UTS Track Design Study Report Released

[Emotive 306]

For anyone interested in track design and safety. Interesting read.

https://www.thedogs.com.au/NewsArticle.aspx?NewsId=8734

Actual report found here:

http://www.grnsw.com.au/uploads/GRNSW Phase I Report FINAL 20170605.pdf

Breakdown can be found here:

http://www.grnsw.com.au/uploads/GRNSW Response to UTS Track Design - 4 April 2017 (2).pdf

[Rules For Some 163]

The last point made by GRNSW is hilarious. The current situation with the tracks surface in NSW is dreadful. Trainers told them months ago they were making a mistake (the Track Maintenance Manager) and the tracks in NSW have been going down hill ever since. They have just forked out 3 million dollars to fix the gosford track after they forked out 500 thousand 5 months ago. Seems like a load of BS to me.

I also find their points on straight tracks to be hilarious. They provided no proof that this would lower the injury rate, yet they recommended that they should based on the amount of injuries reported. What i find interesting is that the tracks that race far more dogs have far more interesting than the tracks that race less dogs. Straight track racing is just as rough as circle track racing.

As for the 6 dog fields being implemented. The injury rate in the UK is no better than it is here. So that myth can be thrown out the window.

[Emotive 306]

2 hours ago, Rules For Some said:

The last point made by GRNSW is hilarious. The current situation with the tracks surface in NSW is dreadful. Trainers told them months ago they were making a mistake (the Track Maintenance Manager) and the tracks in NSW have been going down hill ever since. They have just forked out 3 million dollars to fix the gosford track after they forked out 500 thousand 5 months ago. Seems like a load of BS to me.

I also find their points on straight tracks to be hilarious. They provided no proof that this would lower the injury rate, yet they recommended that they should based on the amount of injuries reported. What i find interesting is that the tracks that race far more dogs have far more interesting than the tracks that race less dogs. Straight track racing is just as rough as circle track racing.

As for the 6 dog fields being implemented. The injury rate in the UK is no better than it is here. So that myth can be thrown out the window.

Interesting perspective. I see you have chosen to comment on only one main area. The report makes a number of recommendations, so if each of those recommendations were taken up could you say with any certainty that there would not be a reduction in the injury rate ie, changing the lure distance from the rail, delayed start to allow all dogs to view the lure before release etc? The cumulative effect of employing all the recommendations could have a significant benefit. Is it not worth at least trialing? I am assuming that you comment from the other side of the ditch. Are track surfaces not the responsibility of each individual club like they are here? 

[Rules For Some 163]

41 minutes ago, Emotive said:

Interesting perspective. I see you have chosen to comment on only one main area. The report makes a number of recommendations, so if each of those recommendations were taken up could you say with any certainty that there would not be a reduction in the injury rate ie, changing the lure distance from the rail, delayed start to allow all dogs to view the lure before release etc? The cumulative effect of employing all the recommendations could have a significant benefit. Is it not worth at least trialing? I am assuming that you comment from the other side of the ditch. Are track surfaces not the responsibility of each individual club like they are here? 

I was over there until recently. No, track staff have to report to the track maintenance managers who control everything they can do. This policy has been a disaster since its implementation over there and GRNSW are refusing to take any responsibility what so ever. Greyhound racing in NSW is in shambles and no leadership has been shown whatsoever. All the leaders are in hiding and have shown no backbone or support to the participants what so ever. I agree with some of the points made in the report, but alot of them seem no more than myth without any proper evidence what so ever. 

[Emotive 306]

3 hours ago, Rules For Some said:

I was over there until recently. No, track staff have to report to the track maintenance managers who control everything they can do. This policy has been a disaster since its implementation over there and GRNSW are refusing to take any responsibility what so ever. Greyhound racing in NSW is in shambles and no leadership has been shown whatsoever. All the leaders are in hiding and have shown no backbone or support to the participants what so ever. I agree with some of the points made in the report, but alot of them seem no more than myth without any proper evidence what so ever. 

Thanks for sharing. I do not doubt that your opinion has been formed in part by your personal experience. The report is based on all the available stats during a 12 month period. Using those stats problem areas have been identified. Are you saying that the stats have been manufactured and the data is flawed? Can you produce reports that undeniably refute the data and conclusions drawn in this report? If so, I would like to read them to get the best understanding possible.

I have read many reports because I have a personal interest in reducing injury statistics. I have no experience with track Maintainance but have talked with people who do.
This is my understanding unless you get the mix right no amount of track grooming will produce a safe consistent surface in all weather conditions. The wrong mix affects the base and when water is added the base will respond accordingly. So, first on the list is getting that mix right top and bottom. The next priority is making sure that cambers are maintained. Both are critical when looking at injury stats.

Personally, I would like to see the lure arm extension stats from as many tracks as possible. Trialed on straight, one turn, and oval. I like the delayed start recommendation, it's logical. When you look at the stats from Hattrick, for example, there is a clear bias. Which means the lure is not clearly visible to all runners at release. The idea that collisions and crowding could be reduced with a delayed start has merit.

You mentioned the UK. I don't think a comparison is justified as there are too many variables. Better to compare stats in areas where all conditions are alike and they simply aren't in the UK's case. Yes, they run six dog fields, but other factors may vary considerably. I would like to see the stats for day and night racing, temperature extremes, does air temp play a role? There are aspects of this report I like, and others that require more information in order to agree or not.