Leggy

A fine? Wasn't he banned for 4 years for simply having the jiggers in his possession and will have to prove he is a fit and proper person in order to regain his licence. We should have that rule here like Racing Vic for cases such as the Pertab one.

They would also have had to contract for that turf to have been grown here using the recommended grass types for Auckland's climate etc. and then harvest and lay it. However, that would have put them months further ahead in readying the track, especially with the delays that occurred because the grass would have been growing away in the mean time. I don't think the direct seeding itself was the problem but something obviously went wrong with the process to cause the matting to develop in the root zone. Only thing I can think of is too much too shallow irrigation. They also clearly raced on it way too soon under the circumstances. I just hope they don't try and do that again if they can fix it.

They are also listed in the Programme Booklet.

Their riding weights are listed on Love Racing. Just search any jockey to see it.

I agree, though I'm big on second chances. The problem for me is they've sent him for a spell but he doesn't have to do anything in the interim or demonstrate that he's learned anything before he gets it back.

What core sample? The six month old one in the vid above? Jason even then refers to thinking the root system had got a bit tight hence had just completed an overdue vertidraining. I haven't seen a current or recent one. Where did you see that?

He has that one according to the NZTR site. Lucky Coral (AUS) 2021 Trainer: Kurtis Pertab / Matamata Training Location: Matamata

Does anyone know what the grass mix is that they used there?

Strange alright.

At least that stops the crash test dummy approach for now.

I have 10 years of data on NZ races up to1400m which shows exactly the same as the Caufield data. Where's yours that supports your claim?

Sprint Races – Don’t fear wide barriers Caulfield sprint races involved a straight run to the home turn, which isn’t particularly wide or long. It’s one of the fairer courses in Australian racing. Despite that, the market still overreacts to the perceived disadvantage of wide barrier draws. The table below shows the results of genuine chances up to $10 SP in sprint races (1000m to 1200m) at Caulfield, since January 2005. The first thing you might notice is that barriers have been repeated i.e. 1 to 3 in the first row, then 3 to 5, then 5 to 7 etc. This is a smoothing technique to reduce the influence of variance, which can create illogical anomalies in results between adjacent barriers. Focusing on the results themselves, you may be shocked to discover that wide drawn runners in Caulfield sprints actually win more often than inside drawn runners! More importantly, the betting returns on wide drawn horses are significantly better. If you like a horse that is drawn wide in the Caulfield sprint race, then bet with confidence

Any results data to support that claim Nerula? I'd be interested to see it.

"Senior steward saying significant slip marks" (plural)? This wasn't because of one horse slipping, though there is still no stipes' report up this morning which is extremely unusual.

https://www.sen.com.au/listen-live-nz/

if they get another inch, I wonder if the stewards will downgrade it?

What does this symbol mean in a TAB formline? Enrolled in some scheme? Or, put the house on? Or what?

Hmmmm.. no explanation? They change their mind like the weather. Think it is anything to do with the matting being broken up changing the readings? After discussing the matter with the team from StrathAyr, Chris Hay, Track Manager at Elwick Racecourse in Tasmania (a racecourse also in possession of a StrathAyr track) and New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing, it has been agreed that using penetrometer readings to determine the level of firmness of the Ellerslie track is a flawed process. Therefore, for the foreseeable future, the Ellerslie track will be declared a Good 4 irrespective of rainfall. This track rating will be a more accurate guide for stakeholders including the wagering public. ATR has every intention of continuing to publicise the Ellerslie track penetrometer readings once they are more reflective of how the track will perform.

...and I take it you think it's ok, and good for the integrity of racing that they should have to do that to preserve their own and their horse's safety?

And he's a horse welfare advocate, so I'm hoping he might bring a halt to the crash test dummy approach to testing track safety.

Bloody good summary of what I think we know PS. Thanks.

At least Insider lasted a few days. Scooby couldn't manage even a few hours after saying he wouldn't engage with me again

Yep. it's your site and you do what you like. But that post is exactly what I mean. Name calling seems to have been substituted for intelligent, constructive discussion.

Thanks Oman. I thought so too and there was a time when you weren't supposed to say stuff that you couldn't support. A forum for reasonably intelligent and open debate. Some may need to look in the mirror before they foist the knowitall label on others.

I don't read the Herald, least of all the racing section. Did Dillon write that? Could be correct. It's on the top level of the growing medium level but below the turf level. Next time you are there, get them to show you a core sample and explain, then report back here.