04 039 PDF

Racetrack
Design &
Performance
Database of Current
Knowledge
A report for the Rural Industries Research

and Development Corporation
by A K Stubbs et al
February 2004
RIRDC Publication No 04/039

RIRDC Project No PTP-20A
© 2004 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation.
All rights reserved.
ISBN 0 642 5849 3

ISSN 1440-6845
Racetrack Design and Performance – databaseof current knowledge

Publication No. 04/039
Project No. PTP-20A
The views expressed and the conclusions reached in this publication are those of the author and not
necessarily those of persons consulted. RIRDC shall not be responsible in any way whatsoever to any person
who relies in whole or in part on the contents of this report.
This publication is copyright. However, RIRDC encourages wide dissemination of its research, providing the
Corporation is clearly acknowledged. For any other enquiries concerning reproduction, contact the
Publications Manager on phone 02 6272 3186.
Researcher Contact Details

Arthur Stubbs
58/2 247-55 Drummond Street, Carlton, Vic, 3053
Phone: 03 9844 1135

Fax: 03 9844 4554
Email: akstubbs@compuserve.com
In submitting this report, the researcher has agreed to RIRDC publishing this material in its edited form
RIRDC Contact Details

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation
Level 1, AMA House
42 Macquarie Street
BARTON ACT 2600
PO Box 4776
KINGSTON ACT 2604
Phone: 02 6272 4819

Fax: 02 6272 5877
Email: rirdc@rirdc.gov.au
Website: http://www.rirdc.gov.au
Published in February 2004

