Increasing Frequency of Omitted Obstacles

[Posts: 78Joined: 29 Aug 2011, 15:03]

There seems to be a worrying trend of regularly omitting obstacles at meetings due to "turf management issues", i.e false ground/ground under repair, at several racecourses.

Another symptom of the saturation of meetings, despite the attempt by the BHA to cut the fixture list to more manageable levels.

The latest examples have been the last fence and the last hurdle in the back straight at Hexham, the first fence down the back straight at Fontwell. I would estimate that probably 50% of meetings now omit an obstacle for one reason or another. (Not including the annoying low sun excuses prevalent at certain times of the year). I can't remember this happening so regularly as it does these days. Certainly in the twentieth century obstacles were only omitted when the ground was really desperate.

I see Worcester have now removed their chase fences and replaced them with portable fences this season. They seem to have taken the opportunity to reduce the number of fences down the back straight to four (admittedly an increase from the paltry three for the previous meeting).

I assume the BHA have to give dispensation for these omissions. When omissions are authorised, is there a minimum number of obstacles that have to be available to be jumped during races for meetings to take place?

When the full compliment of obstacles are jumped, I think the rules state there must be 8 hurdles for a 2 mile race and then 2 per extra half mile. For chases there must be 12 fences for a 2 mile race and then 3 per extra half mile. Probably allowances are made for some courses due to their layout, i.e. location of road crossings or minimum distance of obstacles from bends.

Several years ago I'm sure there also used to be a stipulation that every NH meeting should include at least one steeplechase over a distance of 3m +. Obviously this rule was relaxed some time ago!

[Posts: 1426Joined: 03 Jan 2008, 21:49Location: Lowton,Cheshire]

I have also noted that Worcester seem to be going down the same route as Southwell as regards having Steeplechases first then the hurdles with a Bumper inbetween if they have one down.

For me i dont like it and prefer it how it used to be.

I cannot understand why they have done it as they have plenty of turf to use at Worcester.

[Posts: 78Joined: 29 Aug 2011, 15:03]

I have also noted that Worcester seem to be going down the same route as Southwell as regards having Steeplechases first then the hurdles with a Bumper inbetween if they have one down.

For me i dont like it and prefer it how it used to be.

I cannot understand why they have done it as they have plenty of turf to use at Worcester.

A direct result of switching to portable fences. They wouldn't want to be wheeling fences and hurdles on and off the course every half hour, so they just switch obstacles once during a meeting as Southwell do.

I would guess they are trying to create two courses out of one to produce fresh turf, that hasn't been raced on, for the latter part of their season.

[Posts: 15Joined: 14 Oct 2010, 20:17]

What a shame Worcester have done away with their traditional chase course. There has always been plenty of space at Worcester as the hurdles course took over the flat course (when they ceased flat racing). I guess that means the water jump down the back straight has gone too. I am not a fan of these portable fences they encourage lazy jumping and I also like to see chases and hurdles split up throughout the meeting. I wonder which other course will now go down this route after, Southwell, Haydock and now Worcester?

[Posts: 78Joined: 29 Aug 2011, 15:03]

What a shame Worcester have done away with their traditional chase course. There has always been plenty of space at Worcester as the hurdles course took over the flat course (when they ceased flat racing). I guess that means the water jump down the back straight has gone too. I am not a fan of these portable fences they encourage lazy jumping and I also like to see chases and hurdles split up throughout the meeting. I wonder which other course will now go down this route after, Southwell, Haydock and now Worcester?

The water jump in the back straight disappeared many years ago.

[Posts: 4482Joined: 03 Sep 2007, 22:56Location: Milton Keynes]

The latest examples have been the last fence and the last hurdle in the back straight at Hexham,

In fairness to Hexham conditions were dire yesterday and the ground would have been genuinely unsafe to jump the final flight in the back straight. Ditto the two omitted fences.

I only walked part of the course, the relatively better part, and I called it squelchy.


Someone who walked the entire course called it heavy, very heavy in places and with the ongoing rain there were patches of standing water in places.

Hexham were not only lucky to stage the meeting in the first place they were exceptionally lucky to get through the entire card.

The question I would throw back to you is which is preferable - omitting a couple of obstacles or calling the entire meeting off?

