Chief Stipe

There is a significant layer of sand as the top layer - been described by some as sand carpeting. Galloping isn't causing the compaction. It is the same problem as experienced at Ellerslie - a sand layer that has no organic matter or other soil particles like silt and clay to provide structure. So the sand settles especially when intensively watered - just like it does at the beach. Sand has a very low water and nutrient retention rate (rye grass doesn't grow very well on the beach) therefore to grow grass you need to water large amounts and fertilise frequently (bit like a hydroponic system). Like most species grass takes the easy option to survive - the roots will have grown in a carpet mat on the top layer and limited progression downwards. So Ellerslie described the issue as a "water tension" problem in the top layer. The result is a dense mat of roots in a shallow depth lying on top of a layer of sand. That's the compaction - nothing to do with horses racing although horses and machinery traversing the turf layer would exert doward pressure on the carpet compressing the sand. The top layer that I saw at Ellerslie was like kevlar and the horses couldn't get their hooves into it. That is a very good question that we can only speculate on. My guess is that the sand was poor quality i.e. not screened and when the trucks were pouring it in no one was keeping an eye on the quality. OR the sand layer is shallow and there are either drainage rocks or naturally occuring rocks below that layer. However rocks don't rise upwards in sand - Einstein will tell that heavy particles settle downward as a force called gravity is exerted on them. However the rock question is a very good one. Especially when it seems to limit what Ellerslie do and that is slice and dice the turf on a regular basis especially before a race meeting to break that top matted layer up. The same process that happens when you mow your lawn with the catcher off - the worms will pull the clippings into the soil. The organic material on the track will come from mowing i.e. the clippings will settle on the surface and the coring or verti-draining process will force that organic material into the sand. They may expedite the process by doing what the do to rejuvenate bowling greens on a periodic basis and that is core the ground, remove the cores (bit tricky on long grass) and then spread new soil with organic material in it filling the cores up. That was one of my first jobs in horticulture - rejuvenating bowling greens! The organic matter adds structure and improves the ability of the soil to retain water and nutrients. From a horse racing perspective it also creates a surface that horses can get their hooves into. A horse needs to get its hooves into the soil particularly during the sheer phase of the stride as it disperses significant amounts of energy and thus is safer for a horse. One of the other problems with sand is not only the compaction issue but when you cut and dice the turf to alleviate that and it rains the top layer gets shifty and that isn't good for horses either! That happens at Ellerslie especially on the final bend. Well I'd like to know who was the expert that recommended the customised Strathayr that was installed at Ellerslie with the near 100% pure sand? There has been a fixation with putting sand into our tracks for a long time now. I've been anti it for just as long. They have been verti-draining constantly e.g. Te Rapa and Ellerslie (old track) and applying sand. Two things happen - the drains get clogged with sand (try putting handfulls of sand down your sink) and the tracks get shifty. I suspect they are focussed on the wrong objective - the objective they are focussed on is providing a well drained track so we now end up with a track like Ellerslie that is always a soft 5. Notice the turf tracks in Australia have a wide range of ratings and they change slowly? The objective should be to provide a well draining turf that is optimal for a horse to gallop on regardless of its firmness. In my opinion they only way to do that is to customise the soil by applying the right sand:clay:silt and organic material with the optimal ratios. That's why some tracks naturally perform well e.g. Foxton (caveat though - you still need to put back in what you take out).

In the last two Financial Years Riverton Racing Club earned $20k each year from track fees. That figure gives you an indication. BTW they earnt $112k from farming activities. Riverton Racing Club 225294_-_Accounts_2024.pdf

In a perfect world yes but there were a lot of factors to consider. For example: Hastings future in its current location - how much money should be spent at the current location?; What actually needed to be done; Where was the capitial coming from to do the work - i.e. who was paying?; Consultation with HB members on the above; etc. Don't forget that there were many different opinions on what was wrong from the simplistic to the complex. For example: A Senior Jockey saying "that nothing was wrong with the track - the track manager didn't listen and it needed more irrigation"; A lunatic owner aka @Transparency running rampant on Social Media saying also that nothing was wrong with the track and "a few good farmers and a tractor could fix it in a day"; Local stakeholders who were close to the action saying that the problem was poor and broken drainage and a reverse camber on the bend (no mention of the other bend); A newly appointed very experienced track manager who apparently argued that there were bigger issues than just the bend; and so on. BTW having seen the aftermath (true use of the word) after the HB Guineas abandonment and walking the problematic part of the track an hour after the meeting was abandoned I agree with those saying the track turf/soil itself has a problem which was magnified by the drainage issue and reverse camber. Why was it a rush? On the one hand you are arguing that the Hastings fix hasn't started soon enough and on the other hand Awapuni was rushed back. Isn't the indicated elapsed time for Hastings about the same as it was for Awapuni? A lot of horses galloped on Awapuni prior to the race meeting being conducted. Circumstances forced them to put the rail out to ground that hadn't been tested. Seems they used low quality sand as well!

Your point?

Should have been seeded a month ago.

Must find that photo that someone posted here. Perhaps that is the difference in opinion that @Special Agent refers to with regard to Bryce Mildon. However if the track is out until Spring 2026 then perhaps they are going to fix it properly. They have had two semi-attempts at getting it right e.g. Ellerslie and Awapuni.

