Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Jack Veitch Interviews Thirsk's Clerk of the Corse James Sanderson, covering how they prepare the ground for each meeting, BHA directives, the going stick and how bias are handled
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhSdDbAD07E
7.36 mins in he talks about the going-stick readings up and down the country.
he states that his going stick 8.9 reading on 12th of April is innacurate so he dials it back to 7.9 so that he doesn't get inundated with withdrawals.
been there 16 years so the geezer knows the track inside out but it must raise questions as to the efficacy of the sticky stick thingy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhSdDbAD07E
7.36 mins in he talks about the going-stick readings up and down the country.
he states that his going stick 8.9 reading on 12th of April is innacurate so he dials it back to 7.9 so that he doesn't get inundated with withdrawals.
been there 16 years so the geezer knows the track inside out but it must raise questions as to the efficacy of the sticky stick thingy.
Show More
The old one was the best…..along with experience….what you think of the ground at Newbury ?
times from thirsk on sat
round course: good
str course: g/f
so he's called the ground correctly
reporting his own reading clearly that shouldn't be happening but if clerks feel a reading is misleading they should have the discretion to not use the stick imo
round course: good
str course: g/f
so he's called the ground correctly
reporting his own reading clearly that shouldn't be happening but if clerks feel a reading is misleading they should have the discretion to not use the stick imo
think it was 7.6 reported instead of 8.6 leif
8.9 was decs stage
8.9 was decs stage
NTF alarmed after clerk's 'inaccurate and condescending' comments on GoingStick readings
Punters and trainers have expressed shock and concern at suggestions GoingStick readings are being fabricated by clerks of the course.
On Tuesday, Thirsk clerk of the course and chief executive James Sanderson said he published a GoingStick measurement below the reading taken as “if we published the readings as they came out of the ground they would be misleading”.
Sanderson, who said he was not a fan of the apparatus, added that if an anonymous survey of clerks was conducted on whether readings were changed he would “be amazed if you didn't get 50 per cent or more saying yes. I know others do, I talk to them”.
Paul Johnson, chief executive of the National Trainers Federation, said it was incumbent on clerks to provide accurate going information and that he had contacted the BHA to discuss Sanderson’s comments.
He said: "The comments from James that he has been deliberately providing incorrect GoingStick readings will be a cause of great concern to trainers. It is the role of the clerk to provide accurate information that will enable trainers to make plans for the horses that are their responsibility.
“Falsifying this information may have led to incorrect decisions being made by those trainers, who will be seeking to act in the best interests of the horses in their charge. The suggestion that trainers will not understand that stick readings cannot be compared between courses is both inaccurate and condescending.
“We have already discussed these comments with the BHA and look forward to hearing how they intend to ensure that this is not as widespread an issue as suggested by James.”
The Horseracing Bettors Forum (HBF) said the comments showed a disregard for punters and that racing had a responsibility to act to ensure those betting on the sport could trust the information that was being provided to them.
Sean Trivass, HBF chair, said: “There’s a lack of trust in the GoingStick and going readings in general. We have to question whether racing overall wants to get together and provide accurate going descriptions for people to bet on because it doesn’t feel that way.
“If 50 per cent of clerks are jiggling with the going readings, as has been alleged, then racing has no choice but to get together and define what has to be done. We have to know clerks will give a reading and that we can trust what they are giving.”
The BHA said while it appreciated there were nuances in how the readings recorded by the GoingStick at different courses were interpreted by clerks, it was important that accurate information was provided.
A BHA spokesman said: “The BHA is aware of comments made by Mr Sanderson regarding the sharing of GoingStick readings prior to race meetings and are looking into them.
“We believe that sharing accurate GoingStick readings is important, as it provides important information for participants, bettors and fans about the condition of the course at a given time.
“It has also always been made clear that GoingStick readings are not comparable across different venues, but rather should be considered in comparison to other readings from that same course.
“If a different user takes responsibility for taking GoingStick readings then a slight difference to the average stick reading would also be expected. A given reading may well, therefore, lead to different official going descriptions at different courses.”
https://www.racingpost.com/news/britain/ntf-alarmed-after-clerks-inaccurate-and-condescending-comments-on-goingstick-readings-abTyO7g55WeF/
Punters and trainers have expressed shock and concern at suggestions GoingStick readings are being fabricated by clerks of the course.
On Tuesday, Thirsk clerk of the course and chief executive James Sanderson said he published a GoingStick measurement below the reading taken as “if we published the readings as they came out of the ground they would be misleading”.
Sanderson, who said he was not a fan of the apparatus, added that if an anonymous survey of clerks was conducted on whether readings were changed he would “be amazed if you didn't get 50 per cent or more saying yes. I know others do, I talk to them”.
