The home of intelligent horse racing discussion
The home of intelligent horse racing discussion

You have to get rid of three tracks

Home Forums Horse Racing You have to get rid of three tracks

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 91 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #571
    Racing Daily
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1364

    You are an imaginary administrator, looking to eliminate ‘bloat’ from the racing calender.  Which three tracks would you choose to put the hammer down on?

    My choices –

    Folkestone (F)<br>Catterick (N)<br>Southwell (A)

    I can truly say that that there is nothing that interests me in these three tracks.  Nothing at all.<br>Northern England is awash with other venues, and Folkestone’s flat calender could easily be switched to Brighton, whilst Plumpton or Fontwell (even Lingers) could absorb it’s NH itinerary.  Southwell is the obvious choice for the axe in the AW catagory.<br>Opinions?

    #33783
    Smithy
    Member
    • Total Posts 720

    Flat Catterick (NAP)<br>Jumps Catterick (NB)<br>Wouldn’t get rid of an AW track but Kempton was last in so can be first out.

    #33784
    The Market Man
    Member
    • Total Posts 396

    Can I be awkward and just say scrap all all weather tracks? :cool:

    #33785
    davidjohnson
    Member
    • Total Posts 4491

    Brighton for the Flat without a shadow of a doubt. Like a number of others I wouldn’t get rid of any of the all-weather tracks. No strong views on a jumps track.

    #33786
    The Market Man
    Member
    • Total Posts 396

    (Sorry accidently posted twice somehow)

    (Edited by The Market Man at 4:55 pm on Dec. 17, 2006)

    #33787
    Librettist
    Member
    • Total Posts 559

    Sedgefield would make a good land-fill site.

    Wolverhampton (AW) can go up in flames as far as i’m concerned.

    And finally, why not drop a bomb on Musselburgh?

    #33788
    Racing Daily
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1364

    I originally thought Brighton.  But it is so unique that I would keep it and ditch Folk instead.

    #33789
    non vintage
    Member
    • Total Posts 1268

    I don’t like Bath much, I can’t get excited about Ludlow or Hereford (aren’t they almost the same track – has anyone ever seen them together?) so one of those can go, and Kempton is the least appealing of the dirt quartet…

    #33790
    zilzal
    Participant
    • Total Posts 669

    Flat

    1ST Redcar   <br>2nd Hamilton Pk (Nose)<br>3rd Bath (Shd)<br>4th Thirsk (1/2L)<br>5th Yarmouth (1L)

    Jumps

    Carlisle

    AW

    Lingfield Park

    #33791
    Wallace
    Participant
    • Total Posts 862

    How can someone waith a byline like,

    ~Hever Golf Rose~Lochsong~Dizzy~

    even conisder getting rid of Musselburgh.  

    Dizzy’s Bar at Musselburgh and the Chicken Hut at Kelso two places where deals are done.

    Brighton, Catterick and Bangor can all go.

    (Edited by Wallace at 6:14 pm on Dec. 17, 2006)

    #33792
    Gizmogirl
    Member
    • Total Posts 60

    Windsor, which would avoid the chop if it repositioned the stands so I could see the entire race.

    RD – what’s so wrong about Folkestone? Dare I ask?

    #33793
    slipperytoad
    Member
    • Total Posts 419

    Flat – Bath :angry: <br>Jumps – Hereford<br>A/W – none..

    #33794
    Glenn
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1981

    Kempton, Kempton and Kempton.

    #33795
    Mounty
    Member
    • Total Posts 455

    AW – Kempton<br>Jumps – Kempton – preferbly before the King George as I’ve laid Kauto Star at the wrong price.<br>Flat (turf) – Bath – pointless s**t
    hole

    #33796
    yeats
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2927

    No watering has to be a major plus for Bath even if it is run by Northern Racing.

    Brighton     (F)<br>Folkestone (J)<br>Kempton    (AW) Replace it with a turf track.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 91 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.