What is the state from Thirsk before the track meeting tomorrow evening? In a well -managed race industry, it should not be an unchanged question, but it seems rather this way after James Sanderson, the clerk of the track course, Admitted to an interview last week That when it comes to stick readings – the figures on which professionals and bettors rely as an objective guide to the state of the field – he feels free to massage the data as he seems.
Sanderson told an interviewer of the Podcast Barstewards Investigation, which is a sponsor on his track, that he had eliminated a real reading point on his part before the Thirsk meeting on April 12. He later said Racing Post That he had done it because “if we publish the readings because they left the ground, they would be misleading”, and added for good measure that he does not believe that he is the only clerk of course who regularly modifies the figures.
In relation: The Skelton winner in Cheltenham maintains a narrow duel title advance with Mullins
“If the racing post has made an anonymous investigation of the course clerks,” said Sanderson, “and asked that they change the reading or manipulate the process to obtain a reading of which they are satisfied, I would be surprised if you had not 50% or more by saying yes. I know that others, I speak to them.”
This news came as a shock for the National Federation of Coaches (NTF), which said that Sanderson's comments “would be a great concern for the coaches”, but perhaps as a little less a surprise for the forum of horses of horses (HBF), which has housed its suspicions for some time.
“There is a lack of confidence in the readings of drops and earnings in general,” said Sean Trivass, the president of the HBF, at the post. “We must ask ourselves if the global race wants to meet and provide specific descriptions for the people on which people can bet, because it does not look like this.”
The Goingstick, which was designed to provide an objective digital companion of descriptions like “good to do” and “sweet with heavy patches” which had been used for generations, arrived for the first time in British race in 2003. Since 2009, the rules of the race required tracks to publish a reading before each lighting.
Unlike the penetrometer, its French equivalent, which measures the penetration of the lawn after a vertical drop, the gouttick records both the penetration and the shear force necessary to remove the stick from an angle of 45 degrees.
This is intended to be a more complete measure of forces at work on the hooves of a galloping thoroughbred and could in theory find a number between one – where a horse would swim – at 15, which would be akin to the main track in Heathrow. For practical purposes, however, a reading of about five would be the point where the heavy soil becomes unpleasant, while 10 would be considered as the upper limit for security in the other direction.
About two thirds of the 1,450 annual race meetings of the United Kingdom take place on Turf, and although the occasional bettors take few comments of readings in progress, the donors more committed – those who maintain the bearing of a week at the next, during meetings like those of Thirtsk which maintain the whole show on the road – See Accident Information on the meetings. It is, quite simply, a cornerstone of a serious form study, which also has an impact on the analysis of racing times, winning margins and much more.
The trainers, on the other hand, make daily decisions regarding the declaration or not an entry according to Goingstick reports. “The falsification of this information may have led to incorrect decisions taken by coaches who will seek to act in the best interest of horses at their expense,” said Paul Johnson, director general of the NTF last week.
Sanderson's comments also highlight a potential conflict of interest in which civil servants face when they take on readings, because there is little sign that he has ever felt the need to add anything. Instead, any correction is down, not increasing, so that the figure published suggests that the course is easier than reading indicates.
An increasing number of sneakers and owners hesitate to take place that, although it adapts to the declared objective of the British Horseracing Authority of “good to do”, is perhaps on the faster side of the description. The ie, on the other hand, depend on money money in their chests in media rights agreements with online bookmakers. Transactions are based on a percentage of online Paris bearing, and turnover is intrinsically linked to field sizes.
The course clerks are therefore subject to significant and probably growing pressures to do what Sanderson believes that at least half of his colleagues are already doing – adjusting the raw data of their drops.
For the moment, the BHA has only made a brief response to Sanderson's comments. Process his reaction with a stick, in fact, and he would probably record something around 3.5 – very, very soft.
Puffer 1.48 Mary Stanford 2.18 RATAL RATTLING 2.48 BALLYGUNNER CASTLE (NB) 3.18 FUN FUN FUN 3.48 VOCITO 4.22 Little Miss Dante 5.00 Shuil Ceoil 5.32 Follow Charlie.
Catterick 2.00 Glory Fighter 2.30 Lucius Aleius 3.00 Troi salary 4 4.04 Animate 4.35 The pious appearance of 610 months salmon
Ludlow 2.38 Brendas requesting 3.08 ThankyourluckStar 3.38 Ultra Beat 4.10 Amberelli 4.40 Captain Tommy 5.15 JORAH D'ALMA.
Lingfield 4.50 Palazzo Persico 5.20 Princess PW 5.50 Cerulean Summer 6.20 Ghaiyya 6.50 Time Sunny 7.20 Daisy Roots 7.50 Knockout Blow.
Taunton 5.25 Jackpot des Bordes 6.00 Jacksbar 6.30 Bruce Gobble 7.00 Taritino 7.30 El Gavilan 8.00 Bob Bishop.
“The BHA is aware of the comments made by Mr. Sanderson concerning the sharing of Groustick's readings before racing meetings and examining them,” said a spokesperson.
“We believe that the sharing of precise drops of drops is important because it provides important information to the participants, the bettors and the fans on the state of the course at a given time.
“It has also been specified that garttic readings are not comparable in different places, but should rather be considered compared to the other readings of this same course.”
This is far from being fairly well.
There is A decade of online data. Sport deserves an answer as to the quantity, exactly, must be taken with a large pinch of salt, and also how the BHA will restore the credibility of the most important unique data point in the race.
