WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES!!!!!!!!!!!!

Last Saturday morning about 9.30am I donned my rain coat and boots and headed off in the steady rain to inspect the condition of the Ascot track before the afternoons races. It didn't take me very long to work out that there was a real chance of the races being called off. By the time I inspected the 1200m chute I had already made up my mind. The further I went around the track, the less likely it became that any races would be held. There was so much surface water laying around that I figured it would be Monday at the very earliest that the meeting would be held.

It came as no shock to hear during the morning that the races had been postponed however I was a bit stunned that Perth Racing had decided to run the meeting the next day. Fairly ambitious to say the least I felt. Why not wait till Monday and race on a slow to dead track instead of racing on Sunday on what would surely be a heavy track with the real chance of the track not standing up to the traffic of a nine event card?

The next morning the rain had cleared however with no wind about and quit high humidity in the air, I decided to head off and check out the track once again. Once again I have to say that I was stunned. The track was firm with no surface water to be seen anywhere. The crossings were boggy however they were being dug out and replaced as I was on my way home. I was at home when the first race was run just after mid day and I couldn't believe the time for the race. What was rated a slow track was soon upgraded to dead and I think possibly even good by later in the day.

I have to say that I have never seen anything like it before. Never have I seen so much water laying on a track and then 24hours later the same track have a full race meeting held on it and barely a mark left on the track. It really does say something about the drainage of the new Ascot surface and suggests that racing on the track in winter may not be as silly as we all thought it would be. Top marks to Perth Racing, The Curators and the designers.

My only question mark is this. How can a track have a penetrometer reading of 6.1 in the middle of a hot summer with strong Easterly winds yet have a reading of 6.3 only hours after 80 to 100mm of rain have fallen on it with no wind and humid conditions? I don't know the answer and I am not having a go at anyone but I do think we have a problem with either our penetrometer or our readings on a dry track.

Hope we can work it out.