In this Discussion
- Amyquil October 2015
- BobbyDavis October 2015
- carey October 2015
- Carlosa October 2015
- Chelsea October 2015
- ColourfulRD October 2015
- Dale October 2015
- DamienWyer October 2015
- darkshines October 2015
- Fastmoney October 2015
- GLAMOUR October 2015
- Gray October 2015
- Legless October 2015
- paraletic October 2015
- Rex October 2015
- RIO October 2015
- spinking October 2015
- SuperSnoop October 2015
- TheDiva October 2015
- thefalcon October 2015
- TheSwooper October 2015
- Thoroly_Bread October 2015
- Tivers October 2015
- turf October 2015
- whereamigoingwrong October 2015
- Yankee October 2015
Who's Online
0 Members & 25 Non Members
Comments
RIO, thefalcon, Mr_WasheeWashee, Thoroly_Bread likes this post.
With the frank apology, I think they have found out that they had no other choice after last week.
I'm still not going though, maybe when we have a 2YO starting.
@RIO are they suggesting that there was nothing wrong with the track and therefore there was no reason to cancel the meeting ? ( other than ofc someone mentioned the "magic" word which gave the stewards little option )
There has been a lynch mob mentality here with people baying for PR's blood because the meeting was cancelled.
If indeed it was not PR's fault who will be in the lynch mobs sights now :-?
But yes that was the message that was being pushed as far as i am concerned..Not our fault... we done nothing wrong...and if the incident didn't happen during the exhibition gallop everything would've been okay......but i do read a lot of stuff about PR with heavy biased glasses...
:-B
Makybedon likes this post.
Having the rail out for a couple of meetings really is no big deal. When it happened I had my doubts about how dangerous the surface really was, however until I read the independent report will keep an open mind.
Reports of trainers packing up and taking their horses east, reports that trainers would not allow their horses to race, Lenience may have been injured, S Parnham may have been hurt etc etc - how much truth is in them I have no idea.
Was /is it a case of laying the boots in when some-one appears to be down - only for them to bounce up with a huge grin on their face stronger and more resolute than they were previously?
Or is it a case of the track was genuinely dangerous to race on?
The cancellation of the meeting is obviously a different issue to the apparent lack of service and co-ordination of catering on the day. Unlike the track issue I have not heard a single person have a good thing to say about the user experience on the day.
Maybe the lynch mob should direct their attention towards that arm of PR - might have a bit more success in getting the blood they crave
Makybedon likes this post.
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/a/29412427/revamp-a-boost-for-track/
This has disaster all over it.
Makybedon likes this post.
thefalcon, RIO, carey, Makybedon likes this post.
No-one seemed to know however @whereamigoingwrong suggested it may be from the 2400m starting shoot as they don't need that area until 1 race in January
:-?? makes sense to me to use existing track turf. Agrre with you , if they have bought it in from another location X_X
RIO likes this post.
thefalcon, therealkramer likes this post.
Dale, Legless likes this post.
Legless who is it you are refering to as the lynch mob
Carlosa, jum, Legless, Makybedon likes this post.
Daresay those areas will be handwatered to get the goings as close as possible. We'll find out how good he is ...
I have trouble growing weeds so have NFI how or if he can pull this off
turf from 2400 at Belmont, hope it stands up
Darkhorse likes this post.
RIO likes this post.
Ascot Track Assessment by Jason Kerr (Independent Track Curator)
Ascot Racecourse Course Proper Inspection Report
The following observations were made following an inspection of AscotRacecourse on Tuesday, October 20, and discussion with the General
Manager of Racecourses and Facilities, Cameron Sutherland.
There are two issues which I will address, the first being the incident
that occurred on October 17 that led to the race meeting being abandoned
and the latter, a section of the front straight that has suffered from
chemical burn damage.
Course Proper
The Course Proper in the areas that are not affected by the above
mentioned chemical burn is in excellent condition. The general health,
turf density, root strength and overall appearance of the turf are
exceptional. The turf is complete kikuyu grass coverage with less than
0.5% of poa annua (winter grass) in the sward. This is in stark contrast
to when I last visited Ascot in 2011 when the Course Proper contained
approximately 50% winter grass.
The surface provides a solid footing with sufficient give, with clear
indications of a regular aerating regime. During the inspection I
assessed the surface to rated Good 4 and in perfect condition for
racing. There was evidence of some horse traffic on the track and the
damage was some minor shearing of the plant leaf with no evidence of any
divoting.
After assessing the track I could find no evidence that the surface
contributed in any way to the race day incident on October 17. There was
a sizable slip mark where the incident occurred although it appears
certain this was sustained post incident when the horse was scrambling
to regain its footing. The only plausible explanation for the incident
was that the horse knuckled during its work and dislodged the rider.
