- This topic has 295 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
There is no real problem with good-firm ground on the flat CAS.
It’s just that racecourses have a difficult job to get good fields in Guineas trials. Most these days seem to go straight there. As well as a slightly more risk of a small injury that affects the horse’s training for the Guineas; there’s also that Good flat ground is less likely to put off connections. ie Connections with horses with soft surface form won’t be put off running and nor will connections with a sound or good-firm surface horse be put off…So a Clerk who gets Good ground for their Guineas trial is likely to get a larger and / or better field.
ie There’s 12 runners in a competitive field in the Fred Darling.
…And can you imagine what the Greenham would be like without one of the two principles – uncompetitive. ie Good ground is the only surface you’d expect to get Angel Bleu taking on Perfect Power over 7f.Value Is EverythingFred Darling winner Wild Beauty OR 111 2.09 slow for 7f – I’d call that between Good and Good to Soft.
You’d expect these pattern-class 100+ horses to be just about hitting standard on genuinely Good ground.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"The ground for a whole meeting has to be artificially changed for two races badged as trials for races in two weeks time and which are unlikely to provide the winner of those races.
When exactly did the lunatics take over the asylum?
“Who needs actual statistical evidence”.
—————————
Well if you don’t know by now that falling on a hard solid surface is more dangerous than a soft pliable one, then you’re not as good an analyst as I thought you were, Ian.
Value Is Everything“When exactly did the lunatics take over the asylum?”
It’s hard to put an exact date on it but it’s clearly happened.
Good to Firm ground?
Out of the question, apparently.
Got to cater for the cripples, sorry, soup monsters, sorry slow old boat mudlarks, sorry wonderful horses who need a bit of give.
A clear message to breeders to stop breeding top-of-the-ground horses and to everyone to stop buying them – unless a Bath Class 6 is the seasonal objective.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"“You’d expect these pattern-class 100+ horses to be just about hitting standard on genuinely Good ground”.
—————————-
You’re joking right?
2.09 seconds slow for 7f is a genuine good ground time for Group 3 animals.
Value Is Everything“A clear message to breeders to stop breeding top-of-the-ground horses and to everyone to stop buying them”
——————————-
Anyone would think it was watered to produce 15+ seconds slow.
Value Is Everything…And the doubtful stayer with a top-of-the-ground action wins…
In a time of 0.13 fast.
Value Is EverythingNever let it be said that Davies won’t ever acknowledge anything.
Perfect Power has broken standard by 0.13 seconds but that’s no less than I would expect from an OR 115 colt on ground that has now dried out to GOOD.
He’d have to be further under it for it to be Good to Firm, never mind Firm.
But don’t tell GT the time – he will think it must be Hard, the meeting should be abandoned and all children within a 50-mile radius of the track should be banned from jumping off walls for a year.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"0.13 fast.
Although the winner is capable of improvement, with the second and third so close it is unlikely this was itself a Group 1 standard of performance. suggests to me today’s surface is on the fast side of good if not good-firm, CAS.
Value Is EverythingI personally have more of a problem with wrong going reports.
With so many meetings being faster than the official going…Is it now a case of clerks just saying it’s softer than it actually is?
Just imagine what the ground would’ve been or would be risking had they not watered at these meetings where TRFers were adamant they should not water.Cheltenham they said they’d water to produce good-soft for the start of the meeting, race times tell you the ground was no softer than genuine GOOD on the Tuesday. ie Without watering it would’ve actually been genuine good-firm (too firm).
Grand National they said it would be Good-soft, race times of both Topham and National tell you the ground was no softer than genuine GOOD. ie Without watering it would’ve been genuine good-firm (too firm).
Newbury they watered to produce ground “on the soft side of good”, race times indicate it was at least genuine GOOD ground if not GOOD-FIRM. ie Had they not watered it would’ve been on the firm side of good-firm verging on firm (risking too firm).
Do punters just need to presume – whatever they might say – if they water it is as if they’re just telling us that without watering it would be too quick?
