Hokitika Gone

[rdytdy 5,341]

 

 There has been significant rainfall in Hokitika overnight which has affected the racing surface at the Westland Racing Club.

 Stipendiary Stewards and Westland Racing Club representatives have inspected the track and have concluded that the inconsistencies in the racing surface are a safety concern and as a result the race meeting has been abandoned.

 Horses were galloped on the surface this morning and riders confirmed the nature of the track was inconsistent.  Further rain is forecast for today and tomorrow.

[dbtab 95]

The joke continues, when will something change .Were is our minister of racing.as a owner i feel for all the people trying to race there horses only to have all these cancelations happen.Time is up NZ do something.More meetings cancelled than raced so far this year and were only 10 days in

[TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774]

I'm astounded.  This definitely should not have happened.

[.... 226]

There were clearly inconsistencies in the track last year on an extremely Heavy track and that meeting went ahead and was completed.

Is it purely a case now of Health and Safety being so paramount that this will become the norm?, Kumara would have to be odds on to be abandoned now, they had 67mls of rain and there is more forecast and we know what kind of shape that track is in, was abandoned last year.

[We're Doomed 4,855]

Bloody hell. There must be real pressure on the stipes NOT to abandon one of these meetings, the industry is becoming such a laughing stock.

[Guest 2Admin2]

Hokitika has always been inconsistent.  It was dry up one side of the hill and a swamp down the last third of the other side.  Inconsitent isn't slippery!

[We're Doomed 4,855]

If its a problem with that particular track could they not have gone back to Greymouth, or are they saving that for Kumara's replacement. Even Reefton? There would still have been a week before their meeting. Do they not have contingency plans for anything. Its not like a Matamata meeting where the horses just go back down the road and home again, these horses, owners, trainers, jockeys, and various support staff, TAB etc have all travelled miles to get there at incredible expense.  There really does need to be a plan A and B which can swing into action at a moments notice.

[von Smallhaussen 3,226]

Admin - can you start a new forum .... just call it Gone. 

Bound to be one of the busiest 

[Turny 1,224]

And the nightmare continues - just a joke and it aint going to stop anytime soon 

[TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774]

35 minutes ago, We're Doomed said:

If its a problem with that particular track could they not have gone back to Greymouth, or are they saving that for Kumara's replacement. Even Reefton? There would still have been a week before their meeting. Do they not have contingency plans for anything. Its not like a Matamata meeting where the horses just go back down the road and home again, these horses, owners, trainers, jockeys, and various support staff, TAB etc have all travelled miles to get there at incredible expense.  There really does need to be a plan A and B which can swing into action at a moments notice.

Reefton have formally offered the track for Saturday if Kumara decide not to race.  It has had rain but nowhere near as much as the other tracks and is in excellent nick.  Probably a dead 6 at worst at present.  At this stage horses apparently to gallop at Kumara tomorrow morning to check the track.  There are definite issues I hear with the bend from the winning post to the 1100m point.

Reefton is the logical place to transfer because the TAB are relocating there after Saturday anyway - just bring it forward a day or two.

This is an  embarrassment

[Guest 2Admin2]

Can someone explain what "an inconsistent track" means?  Te Rapa would have an inconsistent track every race day.  They should never race there again.

[von Smallhaussen 3,226]

now the million dollar question ( excuse the pun ) 

will they abandon the Ellerslie million dollar races if that track gets wet and cuts up rough before those 2 big races ..... like they did after the Railway Hcp ?

[puha 2,177]

True hasn’t said it’s unsafe but inconsitent . Most watered tracks are inconsistent .

[TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774]

1 minute ago, 2Admin2 said:

Can someone explain what "an inconsistent track" means?  Te Rapa would have an inconsistent track every race day.  They should never race there again.

Apparently there are bare patches and surface water.  Not sure about inconsistencies in the penetrometer readings but the rail is the issue I hear

 

[THE TORCH 665]

It is sad but I refuse to call it an embarrassment. Unfortunate - yes, but an embarrassment or laughing stock?? It rains in NZ - pretty bloody well I might add. The Coast cops it the most. If it is dangerous or inconsistent for racing (ie: unfair!) then so be it. Its no ones fault in particular - its just too bloody wet! I remember every idiot on here posting 12 months ago what a joke the racing was at Hokitika (I was all bloody for it!) and now they get the decision they WANTED "Oh its a joke", "Oh dear what will Australia think?!". Well who gives a continental!? Its wet - it apparently wont lead to satisfactory racing - move on! Preferably to Reefton for two meetings!

PS: and before we all climb in and cry about the rest of NZ well if you want FIRM tracks everyday like the Ellis' of this world then when it does rain 48 hours out from a meeting well yeah you are going to cop unsafe conditions. You cant have it both ways everytime.

[THE TORCH 665]

8 minutes ago, von Smallhaussen said:

now the million dollar question ( excuse the pun ) 

will they abandon the Ellerslie million dollar races if that track gets wet and cuts up rough before those 2 big races ..... like they did after the Railway Hcp ?

Now that was a situation where the term JOKE should be used freely and often! Oooh hang on have you seen what this race is worth? Lets pop around there, fill our coffers, and then make the decision its unsafe!

I bet the Schumachers (Eagle Bay) were delighted in making the 11 hour round trip to hear the jockeys and stipes come up with that one!!!!!

[TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774]

7 minutes ago, THE TORCH said:

It is sad but I refuse to call it an embarrassment. Unfortunate - yes, but an embarrassment or laughing stock?? It rains in NZ - pretty bloody well I might add. The Coast cops it the most. If it is dangerous or inconsistent for racing (ie: unfair!) then so be it. Its no ones fault in particular - its just too bloody wet! I remember every idiot on here posting 12 months ago what a joke the racing was at Hokitika (I was all bloody for it!) and now they get the decision they WANTED "Oh its a joke", "Oh dear what will Australia think?!". Well who gives a continental!? Its wet - it apparently wont lead to satisfactory racing - move on! Preferably to Reefton for two meetings!

PS: and before we all climb in and cry about the rest of NZ well if you want FIRM tracks everyday like the Ellis' of this world then when it does rain 48 hours out from a meeting well yeah you are going to cop unsafe conditions. You cant have it both ways everytime.

Ellis made it clear he wants tracks with give in them Torch not firm and to be fair Hoki was a definite laughing stock last year albeit one of the most entertaining days racing I can remember.  it does rain here and the place is equipped to handle it(much more than the dry) but there should not be inconsistencies in going within the locale of one track(unless there is a debacle like the Omakau issue). 

For people's interest Reefton had 16mm of rain yesterday versus Kumara's 67mm.

[THE TORCH 665]

So how is it the fault of someone that it is inconsistent?? Apart from digging parts of it up and starting again what can be done? I bet Hoki dont have and wont get the funding to carry out such a task. Or are you saying that human error is actually the issue here?

[Portfolio 728]

I have been to many coast meetings over the years, many times I needed gumboots to get out of the car, but they still went ahead.

So what is happening, I know it is a bloody dangerous sport, I would be scared shitless even riding on a firm track at that speed.

But are officials now just to scared to let meetings go ahead, just in case of accidents? Surely going slower on a bog track with a soft landing, is a safer option? 

 

[von Smallhaussen 3,226]

15 minutes ago, Portfolio said:

I have been to many coast meetings over the years, many times I needed gumboots to get out of the car, but they still went ahead.

So what is happening, I know it is a bloody dangerous sport, I would be scared shitless even riding on a firm track at that speed.

But are officials now just to scared to let meetings go ahead, just in case of accidents? Surely going slower on a bog track with a soft landing, is a safer option? 

 

health and safety Porty - now it can also be unhealthy to sit on a chair all day so maybe some of those jobs at HQ can be abandoned too 

[porky 900]

I,m no jockey...far from it...But I reckon it should be their call as to the safety of the track.

if they decide as a group it is unsafe...meeting off , I suppose...But if one or two don,t wish to risk their necks ...hopefully willing replacements available.

Bloody Health and Safety,s gone mad in this country...sure it creates plenty of work for all those paper pushers involved.

But shit wheres our minister and others on big incomes to sort things? 

 

[Guest 2Admin2]

Hokitika has always been "inconsistent" and if everyone was honest so has Omoto, Kumara AND Reefton.  FFS our resident thoroughbred racing and veterinary expert cut his teeth on that circuit.

As for looking after the punters well anyone with any nous knows that on a wet track at Hokitika you backed any fit horse from a good stable with a cunning jockey mid weights.  Double up if the jockey was a cunning apprentice!  Thanks Walsh, Molloy, and Morty.

I used to run round the track and knew where every inconsistency was.  Any jockey who hadn't walked the track would set sail for home at the top of the hill only to stop dead at the swamp at bottom.

Hardly a premier track similar to those outback tracks in OZ with native names which have punter beware written all over them.

 

[Guest 2Admin2]

Word from a trainer on course:

A lot of very pissed off people- me included when told 'visibility ' was the reason for the call....because No way was there a problem - at that time at least.
But spraying had been done under the rail and there was no grass at all.
No problem when dry, but with no root structure at all, definitely a big problem when wet.
Nonetheless I sent a ( supposed) firm tracker around on the fence first thing and she had no issues at all.

[TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774]

45 minutes ago, 2Admin2 said:

Hokitika has always been "inconsistent" and if everyone was honest so has Omoto, Kumara AND Reefton.  FFS our resident thoroughbred racing and veterinary expert cut his teeth on that circuit.

As for looking after the punters well anyone with any nous knows that on a wet track at Hokitika you backed any fit horse from a good stable with a cunning jockey mid weights.  Double up if the jockey was a cunning apprentice!  Thanks Walsh, Molloy, and Morty.

I used to run round the track and knew where every inconsistency was.  Any jockey who hadn't walked the track would set sail for home at the top of the hill only to stop dead at the swamp at bottom.

Hardly a premier track similar to those outback tracks in OZ with native names which have punter beware written all over them.

 

Just give me an example of an inconsistency at Reefton Admin.  Hokitika Greymouth and Kumara all suffer from it because they have all been dug up and 'renovated' but you are talking shit about Reefton.  Sure if it gets wet they come down the outside as they do at every NZ track but to suggest inconsistency is fairyland stuff.  It is the best surface on the Coast(probably in the South Island) by a street but is simply too small so has a limited life.

Every track in NZ that has been 'renovated' has been cocked up without exception and 99% of the abandonments relate to renovated tracks.

 

[Guest 2Admin2]

7 minutes ago, TOM(the other Molloy) said:

Just give me an example of an inconsistency at Reefton Admin.  Hokitika Greymouth and Kumara all suffer from it because they have all been dug up and 'renovated' but you are talking shit about Reefton.  Sure if it gets wet they come down the outside as they do at every NZ track but to suggest inconsistency is fairyland stuff.  It is the best surface on the Coast(probably in the South Island) by a street but is simply too small so has a limited life.

Every track in NZ that has been 'renovated' has been cocked up without exception and 99% of the abandonments relate to renovated tracks.

 

Your post highlights one of the biggest problems with club racing - blind parochialism.

Give me a definition of inconsistency?

Freda says the track at Hokitika was OK.