It is my view that protocols around track inspections and abandonment of
race meetings needs to be revised and a system introduced where non
emotive analysis of any track issue is undertaken by an agreed
representative groups of all relevant stakeholders. RVL have recently
revised the policy around similar incidents.
Chemical burn damage
The damage from the chemical burn is apparent from the 75m point to 200
metres past the winning post and some smaller sections adjacent the
track crossing at the 1700m area. The damage is contained to the inside 7
metres.
It is my opinion that the majority of the damage will grow out over a period of 5 – 6 weeks.
A section at the winning post of approximately 500 square metres is the
most severely affected and will be re sodded with large blocks of
identical turf. The replacement turf will be sourced from the 2400 metre
chute and has an identical soil profile and grass species make up. This
turf replacement method will allow racing to resume within two or three
days of completion. It is my view that this option of blocking out the
major section at the winning post is the safest option to ensure that
racing is not disrupted and allows the rail to be returned to the true
position.
Similar works were conducted at Caulfield in August 2014, and a race
meeting was conducted on the area five days later without incident.
It would be beneficial to all parties if regular dialogue was held
between Perth Racing, Racecourse Management and stakeholders
particularly local trainers, track riders and jockeys. It will assist in
the accurate information flow to stakeholders which appears currently
non-existent.
Jason KerrGeneral Manager of Racecourses
Melbourne Racing Club
Ascot Track Assessment by Jason Kerr (Independent Track Curator)
Ascot Racecourse Course Proper Inspection Report
The following observations were made following an inspection of AscotRacecourse on Tuesday, October 20, and discussion with the General
Manager of Racecourses and Facilities, Cameron Sutherland.
There are two issues which I will address, the first being the incident
that occurred on October 17 that led to the race meeting being abandoned
and the latter, a section of the front straight that has suffered from
chemical burn damage.
Course Proper
The Course Proper in the areas that are not affected by the above
mentioned chemical burn is in excellent condition. The general health,
turf density, root strength and overall appearance of the turf are
exceptional. The turf is complete kikuyu grass coverage with less than
0.5% of poa annua (winter grass) in the sward. This is in stark contrast
to when I last visited Ascot in 2011 when the Course Proper contained
approximately 50% winter grass.
The surface provides a solid footing with sufficient give, with clear
indications of a regular aerating regime. During the inspection I
assessed the surface to rated Good 4 and in perfect condition for
racing. There was evidence of some horse traffic on the track and the
damage was some minor shearing of the plant leaf with no evidence of any
divoting.
After assessing the track I could find no evidence that the surface
contributed in any way to the race day incident on October 17. There was
a sizable slip mark where the incident occurred although it appears
certain this was sustained post incident when the horse was scrambling
to regain its footing. The only plausible explanation for the incident
was that the horse knuckled during its work and dislodged the rider.
It is my view that protocols around track inspections and abandonment of
race meetings needs to be revised and a system introduced where non
emotive analysis of any track issue is undertaken by an agreed
representative groups of all relevant stakeholders. RVL have recently
revised the policy around similar incidents.
Chemical burn damage
The damage from the chemical burn is apparent from the 75m point to 200
metres past the winning post and some smaller sections adjacent the
track crossing at the 1700m area. The damage is contained to the inside 7
metres.
It is my opinion that the majority of the damage will grow out over a period of 5 – 6 weeks.
A section at the winning post of approximately 500 square metres is the
most severely affected and will be re sodded with large blocks of
identical turf. The replacement turf will be sourced from the 2400 metre
chute and has an identical soil profile and grass species make up. This
turf replacement method will allow racing to resume within two or three
days of completion. It is my view that this option of blocking out the
major section at the winning post is the safest option to ensure that
racing is not disrupted and allows the rail to be returned to the true
position.
Similar works were conducted at Caulfield in August 2014, and a race
meeting was conducted on the area five days later without incident.
It would be beneficial to all parties if regular dialogue was held
between Perth Racing, Racecourse Management and stakeholders
particularly local trainers, track riders and jockeys. It will assist in
the accurate information flow to stakeholders which appears currently
non-existent.
Jason KerrGeneral Manager of Racecourses
Melbourne Racing Club
:-O :-O Well well :-O :-O surprise surprise :-O :-O
Just say one of the magic words and you can move mountains [-(
Legless likes this post.
Legless, RIO likes this post.
:)) :)) suggesting PR should have dialogue with stakeholders!!!!!! =)) =))but if other people knew what they know PR wouldn't have all the power :-SS now we know that will change over night don't we.
:^o
of course we know that my once 40-50 fags a day habit, was nothing to do with drugs.
nor my fondness for getting p i s s e d after a nice day at the track.
thankfully i was able to stop both grog and smokes a long time ago.
oh hang on, i do do weed....you can make a great cuppa from dandelion leaves and the root is heaven!!!
So is he saying there was zero need to abandon the race meet? That the track was indeed fine?
RIO likes this post.