Paul Johnson, chief executive of the National Trainers Federation, said it was incumbent on clerks to provide accurate going information and that he had contacted the BHA to discuss Sanderson’s comments.
He said: "The comments from James that he has been deliberately providing incorrect GoingStick readings will be a cause of great concern to trainers. It is the role of the clerk to provide accurate information that will enable trainers to make plans for the horses that are their responsibility.
“Falsifying this information may have led to incorrect decisions being made by those trainers, who will be seeking to act in the best interests of the horses in their charge. The suggestion that trainers will not understand that stick readings cannot be compared between courses is both inaccurate and condescending.
“We have already discussed these comments with the BHA and look forward to hearing how they intend to ensure that this is not as widespread an issue as suggested by James.”
The Horseracing Bettors Forum (HBF) said the comments showed a disregard for punters and that racing had a responsibility to act to ensure those betting on the sport could trust the information that was being provided to them.
Sean Trivass, HBF chair, said: “There’s a lack of trust in the GoingStick and going readings in general. We have to question whether racing overall wants to get together and provide accurate going descriptions for people to bet on because it doesn’t feel that way.
“If 50 per cent of clerks are jiggling with the going readings, as has been alleged, then racing has no choice but to get together and define what has to be done. We have to know clerks will give a reading and that we can trust what they are giving.”
The BHA said while it appreciated there were nuances in how the readings recorded by the GoingStick at different courses were interpreted by clerks, it was important that accurate information was provided.
A BHA spokesman said: “The BHA is aware of comments made by Mr Sanderson regarding the sharing of GoingStick readings prior to race meetings and are looking into them.
“We believe that sharing accurate GoingStick readings is important, as it provides important information for participants, bettors and fans about the condition of the course at a given time.
“It has also always been made clear that GoingStick readings are not comparable across different venues, but rather should be considered in comparison to other readings from that same course.
“If a different user takes responsibility for taking GoingStick readings then a slight difference to the average stick reading would also be expected. A given reading may well, therefore, lead to different official going descriptions at different courses.”
https://www.racingpost.com/news/britain/ntf-alarmed-after-clerks-inaccurate-and-condescending-comments-on-goingstick-readings-abTyO7g55WeF/
think it was 7.6 reported instead of 8.6 leif
8.9 was decs stage
He stated the stick that morning (day of racing) was 8.6 (and that it was 8.9 on decs)
He foes on to say he lobbed off a full point because , in his words, "the stick is misleading"
no wonder he has ruffled fdeathers.
8.9 was decs stage
He stated the stick that morning (day of racing) was 8.6 (and that it was 8.9 on decs)
He foes on to say he lobbed off a full point because , in his words, "the stick is misleading"
no wonder he has ruffled fdeathers.
*goes
worse still he says that a lot of clerks of the course publish their own readings - "some of them at the top"
infer that he means the top racecorse COtc obviously
worse still he says that a lot of clerks of the course publish their own readings - "some of them at the top"
infer that he means the top racecorse COtc obviously
you've repeated what I said leif
he reported it to be 7.6 instead of 8.6
decs (thurs 10th) reported 7.9 instead of 8.9
he reported it to be 7.6 instead of 8.6
decs (thurs 10th) reported 7.9 instead of 8.9
This is tricky, we all know that the ground at every individual racecourse can produce its own g/s reading but they are using a universal g/s stick then what the hell do the clerks do?. firm groung reading at one course could probably be good ground at another surely the answer is to calibrate each courses stick to their own ground.
and also the round course reading would have been lower than the straight course
with also some variation across the width of the track
surely clerks should be allowed to decline using it if they see fit
or do away with traditional going reports & have an independent assessor producing 3 going stick readings for every furlong of track, inner centre & outer
with also some variation across the width of the track
surely clerks should be allowed to decline using it if they see fit
or do away with traditional going reports & have an independent assessor producing 3 going stick readings for every furlong of track, inner centre & outer
Like i say it is tricky, we all know who to trust and who not when it come to going reports its a case of watch the first race and check the times although it doesnt help people who place a bet in the mornings.
Kirkland Tellwrong is sadly missed for his utter bullshat going descriptions
Racecourse clerk fined for failure to provide accurate GoingStick reading
Thirsk clerk of the course James Sanderson has been fined £500 for his failure to provide an accurate GoingStick description.
Sanderson, who is also chief executive at the track, had voiced his lack of trust in the equipment, which measures the firmness of the ground, during a podcast interview on April 12.
He said that when he did record a GoingStick reading it would be altered in line with how he perceived the ground to be, based on his experience and assessment with a wooden stick.
Sanderson subsequently said he believed publishing the GoingStick readings would “mislead people” and that other clerks also published altered readings. “I know others do, I talk to them," he said.
