|
By:
futile m8.
Check out the thread on antepost forum. |
|
By:
signed
|
|
By:
 |
|
By:
Ruined York (imo) ….
They won’t listen…. Haydock wouldn’t look out of place if full of veg and potatoes tbh…. Maybe they should ask farmers for advice…..they are naturally trained without uni….tbh… |
|
By:
not quite 15 years, but still applies today
|
|
By:
the same infant school as rico?
|
|
By:
a million miles apart. well, 3 million approximately
|
|
By:
How the Catterick going pre racing could be given out as Good to Soft, Good in places is a sackable offence. Changing to Good to Soft after race 3 and that's still not accurate or even close.
Where's is the actual Good to soft on that track today? Simply put, you don't create that much disruption to a racing surface on Good to soft going as what we're seeing today. Punters left guessing on the accuracy of going reports yet again. |
|
By:
on times its g/s
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
I'll have even money to any stake you want that timeform call both tracks g/s when the data is up (after 5pm tomorrow)
but for interest let's have your assessment of the ground along with full reasoning... |
|
By:
Catterick CotC picking the weeds out of the ground and the fluff outta his navel wondering why folk are worried about the track in February.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
for interest let's have your assessment of the ground along with full reasoning...
you still haven't told us what you think the ground was and why an evidence based response please, which after 35 years of watching and punting shouldn't be beyond you |
|
By:
I'd have had it as soft. Based solely on what my eyes are telling me.
If you think a large part of this can't be visual, think of the condition of the bend leaving the stands in particular at Catterick today. Why does that not occur on firm or even good to firm going? So conversely it does happen when the ground has retained a lot of moisture Interesting you press me for an "evidenced based response" and then claim your input will have to come from Timeform tomorrow after 5pm. You'd do well to draw your own conclusions with your own eyes. Time buffs aren't infallible either you know. Moreso over the jumps on ground that's incorrectly described. |
|
By:
Somerset Sam • February 10, 2025 10:55 PM GMT
I'd have had it as soft. Based solely on what my eyes are telling me. I suspected that's as good as you could come up with...thanks |
|
By:
Times indicate good to soft.
Times over eyes give you the only reliable going description. |