Open letter to the BHA
I have a request, ultimately simple request given that all the information is held either by the courses or TurfTrax themselves and it revolves around the application of the Going Stick.
In June 2011 email dialogue with Mike Maher, then and still current Manager Director of TurfTrax Limited I discussed the current use of the Going Stick following twitter conversation with Sulekha Varma, then Clerk Of Course at Nottingham racecourse. The fall out of these dialogues are as follows:
Disclosure of courses using, and not using, “Gridzone”
At Nottingham Sulekha would take three readings per furlong, “Grid”, and then the Reading would be a reflection of this, other courses do not as per Mike’s email, “About 20 of the racecourses use the grid system that you have described below, which is something that we set up as an additional service some years ago.”
Disclosure of reading points where “Gridzone” are not in use
Mike stated the following with regards to courses not using the “Gridzone” method; “The courses who do not use the grid system are all instructed to take readings in a methodical way from the same areas each time so that the averages are comparable at each course over time.”
Stick readings when and how
All courses, as per Mike’s email are required todo the following; “Every racecourse is required to give an average reading on the day of the race and prior to declaration stage as part of the British Horseracing Authority �rules of racing�.” As such any course that doesn’t fulfil this task, can we have explanations as to why the reading wasn’t carried out. When they are published, can courses state if the ratings are the readings of “Gridzone” method or not.
Post race readings
We have seen as recently as Sunday where weather conditions deteriorated and no doubt ground ease. Should courses not seek to confirm this in the form of a reading post race.
As said all this data is currently stored within BHA or TurfTrax database, why can’t this info be made public to all.