Printed on environmentally friendly paper by Canprint
ii
Foreword
There have been many horse race and training track constructions in Australia during the last decade
or so, with the overall aim of providing improved surfaces for maximum use, minimum maintenance
and best horse performance and safety. In a number of cases these objectives have not been met and
in general the construction methods followed have varied widely.
It was considered timely to investigate actual track constructions in an attempt to determine the
reasons for success or otherwise of the various approaches with the expectation that some guidelines
to best practice could be developed.
This publication compiles the knowledge and experience gained to date, with particular reference to
Australian conditions and requirements, and proposes initial track design, maintenance and
monitoring standards with recommendations for future research to refine these standards.
This project was funded from industry revenue which is matched by funds provided by the Australian
Government.
This report is an addition to RIRDC’s diverse range of over 1000 research publications, forms part of
our Horses R&D program, which aims to provide industry with options for the establishment and
maintenance of cost effective, aesthetically pleasing and safe race, training and performance surfaces
throughout Australia.
Most of our publications are available for viewing, downloading or purchasing online through our
website:
downloads at www.rirdc.gov.au/fullreports/index.htm
purchases at www.rirdc.gov.au/eshop
Simon Hearn
Managing Director
Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation
iii
Acknowledgments
This project could not have been contemplated without the invaluable contributions of the project
team from start to finish. They included:
Co-Principal Investigator - David McLaren, Bodmac Consultants
Racecourse Managers – Lindsay Davies & Lindsay Murphy, Sydney Turf Club; Norm James,
Australian Jockey Club; Ian Trevethan & Greg Barker, Moonee Valley Racing Club; and Warren
Williams, Brisbane Turf Club
Racecourse Designers - Jim Boxall, Young Consulting Engineers; Philip Butcher, Rooney & Bye;
and Frank Henville, Rygate & Co.
Literature Review - Naomi Cogger & David Evans, University of Sydney
Database/Website Development - Michael Robinson, Sportsturf Consultants
In addition, valuable input was given by turf scientists, John Neylan and David Nickson; racing
industry veterinary officers, John McCaffrey and Craig Suann; veterinary research scientist, Helen
Davies; and the following racecourse managers or consultants: Tim Bailey, Geelong; Ray Chandler,
Caulfield; Bart Cowan, Morphettville; Geoff Fanning, Gold Coast; Bernard Hopkins, Bendigo; Jason
Kerr, Sandown; David Lowe, Elwick; Chris Nolan, Warrnambool; Pat McEvoy and Charlie
Stebbing, Racing Victoria; and Ray Hawke, Thoroughbred Racing SA.
iv
Contents
Foreword .................................................................................................................. iii
Acknowledgments................................................................................................... iv
Executive Summary................................................................................................. vi
Introduction ............................................................................................................. vi
Objective ................................................................................................................. vi
Methodology ........................................................................................................... vi
Results ................................................................................................................... vii
Recommendations ................................................................................................ viii
1. Introduction........................................................................................................... 1
2. Objective ............................................................................................................... 2
3. Methodology ......................................................................................................... 3
4. Results................................................................................................................... 4
Introduction ............................................................................................................. 4
Epidemiological approaches to identifying risk factors for MSI ............................... 4
Incidence and description of MSI ............................................................................ 5
Track related risk factors for MSI ............................................................................ 7
Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 10
References............................................................................................................ 11
5. Racetrack Design & Performance Database Survey ....................................... 14
6. Discussion & Conclusions ................................................................................ 42
7. Recommendations ............................................................................................. 47
8. References .......................................................................................................... 48
v
Executive Summary
Introduction
During a comprehensive survey of turf composition and management of grass racetracks in Australia
(RIRDC Project TGT-1A), a diverse range of situations and practices were found, many of which
were based on local opinion and experience in the absence of more uniform, recognised techniques.
A recommendation from this project led to annual Racecourse Managers Conferences which have
assisted information exchange and wider knowledge of better practices. A Racetrack Management
Manual (RIRDC Project PTP-15A) has been prepared to assemble all this information.
At the 5th Conference, in 2000, a research and development forum was conducted which identified
more precise definition of quality standards and best practices as now being required, particularly
applying to track construction, management, performance and assessment. This led to a workshop,
held in March, 2001, which considered priorities for racecourse R & D, and resulted in agreement to
collect all currently available information about track design, maintenance and performance and
attempt to relate this data to horse performance and injury.
It was considered that compilation of data on recent racetrack constructions and subsequent
performance, together with any other relevant records on race and training tracks, to evaluate the
degree of success of the various techniques, would be an essential first step to guide development of
quality standards relative to horse performance.
This exercise would have the added benefit of pointing the way to a uniform approach to collection of
data on racetrack performance and management. It would also provide the industry with an account of
the different approaches and experiences, to assist better, future decision making, and highlight areas
of limited knowledge needing more research and development.
Objective
Compilation and analysis of data on race and training track construction and performance as a basis
for development of quality standards and monitoring procedures relevant to horse performance and
injury.
Methodology
A database was designed, differentiating between turf and non-turf tracks, race and training tracks,
with details of re-constructions including reasons and results, performance records and maintenance
practices, with the aim of identifying and defining effective and non-effective techniques.
An international scientific literature review was conducted for information pertinent to design,
performance and maintenance of horse race and training tracks. This was assisted by reference to
overseas experiences in California, Singapore and Hong Kong, identified from recent Racecourse
Managers conferences.
A number of major racetrack constructions or reconstructions that occurred in Australia in recent