[Posts: 846Joined: 14 Jun 2009, 23:52Location: Croydon]

Looking on tv it looks as though there is a problem with the grass not far from the winning post at Worcester, so guess they have pushed the racing line out to give time for the surface to recover.

I agree totally about the over watering of racecourses, over time this will adversely affect how the grass grows.

[Posts: 383Joined: 04 Mar 2009, 01:52Location: Herts, Stourbridge & Dorset]

Also noticed that for the last 5 or 6 years, Uttoxeter have routinely omitted a fence from all chases during their Summer meetings.

[Posts: 78Joined: 29 Aug 2011, 15:03]

The latest examples have been the last fence and the last hurdle in the back straight at Hexham,

In fairness to Hexham conditions were dire yesterday and the ground would have been genuinely unsafe to jump the final flight in the back straight. Ditto the two omitted fences.

I only walked part of the course, the relatively better part, and I called it squelchy.


Someone who walked the entire course called it heavy, very heavy in places and with the ongoing rain there were patches of standing water in places.

Hexham were not only lucky to stage the meeting in the first place they were exceptionally lucky to get through the entire card.

The question I would throw back to you is which is preferable - omitting a couple of obstacles or calling the entire meeting off?

Understandable in extreme ground conditions, but the point I'm getting at is omissions are becoming too frequent.

Uttoxeter and Sedgefield, to name only two, regularly find an excuse to omit obstacles. The reasons may be valid, but it appears the courses can't cope with the amount of racing as this didn't seem to happen as often in past seasons.

[Posts: 1301Joined: 17 Nov 2009, 01:13Location: Virginia]

What a shame Worcester have done away with their traditional chase course. There has always been plenty of space at Worcester as the hurdles course took over the flat course (when they ceased flat racing). I guess that means the water jump down the back straight has gone too. I am not a fan of these portable fences they encourage lazy jumping and I also like to see chases and hurdles split up throughout the meeting. I wonder which other course will now go down this route after, Southwell, Haydock and now Worcester?

Every steeplechase meeting in the US uses portable fences and most of them have water jumps. The "National Fences" seem taller than the ones in the UK (52") and are fairly solid brush. Of course many meets have permanent timber courses as well and switch between the two courses.
i.e.
http://willowdalesteeplechase.org/cms/p ... aseMap.pdf
http://www.steeplechaseatcallaway.org/pdf/2009Map.pdf
http://isteeplechase.com/wordpress/wp-c ... se-map.pdf

[Posts: 3687Joined: 19 Nov 2002, 14:40Location: Fife]

The "National Fences" seem taller than the ones in the UK (52") and are fairly solid brush.

Miss Woodford

Steeplechase fences in the UK are 4'6" in height (54") so there would appear to be only the slightest difference with "National Fences". Biggest fences here would be the Grand National fences which vary between 4' 6" and 5' 2".

Stiffness of fences varies as well, certainly from course to course and sometimes from season to season at the same course. Musselburgh's portable fences were particularly flimsy over the last winter, as witnessed by Fiendish Flame walking through a good proprotion of them to win the chase on New Year's Day. Perth's fences always quoted as being soft, but they don't seem to be and you can't take too many liberties with them.

Back to the original point htough and I agree that omitting fences seems to happen too often these days. For their first two or three meetings of last season Ayr missed the first two fences in the straight, they hadn't even been constructed as far as I could see. The second last down the far side has been a regular omission over the last couple of seasons.

Rob

[Posts: 1301Joined: 17 Nov 2009, 01:13Location: Virginia]

The "National Fences" seem taller than the ones in the UK (52") and are fairly solid brush.

Miss Woodford

Steeplechase fences in the UK are 4'6" in height (54") so there would appear to be only the slightest difference with "National Fences". Biggest fences here would be the Grand National fences which vary between 4' 6" and 5' 2".

Stiffness of fences varies as well, certainly from course to course and sometimes from season to season at the same course. Musselburgh's portable fences were particularly flimsy over the last winter, as witnessed by Fiendish Flame walking through a good proprotion of them to win the chase on New Year's Day. Perth's fences always quoted as being soft, but they don't seem to be and you can't take too many liberties with them.

Rob

Right, but National Fences are considered hurdles (since they are jumped in stride vs. out of stride like timber fences)

[Posts: 78Joined: 29 Aug 2011, 15:03]

I see Hereford are missing the fence in the home straight (again) tonight.