@Murray Fish sometimes that is all it takes. We tend to not see what we see every day.

Agree with the bends comment however my observation was that the slipping on HB Guineas day wasn't to do with the camber of the turn. One of the longer slips that i've seen.

That isn't the first priority - its giving owners and trainers an opportunity to race their horses. If locals turn up to watch then well and good but you only have to look at the Trentham crowds to see that there is a general patron malaise. Wouldnl't it be a novel idea though for local Hawkes Bay businesses and supporters to promote a Waipuk meeting and send a message to the industry. Custers Last Stand at Waipuk!

At least it was the right way round. Probably the track was in better condition as well!

Why don't you get the Training team collective together and go tell them?! If you don't get a satisfactory response then escalate to the next level. Hint: don't involve Wightman just use rational reasons and logic.

Well that is a sad reflection on the CJC's priorities. I realise Harness is different and easier to change direction but we always rotated our fast work. The theory being it helped developed more physically balanced individuals.

Perhaps however nothing was done primarily because there was no money. Whose fault is that? Past participants including Club management? Easy to blame NZTR. Track ratings are a different subject altogether. As you know I've been arguing about those for a long time. The track ratings from Riccarton, Trentham and CD locations have been a farce for a long time. Trentham the worst followed a close second by Riccarton. BUT that as I said is a different subject to the lack of maintenance of the track. The BS ratings are in my opinion quality control issues with regard to their measurement and what borders on a cover up. Although the reason for that is the fundamental issue that the tracks concerned are in desperate need of substantial maintenance. Cool. Happy punting. I'm sure you can find a FB page or another site or even an NZTR Lynch Mob where there is an echo chamber supporting your views.

RACE Inc. Surplus from Race Meeting activity: $2.2m Surplus from Catering: $64k Fees from Horse Activity: $748k RACE_Inc (2).pdf

I've posted their latest financial report.

What's that supposed to mean? That he is serious about his job?

The point is if you look at the financials they only broke even because of: NZTR $29k DIA Grant (Pokies?) $19k MSD Wage Subsidy $9k. The loss from core trading activities (i.e. horse activities) was $55k!

Yes but as I said above - if a meeting is shifted from Woodville to Hawera two weeks or even a week out for a programme that has been announced a year out or even 6 months out are you not going to turn up with your midweek BM65 horse?

Ok. My sources have told me that Mildon is well trained, skilled and knowledgeable. Spent a long time under another very good track manager at Matamata. He probably realises now that he has been sold a pup.

Yes the big Club troughs. They are still there but harder to get into and the suits are looking a bit tardy. Trainers often weren't invited to those trainers but Owners were and they ended up with a glassy eyed version of reality. Hence no investment in infrastructure. They didn't notice the paint fading, the upholstery becoming threadbare or the roof leaking until the red sticker was slapped on the building. Let alone worry about Track maintenance.

Yes that is the connundrum for Trainers/Syndicators in general. However at the end of the day the Owner often pays and gets disgruntled anyway. However the main point I was making was why don't Trainers work more cooperatively at the local level particularly in relation to tracks. For example why did the Riccarton AWT get into the state it did? Surely the locals could have worked together and first challenged Riccarton and then NZTR. Yes they found a rabid ranting lunatic to do it for them in the end but surely there is a better way. Now they have a lunatic bagging everyone anyway.

Whose opinion? The new track manager or the old caretaker?

You are clutching at straws using Trentham as an example!!! Most tracks have long straights! The majority of those racing at Trentham chasing Premier races are travelling and need an overnight stay! From what I can tell they all stay overnight in the Manawatu region. Hastings is a perfect location though - everyone travels roughly the same distance except those trained on course. Seriously though would shifting Woodville to Hawera for a BM65 race change your mind?

No the issue is the obsession with laying large amounts of sand on top. The only way to have a turf that is truly conducive to galloping is to make sure that the sand:clay:silt:organic matter ratios are optimum for water retention (mimimise irrigation requirements vs optimise drainage) and nutrient retention. I suspect the Ellerslie track will improve as time progresses relative to the amount of mown grass that is left in situ on the track that is then incorporated into the top layer of the track. However that will be a long process and relatively uncontrollable e.g. it is dependent on even mowing for a start. The same process will happen at Awapuni. I've been thinking about what would be the best way to fix Hastings (cambers aside). You will move all the track soil off to the centre of the track. Put in a layer of drainage gravel and new layer of drains, another layer to limit the loss of soil particles (reduce clogging of drains) and then replace the reconditioned top soil. The top soil would be reconditioned to have the optimum sand:clay:silt:organic matter ratios for the local climate. I thought that this was what the normal Strathayr (not the pure sand version) was about with the addtion of artifical mesh to provide structure. A track reconditioned like I suggest would have a limited life which could be extended by yearly maintenance. A track like Matamata survives (as does most of the Waikato) because naturally it has a high organic matter content and possibly more silt than clay. Silt is closer to sand in terms of drainage properties. My brief looks at the Hastings turf suggests it has a high clay content and the organic content is minimal hence the emergence of slipping issues.

Most training centre's worth their salt do cater for "reverse" galloping. If they don't then their trainers will be disadvantaged as all roads point to the Ellerslie gold don't they?