years were surveyed to gather information on methods, costs, schedules, results and lessons learnt.
Performance records, recording systems and maintenance practices for race and training tracks were
collected in some of these surveys.
Horse performance and injury data relative to track shape, surface and durability were sought from
racing industry veterinarians.
vi
The database was constructed as a reference website and a report produced, drawing conclusions
regarding apparent best practice techniques and basic standards, proposing data collection procedures
for uniform application, and recommending priority areas for future race and training track research
and development.
Results
Literature Review
The review found that, whilst there has been progress towards understanding the track related risk
factors for MSI, there is still insufficient information to produce guidelines for the design and
management of “safer” racetracks.
General findings were:
• Track geometry
Racing injuries were more common near turns, particularly the home turn, due to strain on the
lower forelegs. Turn radius, camber and speed entering the turn all have an effect. Installing an
incline before the turn, having a more gradual turn and/or transitional turns can reduce injury
risks. Recommended camber on turns at standardbred tracks is about double that found at
racetracks.
• Track surface
Evidence from overseas indicate less injuries occur on turf surfaces compared to dirt and some
synthetic tracks, and less shin soreness on woodchip compared to dirt. Turf roots increase impact
and shear resistance. Thatch and mowing height do not appear to have a significant impact on
surface hardness.
• Track condition
Results tend to be inconsistent but more injuries appear to occur on hard, as against slow, turf
tracks, and muddy dirt tracks. Similarly, the most severe injuries occur on the harder ground near
starting chutes and crossings.
Track Surveys
Most common reasons given for constructing (reconstructing) tracks are to:
- reduce or eliminate the number of meetings lost due to excessively wet tracks
- achieve a narrower range of track rating, ideally ‘Good’, through the racing calendar
- give a more even and uniform track surface, both across and along the track from start to finish
- improve track drainage and/or irrigation systems
- change track shape and layout, eg, total length, length of straights, width – to allow larger fields
and/or rail movements, more gradual and/or better cambered turns, better camber on straights,
adding chutes, removing crossings
- provide a more durable track surface to cope with extra racing and/or training loads with reduced
maintenance time and costs
- provide a range of surfaces for different training regimes
The surveys of a number of actual track constructions in Australia during the last decade, together
with examination of several overseas experiences, have revealed some commonality of approach to
track geometry and profile parameters, despite a mix of reasons and budgetary constraints. There
have been generally positive outcomes from the constructions in broad terms such as fewer lost
meetings and less extreme variations in track rating. However, there is a dearth of detailed ‘before
and after’ data that could throw light on the relative effect of the varying changes on horse
performance and injury.
Performance Recording Systems
vii
This is the area of greatest deficiency in the industry. Some racecourses have monitored racetrack
ratings, weather, irrigation, maintenance procedures and user comments over time but they are
probably in the minority. There appears to have been little detailed analysis of this data to relate
track factors to horse performance.
Injury and fatality data has also been routinely recorded by racing industry veterinarians but this is
only recently being related to track conditions on race days. There is no evidence of systematic
collection of data on training tracks to examine the effects of surfaces and condition on horse injury
or performance.
Track Standards
From the case studies, examination of the literature, and consultations with researchers, racing
industry suppliers and racecourse managers on the project team, some broad parameters for track
standards can be defined relative to current opinion on requirements for optimum horse performance
and minimum injury risk. There is little objective evidence to support these parameters, particularly
with regard to the actual effects on horses, and further work is required to more accurately define
them.
Track standards are defined for: Track Design/Geometry; Track Surface/Profile; Track Maintenance;
and Monitoring Procedures.
Recommendations
1. Standardised race and training track monitoring procedures, as described, should be instituted by
the industry, preferably at all tracks but at least at the main racing and training venues. Means of
