Timeform has called on the BHA to provide greater scrutiny of going assessments and watering policies after race times at Chester on Thursday indicated the ground was slower than officially described.
The ground was officially called 'good' for all three days of Chester's May meeting. However, Timeform, which returns an independent going assessment based on race times, deemed conditions to be good to soft on Thursday, which may have been a surprise to some racing fans given the prolonged dry spell and high temperatures this spring. Timeform's going description tallied with the course's on Wednesday and Friday.
Watering took place before and during the meeting at Chester, with 3mm added after racing on Wednesday and Thursday.
The Timeform report for the opening race of Thursday's card read: "The second day of Chester’s May meeting began on ground officially described as ‘good’ but after further watering following Wednesday’s fixture, time-based analysis of conditions suggested it was riding slower than that, Timeform calling it good to soft. Quite why it was felt further watering was necessary when times for the opening day had also suggested the ground was very much on the slow side of good is very hard to fathom."
Debate regarding the accuracy of the Chester going description follows less than a couple of months after another high-profile example at Uttoxeter on Midlands National Day when racing was judged by Timeform to have taken place on a surface softer than advertised.
More recently, Thirsk clerk of the course James Sanderson faced criticism after admitting he altered GoingStick readings to better reflect his interpretation of ground conditions. He also said he was not alone in doing so and told the Racing Post: "If the Racing Post did an anonymous survey of clerks of the course and asked do they ever change the reading, or manipulate the process to get a reading they’re happy with, I'd be amazed if you didn't get 50 per cent or more saying yes. I know others do, I talk to them."
Calling on more action from the BHA, Timeform's report continued: "At a time when clerks at other courses are admitting to fabricating GoingStick readings, it really is time for the governing body to hold racecourses to account to restore the faith of punters and industry professionals in producing accurate going assessments which currently must be at or close to an all-time low."
Chester clerk points to participant feedback
Chester clerk of the course Eloise Quayle, who said she "never has and never would mis-publish a GoingStick reading", was taking the helm for her first meeting at Chester having previously held the same role at Newcastle. She was comfortable with the track's watering policy for the meeting and, pointing to a lack of criticism from racing professionals, said: "The forecast was to be dry through the week. We watered to maintain where we were. We maintained the going description due to the fact nobody implied it should be changed to anything other than good. I like to listen to feedback and I am willing to make changes to the going description if opinions are generally consistent across the board.
“I go and look for feedback with the jockeys and then you see trainers through the day, but I genuinely didn't have complaints from anyone who ran horses there. That doesn't just include the winners, that's also from people whose horses haven't run as well and said the ground was what they were expecting."
The BHA's general instructions state that Flat courses should try to provide good to firm ground, though it also says it is accepted some managing executives of Flat courses may wish to aim for good ground "depending upon their track topography, soil type, weather and fixture patterns and/or whether they are staging two or more consecutive days racing".
It is Timeform's view that during multi-day meetings the BHA should be providing data to clerks, in the form of race-time analysis, to help them make objective decisions on watering and stay within the guidelines. Racecourses need to be more transparent with details on watering and should be compelled to publish them on the BHA website, and in instances when race times suggest the going description was inaccurate, the BHA should contact the course with feedback and log it.
Quayle was satisfied with the surface Chester delivered and added: “It was down to be good [ground] from entries. You're managing expectations as much as anything and we were quite openly aiming not to have it as good to firm because we had started as good from entries.
"I can understand the times were a bit slow, particularly for the second day and I put that down to the fact they were running on more worn ground. The difference with Chester is that the inside two yards on the bends are run by every single horse, nearly, for every race. If you go any wider you're adding significant yardage."
'We had a successful meeting'
She added: "From my perspective we had a successful meeting. We only had one non-runner on account of the going and we didn't have any injuries. I understand from a punter's perspective it may not have been ideal because it wasn't good to firm ground. But people who were expecting to run their horses at Chester were hoping for slower ground because historically it has been slower ground, they know it was a three-day fixture and that the layout doesn't lend itself to fast ground. I know we were a long way off fast ground but it does dry back quickly when it’s that sort of week weather wise.
“From a ground management perspective if we hadn't watered from Wednesday night into Thursday we wouldn't have been able to just put more water on Thursday night because then the surface wouldn't have been as genuine. It wouldn't have been as stable - we'd have been putting too much water on too close to race time."
When approached, the BHA indicated that it is working on a number of initiatives in this sphere with the aim of providing more transparent, accurate data to the industry relating to areas such as the surface, moisture, irrigation and course mapping, and that more information will be made available on these issues in due course.
More from Sporting Life
Safer gambling
We are committed in our support of safer gambling. Recommended bets are advised to over-18s and we strongly encourage readers to wager only what they can afford to lose.
If you are concerned about your gambling, please call the National Gambling Helpline / GamCare on 0808 8020 133.
Further support and information can be found at begambleaware.org and gamblingtherapy.org