Is the ground they now describe as good-soft really the old GOOD etc?
Value Is EverythingThere was a mixed bag time wise yesterday with two races being over 4sec slower than standard (one was actually closer to 5sec slow) and two dipping under standard with the last race of the day recording the fastest time on the round 10F course but that was preceeded by the second slowest race of the day also on the round 11F course. I would imagine if you asked each of the jockeys what the ground was like you would probably get some conflicting statements – those on horses that wanted quick ground would likely say it was the soft side of good and those who wanted cut would say it was on the fast side of good.
Had they not watered (5mm only – how would they know that is sufficient enough water to put down?) it would have likely been genuinely good to firm ground as these days with the artificial watering that goes on throughout a season the water table is usually quite high simply based on the fact of how quickly the going drastically changes when mother nature decides to do some of her own selected watering.
Good to firm should always be the default setting for flat racing ground (maybe Derby meeting aside) and whilst there will always be times where the weather can adversly impact those aims ground shouldn’t be artificially compromised by a cotc thinking they need to provide ground on the easy side of good to avoid good to firm.
It will be interesting to see what happens at Royal Ascot this year if we get a warm summer and fast ground is potentially on the cards.
https://www.britishhorseracing.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Going-Stick-Average-Readings-1.pdf
The above is worth bookmarking IMO – it illustrates how CoCs have moved the goalposts over the years with going definitions.
It was 6.1 at Fakenham this morning, they said it was Good.
Nine years ago 6.1 = Soft.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"“There was a mixed bag time wise yesterday with two races being over 4sec slower than standard (one was actually closer to 5sec slow) and two dipping under standard with the last race of the day recording the fastest time on the round 10F course but that was preceeded by the second slowest race of the day also on the round 11F course. I would imagine if you asked each of the jockeys what the ground was like you would probably get some conflicting statements – those on horses that wanted quick ground would likely say it was the soft side of good and those who wanted cut would say it was on the fast side of good”.
——————————–
LD,
The reason why punters need to keep an eye on how a race is run is a slowly run race will (judged on time alone) appear softer ground than it actually is. Therefore when assessing ground conditions by race times the slower run races mean absolutely nothing. Fact is it’s the faster run races that tell us punters the true state of the ground.Personally I couldn’t care less what the jockeys think the ground is. I once went to ask why the Fontwell Clerk hadn’t changed the official going? He said the jockeys hadn’t told them it was any different. An hour later I was on the way home and the M27 was closed due to flooding!
At Newbury yesterday, unless there was a hurricane behind them, or race distances were shorter than advertised, or we had two exceptional Group 1 performers – one in a Group 3 and another in a Class 4 handicap
– which are all extremely unlikely… Any jockey coming back saying the ground was on “the soft side of good” is just plain wrong. Times tell me that. ie It’s not just an opinion. If the ground was genuinely on “the soft side of good” those times would be impossible to put up.Value Is Everything“There is no real problem with good-firm ground on the flat CAS.
It’s just that racecourses have a difficult job to get good fields in Guineas trials. Most these days seem to go straight there. As well as a slightly more risk of a small injury that affects the horse’s training for the Guineas; there’s also that Good flat ground is less likely to put off connections. ie Connections with horses with soft surface form won’t be put off running and nor will connections with a sound or good-firm surface horse be put off…So a Clerk who gets Good ground for their Guineas trial is likely to get a larger and / or better field.
ie There’s 12 runners in a competitive field in the Fred Darling.
…And can you imagine what the Greenham would be like without one of the two principles – uncompetitive. ie Good ground is the only surface you’d expect to get Angel Bleu taking on Perfect Power over 7f”.The simple answer to that is if people don’t want to run in the trials on good to firm ground, don’t have the trials. Why should everyone else be disadvantaged for 3 or 4 horses in trials?
What if the horses named required fast ground, would he have watered then?Unsurprising most these days go to straight to the Guineas as the trials are plenty near enough the Guineas and the prize money is nothing to write home about.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.