collection and analysis of this data to relate tracks with horse performance, possibly in conjunction
with the National Racing Database, should be organised.
2. In conjunction with the implementation of standard monitoring procedures, epidemiological
studies should be conducted to gain further understanding of the relationship between track
surface characteristics and horse injury.
3. Means of measuring the direct effect of track design and surface on horses should be investigated
with the aim of finding or developing a compact and relatively inexpensive device of the strain
gauge type, such as is used for humans.
4. Current international knowledge of horse/track surface interaction, particularly that held by the
Netherlands Sports Federation R & D Department headed by Dr Franklin Versteeg, should be
obtained either by a visit to that institution or by inviting Dr Versteeg to Australia.
5. Trials of different training track surfaces of varying moisture levels, and under a range of
workloads, should be conducted side by side to measure changes in surface physical
characteristics, maintenance requirements and apparent performance. Horse reaction to the
different surfaces should be directly measured when an appropriate device has been developed.
6. Trials of different turf profiles should be conducted side by side in a range of climatic locations,
under horse traffic, to measure turf and profile performance and maintenance requirements. Horse
reaction to the different profiles should be directly measured when an appropriate device has been
developed.
7. Further work is needed in Australia to standardise the use and relationship of penetrometer (or
similar device) readings to track ratings. Alternative surface measuring implements should also be
investigated. The relationship between horse reaction and track ratings should be determined
when an appropriate device has been developed.
8. Horse reaction to the impact of various cambers, turns, and slopes should be directly measured
9. The best means of combining Kikuyu and cool season grasses on racetracks in south-eastern
Australia should be investigated.
viii
1. Introduction
During a comprehensive survey of turf composition and management of grass racetracks in Australia
(RIRDC Project TGT-1A), a diverse range of situations and practices were found, many of which
were based on local opinion and experience in the absence of more uniform, recognised techniques.
A recommendation from this project led to annual Racecourse Managers Conferences which have
assisted information exchange and wider knowledge of better practices. A Racetrack Management
Manual (RIRDC Project PTP-15A) has been prepared to assemble all this information.
At the 5th Conference, in 2000, a research and development forum was conducted which identified
more precise definition of quality standards and best practices as now being required, particularly
applying to track construction, management, performance and assessment. This led to a workshop,
held in March, 2001, which considered priorities for racecourse R & D, and resulted in agreement to
collect all currently available information about track design, maintenance and performance and
attempt to relate this data to horse performance and injury.
It was considered that compilation of data on recent racetrack constructions and subsequent
performance, together with any other relevant records on race and training tracks, to evaluate the
degree of success of the various techniques, would be an essential first step to guide development of
quality standards relative to horse performance.
This exercise would have the added benefit of pointing the way to a uniform approach to collection of
data on racetrack performance and management. It would also provide the industry with an account of
the different approaches and experiences, to assist better, future decision making, and highlight areas
of limited knowledge needing more research and development.
1
2. Objective
Compilation and analysis of data on race and training track construction and performance as a basis
for development of quality standards and monitoring procedures relevant to horse performance and
injury.
2
3. Methodology
A database was designed, differentiating between turf and non-turf tracks, race and training tracks,
with details of re-constructions including reasons and results, performance records and maintenance
practices, with the aim of identifying and defining effective and non-effective techniques.
An international scientific literature review was conducted for information pertinent to design,
performance and maintenance of horse race and training tracks. This was assisted by reference to
overseas experiences in California, Singapore and Hong Kong, identified from recent Racecourse
Managers conferences.
A number of major racetrack constructions or reconstructions that occurred in Australia in recent

