- This topic has 79 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 3 months, 3 weeks ago by
.
- Posts
They water if rain isn’t forecast and they water if it is. Most clerks don’t adhere to the directive of only watering to produce good to firm ground but like many things the BHA do bugger all about it.
tbf, Had Ascot not watered last week it may well have been firm… Which would’ve no doubt brought widespread non-runners.
They watered to maintain good-firm and that’s what we got.
Value Is EverythingWatering to maintain the existing ground once the meeting has started I have no problem with.
Looked at Bath yesterday who were officially Firm (watered – always thought they weren’t able to water at the course
) and they gave a reading for the course of 10.1 and 2 of the 7 race card had double digit fields (the rest were between 6-8 runners), there was only 2 non runners of which one was due to the unsuitable ground (the other was a self certificate). Clearly firm ground isn’t the welfare issue some would lead us all to believe it is and while I understand that optically you don’t want outright Firm for the Royal Ascot, many jockeys reported the ground was very quick but with no jar in it.Its unfortunate if you have a horse that needs softer ground to slow the others down but we are talking about a meeting set during the summer so (for the likes of a Trueshan – again a non runner at the meeting) you just have to live in hope that the English summer throws us a goggly.
Summer flat racing wherever possible (i.e. outside of mother nature overruling everything) should be run on good to firm ground – in this day and age the watering technology is available to where you can water a course the day before a individual meeting or the evening after racing if its a multiple day meeting (thus giving the weather forecast every opportunity to play out).
False ground due to rain (be it predicted or not) falling on top of already watered ground isn’t good for anyone and could in of itself potentially cause injuries – sadly Chester showed us with Hidden Law just how susceptible horses can be in taking a false step on what was officially good ground.
I appreciate CotC can be easy targets but sometimes they do bring it upon themselves entirely with some of their decisions but you have to give Chris Stickles his due this time round as watering after racing was the right way to go.
During a drought in Maryland several years back a number of timber races were held on ground officially labeled “hard” – nobody scratched because of it, none of the horses seemed worse for wear. But it’s typical for timber horses to do road work (that is, walking/jogging miles on country roads) and gallop over firm ground so perhaps their hooves are tougher for it.
Used to have hard in the going description over here for jump meetings way back in the day – if your horse is unsuited by the going then don’t run them just like those that don’t run in soft/heavy ground.
The course should only be watered to avoid ground conditions that could be a welfare issue and for me, good to firm ground for summer flat racing is in no way, shape or form a welfare issue.
Obviously heavy shouldered horses are less likely to perform to their best under quick condition as compared to softer ground but that is generally speaking and there will always be horses that buck trends with regards to what you would think would be their ideal going preference.
For me, I think generally horses will ‘go’ on pretty much all types of going…..it is just that some are much more disadvantage in comparison to others when encountering extremes of going (i.e. very fast or heavy ground).
There are some horses that like firm ground and they will always be entered at tracks that often have firm ground (eg Bath)… In cntrast, those that do not like firm ground will not often be entered at such venues (eg Bath). So to give Bath’s lack of non-runners as an example and claim:
“Clearly firm ground isn’t the welfare issue some would lead us all to believe it is”…
maybe should try to understand the vagaries.
However I think we all actually want the same thing. Watering to maintain good-firm. ie NOT to water to produce Good ground or even when there is subsequent rain getting good-soft or (significant rain) soft.
…But there will inevitably be some occasions where – if they don’t get rain – it will be firm… So they water, only for rain to change it to Good ground or softer. ie Sometimes they will get more rain than forecast… Or Sometimes they can not rely on the forecast to be spot on, because if they do and the forecast rain stays away – it is firm. When connections are expecting Good or Soft ground then widespread non-runners will occur on Firm.
However, there do seem to be some racecourses where even the official going is rarely the true state of the ground. eg Newbury and Haydock. This is for me worse.
Value Is Everything“They watered to maintain good-firm and that’s what we got. :good:”
Stickels along Jeremy Martin at Salisbury is one of the better ones Ginger, many of the others aren’t. He had it spot on at Royal Ascot.
Mention should be made of Andrew Cooper overwatering at Sandown yet again. When interviewed prior to Friday’s meeting he stated he had put plenty of water on despite the forecast rain. He added that the rain prior to Fridays meeting was a few mm’s less than what he was forecast. So what would have been the ground on Friday if they had the rain he was forecast? It was good to soft as it was. With more rain forecast prior to Saturday.
As for the people at Haydock (one a relation of Andrew Cooper) they seem clueless after that farce today. The coc at Windsor was sacked a few years ago for similar problems. Do the Haydock people lack experience?
Newton Abbot abandoned in the middle of July.
I don’t know how bad the weather has been in Devon but it would be interesting to know how much water the clerk of the course poured on the track.
Good to Firm ground at Killarney. Has there been no rain in County Kerry?
Or does the Clerk of the Course not pour a shed load of water on the track?
27 non runners at killarney. What were the trainers expecting. Its the height of summer. Who would be a clerk of the course. Impossible job.
Well to be fair they were probably expecting that the watering policy would mean that the ground was going to get watered to ensure it was on the soft side of good……
With 48 hour decs, trainers have to be weather forecasters. What they declare on may not be the ground they want.
We are in danger of never seeing another dayjur or harbinger wow performance if we don’t stop overwatering. That to me would be so detrimental to racing. Especially when it’s rattling fast for the breeders Cup usually and in Japan where they are producing top top horses. Baffling.
) and they gave a reading for the course of 10.1 and 2 of the 7 race card had double digit fields (the rest were between 6-8 runners), there was only 2 non runners of which one was due to the unsuitable ground (the other was a self certificate). Clearly firm ground isn’t the welfare issue some would lead us all to believe it is and while I understand that optically you don’t want outright Firm for the Royal Ascot, many jockeys reported the ground was very quick but with no jar in it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.