Racehorse TALK

wasn't a 'whiz kid' DD - it was Lindsay Murphy who is regarded as a leader in his field in Australia.

I don't think its the 1-10 system thats the problem

Heres what Max Presnall reported on the issue in the smh

Generally most areas have never had it so good, but bleats abound. If the tears blubbered about conditions fell on the surface of Sydney tracks, the ground would be suitable for race meetings in heaven.

Alas, Warwick Farm was too hard last Monday, not enough give in the ground for the modern-day thoroughbred.

''They would have chopped my balls off if I watered a track within seven days of a meeting,'' said Lindsay Murphy, the Australian Turf Club racecourse manager and Australia's most experienced in the field. ''Once a hard, fast track was fabulous but it's the opposite today.''

Warwick Farm trainer Joe Pride complained about Monday's conditions but Robbie Waterhouse, bookmaker and turf student, sent an email of congratulations about the ground. Waterhouse is a firm-track tragic.

''The only time I ever watered a course to get a planned result was disaster,'' Murphy said. ''I'll never do it again.''

Murphy started, specialising in grass for the Sydney Turf Club, in 1977 when the moveable rail came into being, and says the ground is much better now. He regards the Victorian policy of watering to start a program with dead to dry to good as ''impractical''.

During his Sydney reign, the late Tommy Smith never complained about tracks, even Randwick training circuits upon which a walking cocker spaniel would have broken down.

Ray Murrihy, the Racing NSW chief steward, too, gets plenty of groans regarding race-day surfaces. ''It's too hard, too soft, biased,'' he said. ''Some you agree with. Some are laughable. Everyone's an expert.

''I remember a particular person during the course of a Warwick Farm meeting complaining it favoured down the outside for the first couple, then a leader's track for two or three races then before the end of the day you can only win from behind.

''If I said that straight-faced I would be entitled to be locked up. But, seriously, people will come to you with those sort of claims. Vested interest is the primary motivation.''

I disagree - I think its a valid and easily understood system for regulars and less educated racegoers alike.

Not to worry - at least we agree on roundings. Maybe they should always round a dead 4 down to a good 3!

and one more thing - lindsay is one of the most unassuming modest blokes you'd ever meet - so words like whizz kid and his 'brainchild'  have been used about him and the system - they would never be words he'd use himself

It's all in the eye of the beholder, just because you think it's nonsense DD and Mick Goodie agrees with you doesn't make it fact, it is still just opinion, it isn't that black and white, to use the Fast/Good/Dead/Slow and Heavy just makes it easy for track managers to avoid criticism as they have a wider variance, like last week the hulla balloo was about it being a Good 2 and called a good 3 if it was just called good no one could complain could they?? Track managers problem solved but Joe Pride still has a problem doesn't he?? what would actually change? absolutely nothing!!

There are a number of issues probably being lumped in together when they shouldn't be.

Policy -
Taken from -H-Sun ' RVL Track Preparation Policy all tracks must be prepared to race as a good 3 for the majority of the meeting' is the policy a good one?
I can't see any issues with policy, is it being adhered to correctly? Others will know better than me.

Rating system -
The reality is that if you break down the ratings further - using number system - then it follows you're going to move between up/down grades moreso as same scale is just broken down into more points. Just because it isn't working as well as it could be I'm not sure reducing the level of detail of info is good thing. Maybe scale needs tweaking not sure. Could you use the analogy with sectional data - instead of providing times to .00 we'll just go to .0 and round off there - I mean less detailed info isn't good thing surely. Leading to...

Determining the rating -
Who does it? Stewards/track managers - I gather stewards have the ultimate call. How often to they differ.

When the rating's given -
Naturally if if you're giving a rating at 6.30am for a card starting at 1pm on 35 degree day with summers breeze things will change. Need to listen to what expected going will be? Non issue.

Accuracy -
I think this is where punters have main beef - as per Mercs original post - are ratings matching surface. Retrospective up/downgrades - this doesn't help the punter on the day - but I'd like to know more about criteria here. I suspect data should be experiencing few more retrospective changes which isn't being reflected in historical data.

Maybe I've got it wrong, maybe there are other points more/less.

it still only comes down to someones opinion, there is no definitive way of creating accuracy with any degree of certainty, leave it to nature and it is what it is, a track rating is only a Guide not a guarantee, this is a storm in a tea cup, it means ZERO in the scheme of things
Tracks can be a good 3 in parts, a good 2 in other parts, a Dead 3/4 somewhere else, how can you give an overall rating with any degree of accuracy?? simple you can't!! we punters/trainers/owners etc are far to spoiled with information(most of which is irrelevant anyway) and like little kids if we can't run the game or get what we perceive to be inaccurate info we want to throw all our toys out of the cot, lets just grow up and move on

I agree with that, I have never taken any notice of the penotrometer, you stick it in the ground in one spot when 2 feet away it may be different, then you stick it in the outside of the track get a 6 and the inside and get a 4 so say the Penno is 5 when at no point was the Penno reading actually 5 what does that mean??
Track ratings are like luck in running some times it helps your horse to win while other times they don't, I could understand someone like Joe Pride blowing up if it was given out as a soft track and turned out to be a fast track but good 3 to good 2?? that is splitting hairs and has zero credibility in my opinion, Christ it is summertime, if you have a horse that can't handle hard tracks bring it back in the Autumn/Winter don't race it in Summer!!