How does Ellerslie get away with avoiding raceday track protocols?

[Chief Stipe]

Correct me if I'm wrong but does Ellerslie have raceday protocol exemptions:

1. They seem to be able to irrigate closer to raceday than any other Club;
2. They don't use a penetrometer or any other measurement device to derive a track rating;
3. They don't gallop horses on raceday mornings to confirm the rating or a safety test as well.  Yet they do at Pukekohe - "because we have horses available there";
4. The "Soft 5" rating seems standard rather than measured and is achieved by verti-draining late in the week leading up to raceday.  What does this do to the stability of the surface?  Is this why some horses find it shifty particularly on the bends?;
5. They rely on what the Jockeys say to determine when the rating should be upgraded during the day.  If that is the case why don't they gallop horses prior to Race 1?

If they don't use a standard rating measurement device how do punters compare the arbitrary "Soft 5" with other NZ tracks?

[Huey]

Because they are Ellerslie

[Chief Stipe]

54 minutes ago, Huey said:

Because they are Ellerslie

Perhaps but it's time that NZTR and the RIB demanded consistency.

I have no problem NZTR and/or the RIB pointing the bone when required but they need to be consistent.

For example does Trentham have an exemption to not gallop horses prior to race one?  Just because they don't have any available?  

I swear I've been to two abandoned meetings in the last two years earlier enough in the morning to notice that no horses were galloped.  Perhaps if they had galloped horses they may have had time to do some remedial work!!

Isn't the protocol essential to ensuring that the track is safe BEFORE the first race commences?