It was the track that had punters talking – what was going on with the much loved Sandown track on Saturday?
One of Melbourne’s premier and most reliable racing surfaces, it looked and raced like a typical wet, winter offering.
Which left some somewhat confused given the lack of rain in Melbourne during the week. According to the relevant agencies, 18mm of rain in for the previous week, but zero in the three days leading in.
The track hadn’t been used for racing in two months and is reliably one of the better tracks for punters given how fairly it races, so there was every reason to bet with confidence on Saturday.
The track was officially rated a soft 6 on race morning but downgraded to a soft 7 after race 6 on a dry Saturday.
But it came clear early the track wasn’t racing like a soft 6, but something much heavier.
Betsy asked the Melbourne Racing Club on Sunday a series of basic questions around track that might provide punters an explanation surrounding how the track came to be presented in the way it was.
We asked whether the club comfortable with how Sandown raced on Saturday, any explanation how the track was rated so heavy given the lack of rain in Melbourne, any other information regarding the preparation of the track, any insight into how the track was put up a soft 6, but later downgraded with no rain to and whether the club conduct any further works/change in approach regarding the track for its next meeting.
The club, usually one of the more transparent in its dealings, said they would not comment. The MRC has employed a track expert after concerns across a number of its tracks, including Caulfield, which is due for a revamp later this year.
But there was plenty of participants and punters who had their own views following Saturday’s Sandown track.
Those who competed on Saturday [on both sides of the fence] were adamant early on that the track was racing much heavier and communicated as much to officials.
One prominent trainer told owners who had a runner on the day that he was let down by the track’s rating and wouldn’t have raced had he had known just how wet the track was. The trainer likened to track to a heavy 9 or 10.
Times back up the trainers, too.
Right across the day winning times married up with what you’d expect on a heavy 9 or heavy 10 track.
Horses were coming with huge margins, another tell-tale sign the track was not the original soft 6 it was posted.
Just a week earlier, Betsy’s Matt Welsh wrote about how wind can also impact times. But winds certainly didn’t play a part on what was a relatively calm Melbourne day.
Racing is an outdoor sport, and track management a difficult science. But punters deserve to be able to bet with confidence on the information they are presented with and participants should be able to compete with all the necessary assurances too.
