curious

I am dubious, but you have to wait 3 to 5 years before you can make that claim.

Don't know the details sorry other than what I read. Water is an essential element for any racing surface, to which end a 20-million litre reservoir has been installed in the Ellerslie infield. “The new big pond will collect an estimated 96 per cent of all water that falls on the track –both irrigation and rain,” Wilcox explained. “That will be recycled for irrigation back onto the track, and while it does not make us self-sufficient during a protracted dry spell, it’s a major uplift on what we previously had.

I don't know which is why I'm asking. You seem to know. Ellerslie put in a large stormwater reticulation pond as part of the $50m track rebuild. I thought that was to make their irrigation supply largely self-sufficient?

Where did you see or hear that either track had water supply issues. I haven't and you'd think that would have been a significant element for ATR to have included in the Strathayr plans given the substantial budget for that. Are you saying it wasn't?

That would certainly be a long way from a debacle of epic proportions and as you say might be the sensible thing to do.

I'd say they certainly should be able to, though it may be that more time is necessary for more extensive root development and if it's going to be a couple of weeks before Stratayr can get there to assist.

If what is true?

See Wilcox on Weigh In.

The report is saying that an incorrect pattern of mowing and irrigation cause increased surface tension (which reduces the ability of the surface to uptake water), so when the rain came, it wasn't absorbed as it should have been making the surface slippery. Common problem on turf surfaces which is why golf courses etc. apply wetting agents to counteract it.

FYI. That was updated this morning. No serious injuries. https://www.racenet.com.au/news/apprentice-kelsey-hannan-out-of-induced-coma-after-scary-fall-at-strathalbyn-20240128

You are the one who raised that case.

On those sort of matters, yes.

Yes. But some are prone to test the limits and evidence from hearings doesn't always match internal hearsay from stables.

Was it?

That has to be the case. The stewards' report doesn't stack up. If the gates had in fact opened spontaneously without being activated by the starter, for serious health and safety reasons, they surely could not have restarted the race, nor continued the meeting without the fault being determined and corrected. Testing that the gates opened when activated before doing so would not eliminate the risk of that happening again. So, I think either the report must be inaccurate, or they've continued the meeting on a very risky basis. Whichever, neither is a good look imo.

Yes. And Just As Sharp from even further back with the best last 800 in that race.

They are there. Have a look and come back to us.

Jockeys. Where a Jockey is not able to fulfil any riding engagements due to the abandonment. $300 Where a Jockey has ridden in 1 race on the day but was unable to fulfil further engagements due to the abandonment. $200 Where a Jockey has travelled from one Racing Region to any other Racing Region. $200, in addition to the amount paid as above. Where a Jockey was able to fulfil 2 or more riding engagements before the meeting was abandoned no compensation is paid.

No. They had a balance of $1,197,934.88 after the win in the 5th. Then put half that on the Orchestral/Talisker bet in the last which missed.

It is the same amount at the same price and appears to be the start of the actual bet but incomplete in the TAB post.

They got back 1/2 their original investment, not a 50% profit. 7:30pm Total bets placed: $1,908,323.15 Starting balance: $1,196,647 Current balance: $598,323.50

He didn't pull the trigger.

That's not supposed to be until next week. It's also what they are supposed to be using on the track prior to irrigation preceding meetings. Did they?

I couldn't agree more. We have a dead horse, badly injured rider and a mid-summer abandonment at great cost to participants, in the midst of a very reasonable weather pattern. I don't know if the coincident accidents were related to the unsafe and inconsistent track that was delivered, however, it is not a good look either way and this is the product that we continue to present to the world alongside the gates fiasco in a G1 and the water trough incident on another G1 day in recent weeks. I am not opposed to the initiatives announced this week of a Champions day and a slot race (nor the other date and programming changes) provided that they are not designed in a way that interferes with the Pattern. What would really stick in my craw though is if it turns out that NZTR have provided any of the funding for these events from funds that could otherwise have been allocated to upgrading or renovating our now disastrous tracks and equipment.

I wouldn't call the 350k SI trained race in April "absolutely nothing" whether or not they deserved it.