Sanderson was interviewed about his comments by the BHA in June, when he reiterated his lack of trust in the equipment, stating that since April different people using the GoingStick had got different readings for the same part of the racecourse.
According to findings published on the disciplinary panel website on Tuesday, Sanderson said the reporting of this data would be “unhelpful to punters, as far as I’m concerned it’s unhelpful to everyone. It’s unhelpful to trainers declaring as well.”
The BHA said Sanderson had posted a deliberately incorrect GoingStick reading on April 12, recording it publicly as 7.6 when the actual reading had been 8.6, and that he had “not been truthful and accurate in his findings of the GoingStick reading”.
In addition, Sanderson’s limited use of the equipment had prevented a build-up of data that could be used to determine whether the readings were not aligned with ground conditions, and that he had not undergone any additional training in using the GoingStick after developing his concerns about its accuracy.
Adjudicating panel member Philippa Charles said: “It is clear from Mr Sanderson’s candid interview with the BHA that he regards the GoingStick process as flawed and inferior to his experienced view of the going. The BHA do not challenge his experience or ability to assess the going.
“Despite Mr Sanderson’s apparent concern about the accuracy of the GoingStick system, it is nevertheless the case that it is a requirement of BHAGI (British Horseracing Authority General Instructions) that it be used, and a requirement of the rules that the data generated by it is returned faithfully to the BHA.”
Sanderson has been an accredited clerk of the course since 1995, and at Thirsk since 2014.
https://www.racingpost.com/news/britain/racecourse-clerk-fined-for-failure-to-provide-accurate-goingstick-readings-avLLJ9L989ZE/
Thirsk clerk of the course James Sanderson has been fined £500 for his failure to provide an accurate GoingStick description.
Sanderson, who is also chief executive at the track, had voiced his lack of trust in the equipment, which measures the firmness of the ground, during a podcast interview on April 12.
He said that when he did record a GoingStick reading it would be altered in line with how he perceived the ground to be, based on his experience and assessment with a wooden stick.
Sanderson subsequently said he believed publishing the GoingStick readings would “mislead people” and that other clerks also published altered readings. “I know others do, I talk to them," he said.
Sanderson was interviewed about his comments by the BHA in June, when he reiterated his lack of trust in the equipment, stating that since April different people using the GoingStick had got different readings for the same part of the racecourse.
According to findings published on the disciplinary panel website on Tuesday, Sanderson said the reporting of this data would be “unhelpful to punters, as far as I’m concerned it’s unhelpful to everyone. It’s unhelpful to trainers declaring as well.”
The BHA said Sanderson had posted a deliberately incorrect GoingStick reading on April 12, recording it publicly as 7.6 when the actual reading had been 8.6, and that he had “not been truthful and accurate in his findings of the GoingStick reading”.
In addition, Sanderson’s limited use of the equipment had prevented a build-up of data that could be used to determine whether the readings were not aligned with ground conditions, and that he had not undergone any additional training in using the GoingStick after developing his concerns about its accuracy.
Adjudicating panel member Philippa Charles said: “It is clear from Mr Sanderson’s candid interview with the BHA that he regards the GoingStick process as flawed and inferior to his experienced view of the going. The BHA do not challenge his experience or ability to assess the going.
“Despite Mr Sanderson’s apparent concern about the accuracy of the GoingStick system, it is nevertheless the case that it is a requirement of BHAGI (British Horseracing Authority General Instructions) that it be used, and a requirement of the rules that the data generated by it is returned faithfully to the BHA.”
Sanderson has been an accredited clerk of the course since 1995, and at Thirsk since 2014.
https://www.racingpost.com/news/britain/racecourse-clerk-fined-for-failure-to-provide-accurate-goingstick-readings-avLLJ9L989ZE/
Not everyone’s cup of tea but a had grafter with who pulls his tripe out running a well run independent racecourse gets fined a monkey by the bha ,meanwhile Julie Harrington who achieved absolutely nothing when in charge gets a 600,000 drop by the bha ,and some wonder why the game is in such a mess.
Remember Peter Easterby saying Thirsk ground was the best around and would think it's still considered the same by many trainers today hence normally very healthy field sizes.
Typical bha look after the clueless don’t allow anyone with any idea do anything
Wondersobright. 09.06. Wondersobright. 18.51. Jimnast. 21.02. Agree with all.
The only gripe I would have with Mr Sanderson is his dobbing in of other CotC’s. Far better if they come out in support of him, imv.
Someone should sort out a crowdfund to cover the fine.
The only gripe I would have with Mr Sanderson is his dobbing in of other CotC’s. Far better if they come out in support of him, imv.
Someone should sort out a crowdfund to cover the fine.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539