now call me sceptical but i am suspicious that if the ground at Higham was genuinely good on Tuesday then is it REALLY still good now??
With entries and nearly 200 miles to travel we need to know the accurate answer.
For example after a jockey let us down at the last minute we were let off the hook from travelling to North Carlton on the assurance the day before of good ground. The reallity was as mentioned on other sites was much quicker ground.
Come on lets have an accurate update before we waste 4 hrs each way and however much in diesel!!
We have the same concern, with no rain arriving and enough wind to dry the ground out. We did the same as you at Carlton but that was an hour away, not three, so we'll be staying at home tomorrow rather than waste all that fuel. Fast ground will suit some, not others, but please give us the chance to make an informed decision about our own horses!
Fortunately, we are local to east anglia so we didn't have quite as far to go as some of you today. We did however arrive for the first race this morning in response to the information given out over the last 10 days, stating that the ground can be confirmed as GOOD. Immediately after walking onto the course it became clear that it was actually on the fast side of good, not to mention the uneven ground. To run around Highham, as they did today, in under 6 mins, is far from the average course time that 'Makenzie and Harris 2010' state is 6 mins 15 seconds. To avoid a lot of time wasting and unnecessary stress for everyone involved, especially the horses, it would be much appreciated if we could be provided with accurate and honest going reports in the future.
-- Edited by walesw on Sunday 30th of January 2011 06:19:10 PM
We came we saw we didnt conquer, but the going description was as expected, at best, innacurate. why do the CoC,s constantly treat the participants like mushrooms. Higham were not the only guilty party, the farce at Ideford Arch was a digrace. we came for quick ground, and so werent disappointed with what we found!!
