Jump to content
NOTICE TO BOAY'ers: Major Update Coming ×
Bit Of A Yarn

Track - Riccarton Park-Canterbury JC | Saturday 14 November


Chief Stipe

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Galah and Nomates has Pitty been on the phone to you both?

I  always like hearing what he has to say as he isn't afraid to say what he thinks.

It must be frustrating when you have a dry tracker and you see them turning on the sprinklers after they ran on a slow track the day before.  That may be why the Track manager said he irrigated at midnight on thursday night. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Galah and Nomates has Pitty been on the phone to you both?

Not important enough for him to talk to me , i'm not complaining about watering , i'm saying track is worn for whatever reason , i'm sure moisture god given or not is helping the worn effect . All i'm saying inside is off .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, the galah said:

I thought it might have been because the track manager would have have known mr pitman would be tucked away in his bed.

Never over head irrigate any plant when it is hot and sunny.  The plants don't like it.

The other reason may have been to leave it as late as possible to assess what was happening.  Also if the "rule book" was being followed then he can't irrigate on the Friday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Running Man said:

what a joke pitty says track is slow and they ran  122

sore loser obviously cream is rising  to the top 4 for tangerine

On 5 october the maidens ran 1.21.76 for 1400m and two 1200m races were run in 1.07.90 and 1.07.15.

They were running about 1 and a half seconds slower today than they did on 5 october.

So surely any trainer who had a dry track horse would question why they were disadvantaged by unnecessary irrigation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, the galah said:

On 5 october the maidens ran 1.21.76 for 1400m and two 1200m races were run in 1.07.90 and 1.07.15.

They were running about 1 and a half seconds slower today than they did on 5 october.

So surely any trainer who had a dry track horse would question why they were disadvantaged by unnecessary irrigation. 

That track you refer to was a G2 and extremely hard.  It was a mess as evident by the clouds of dust.  There was near universal condemnation of that track.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh well. It seems many are happy with tracks with fast lanes 8 to 10 horses off the rails like they got today. And most apparently happy to see tracks irrigated when they are already rated as slow.

 Personally, just recently  i had been trying to increase my spend to get better rebates, but i have come to the view this week i am being mislead to some extent,as there are so many variables when it comes to track conditions. You shouldn't have to watch a few races to work out the patterns. That track in early october i thought was the best from a punters perspective as you knew what to expect.

It also seems anyone who owns/trains a horse who runs best on good tracks may as well put them back in the paddock.  

I don't recall  in previous decades them having to have tracks about a dead 6 at the start of the day. 

Also,if irrigation is so important nowdays,should tracks without irrigation be allowed to run meetings? 

  • Champ Post 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

But it's always the same thing and what suits Pitty.  

Well it is pretty well known they listen to other people so why wouldn't they listen to Pitty?

As for anyone who queried whether there was a bad strip on the fence look at M Cameron's puzzling ride on Rousanne in the two year old race where he hooked from mid track and looking to figure in the finish (probably not win to be fair) to the fence where she was quickly struggling and swamped late. By way of disclosure I own a racing share in her BUT am not complaining (I didn't back her) but if I actually owned her outright I would be a little unhappy at losing black type and missing probably doubling her eventual broodmare value due to the shit track on the inside.

And harking back to all the bloody bleating and whimpering about the October track I don't remember too many fast lanes that day.  It was fast all over  - plastering water on them just creates lanes whether it be on the fence in the middle or down the outer 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Reefton said:

And harking back to all the bloody bleating and whimpering about the October track I don't remember too many fast lanes that day.  It was fast all over  - plastering water on them just creates lanes whether it be on the fence in the middle or down the outer 

Because of antique irrigation systems that don't provide even application or application levels that run off to the inside of any camber?

Edited by curious
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to agree with both Pitty and Reefton about the watering producing uneven and biased track surfaces.

But, without having any pretensions to expertise in this matter - apart from years of observation  - there are vast differences in the surfaces we are offered for racing.

A fast track at Reefton is very different from the same at Riccarton, a fact that seems to escape many.  The soil structure at many tracks  (as alluded to by the Chief who does have knowledge in these matters) is stuffed, and therefore there is little that beleaguered track managers can do in these situations. 

Riccarton has such an unforgiving substructure that it is unacceptable to offer in unwatered state when firm - yet that watering creates a raft of problems. 

As Curious has pointed out, years of underinvestment has produced this situation that is going to be hugely costly to sort out.

As an aside - love your filly,  Reefton, she looks to have a bright future.

  • Like 1
  • Champ Post 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Reefton said:

And harking back to all the bloody bleating and whimpering about the October track I don't remember too many fast lanes that day.  It was fast all over  - plastering water on them just creates lanes whether it be on the fence in the middle or down the outer 

Or after 28 races by the time it got to the Welcome Stakes it was worn.

If your theory about irrigation was correct then explain the first day that showed no apparent bias yet had far more irrigation?

Also 48mm was applied by God and 8mm by the Track Manager.  I suggest Reefton you go to confession after Mass this morning and ask why the man upstairs decided to disadvantage your horse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, curious said:

Because of antique irrigation systems that don't provide even application or application levels that run off to the inside of any camber?

Probably both but also a soil structure that doesn't facilitate even water take up.  The verti-draining done after October 3 was to assist impeded distribution due to soil structure.

However the problem (if there actually was a problem) on Saturday wasn't caused by irrigation.  

As for there being a bias the inside track was worn and no doubt compacted from the previous two race days in a week.  You can't blame the irrigation.

Now the "apparent bias" became assumed "fact" because of the swoopers winning in the first three races.  Yet that trend didn't continue.  Or are the complainers suggesting there were multiple "fast lanes"?

Thinking about it a bit more, if we believe the penetrometer readings during the week, then the scene was set by the God given 48 mm and the 8mm did nothing.

You wouldn't have got much more improvement in the track rating anyway.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...