years were surveyed to gather information on methods, costs, schedules, results and lessons learnt.
Performance records, recording systems and maintenance practices for race and training tracks were
collected in some of these surveys.
Horse performance and injury data relative to track shape, surface and durability were sought from
racing industry veterinarians.
The database was constructed as a reference website and a report produced, drawing conclusions
regarding apparent best practice techniques and basic standards, proposing data collection procedures
for uniform application, and recommending priority areas for future race and training track research
and development.
3
4. Results
Literature Review
Introduction
Musculoskeletal injuries (MSI) have been identified as the major cause of race day fatalities (Johnson
et al., 1994), lost training days (Rossdale et al., 1985; Bailey, 1998) and weeks spent resting at
pasture (Bailey, 1998). The causes of MSI are likely to be multifactorial and include age (Estberg et
al., 1993), sex, breaks from training (Carrier et al., 1998), exposure to high-speed exercise (Estberg et
al., 1995) and track (Bailey et al., 1998a). The purpose of this review is to examine factors related to
the design and management of racetracks that might be risk factors for MSI. The review has been
divided into 3 sections: Epidemiological approaches to identifying risk factors for MSI, incidence
and description of MSI and the track related risk factors for MSI.
Epidemiological approaches to identifying risk factors for MSI

Epidemiology is the study of a health problem within a population (Reid, 1998). The initial process
in any epidemiological investigation is to describe the extent of the problem (Robertson, 1998).
Descriptive studies and reviews of case histories can be used to identify variables that are associated
with the onset of MSI. However, additional analytical studies should be conducted to determine if the
variables are risk factors.
Risk factors are variables, which are associated with an increase or decreased risk of sustaining a MSI
(Brunker et al., 1999; Caine et al., 1996). These factors are commonly divided into intrinsic or
extrinsic risk factors. Intrinsic factors are characteristics of the horse whilst extrinsic factors are
characteristics of the environment. Examples of intrinsic factors are age, sex and body size. Extrinsic
factors may include the training program, weather, training/racing surface, and surface condition and
track geometry. When examining an individual risk factor it is important to consider not only its
independent effects but also how it interacts with other risk factors. The most appropriate study
designs to investigate risk factors for MSI are case-control and cohort studies.
Case-control studies are preferential when the health problem of interest is rare (Robertson, 1998),
such as fatal injuries on race day. Case-control studies, also called case-referent or retrospective
studies, begin with the identification of a group of animals with the problem (cases) and a group
without (controls) (Caine et al., 1996; Robertson, 1998). Data relating to exposure to factors of
interest is then collected for both the cases and controls and analysed to determine if there is an
association between the factors and the health problem. The main disadvantage of a cohort study is
that the health status is determined prior to collection of data relating to exposure. Therefore, recall or
existing records are relied upon to provide information relating to previous exposure to the potential
risk factors and confounders of interest. It is possible that knowledge of the health status might bias
the recall.
When investigating a relatively common health problem, such as injuries during training, a cohort
study is most appropriate. A cohort study, otherwise know as a longitudinal study or a prospective
study, involves the selection of a group (cohort) and following them over time (Caine et al., 1996;
Robertson, 1998). During the follow-up period horses are observed to determine exposure to risk
factors and occurrence of the health problems. The observations are then analysed to determine if
there is an association between the risk factors and the health problem of interest. The major
advantage of a cohort study is that the exposure status for each subject is known before the
presentation of the health problems. Therefore, it is the ideal setting to conduct an investigation of the
relationship between a number of potential risk factors and the health outcome of interest (Szklo,
1998). Furthermore, a cohort study allows the researcher to examine a number of different health
problems (Samet and Munoz, 1998). Another advantage of a cohort study is that is allows
hypothesised risk factor(s) to be repeatedly measured over time, making allowances for variability
4
over time (Szklo, 1998; Samet and Munoz, 1998). The main disadvantages of cohort studies are that
they are expensive and take a relatively long time complete (Thrusfield, 1995). Additionally, if the
problem of interest is rare a large number of animals must be selected in order to provide an adequate
number of cases.
Presently, the majority of cohort studies have been descriptive and provided information relating to
the proportion of horse injured and the number of lost training days (Rossdale, 1989; Jeffcott et al.,
1982; Robinson et al., 1988; Lindner and Dingerkus, 1993; Bailey, 1998). The Michigan Equine
Monitoring System has tried to identify risk factors for lameness (Kaneene et al., 1997a; Kaneene et
al., 1997b; Ross and Kaneene, 1996a; Ross and Kaneene, 1996b; Ross et al., 1999). However, this
study did not specifically address risk factors for MSI in Thoroughbred racehorses. Therefore there is
a need for future investigations in Thoroughbred racehorses measuring exposure to a number of
potential risk factors for MSI.
Incidence and description of MSI

A prospective investigation of horses that died or were euthanased at Californian racetracks, reported
that MSI accounted for approximately 80% of all fatalities, with fractures (83%) and ruptured
ligaments (10%) the most common type of MSI (Johnson et al., 1994). The incidence of injuries,
particularly fatalities has been documented in North America, United Kingdom and Australia. The
results of these studies are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1: Musculoskeletal injuries (MSI) reported for flat racing of Thoroughbreds in Australia, USA
and UK.
Source Location Duration of Number Racing Fatality
Study of tracks MSI (per rate
1000 (per
starts) 1000
starts)
Bailey, 1998 Australia 1985-1995 2 2.4 0.3
Bailey, 1998 Australia 1988-1995 4 2.9 0.6
Hill et al., 1986 New York 1983-1985 3 7.3 1.1
McKee, 1995 UK 1987-1993 39 NR 0.8
Pelso et al., 1994 Kentucky, USA 1992-1993 4 3.3 1.4
Williams et al., UK 1996-1998 19 4.0 NR
2001
Esteberg et al,, 1996 California, USA 1991 15 NR 1.7
NR-Not reported
Several studies have reported that the majority of fatal fractures occur in the forelimb. (Johnson et al.,
1994; JRA, 1991; McKee, 1995). Johnson et al. (1994) reported that the most common fracture sites
were the proximal sesamoid bones, third metacarpal bone and humerus. Similarly, McKee (1995)
found that in flat and National Hunt flat races that the metacarpal and carpal bones were the most
common fracture sites. In contrast the shoulder was the most common site of fracture during hurdles
and steeplechase. In Japan carpal and fetlock joints were the most common sites of fracture, with
most fetlock fractures occurring during training and most carpal fractures whilst racing (JRA, 1991).
A twelve-year retrospective study of fatal and non-fatal fractures, at Japan’s 10 racecourses and 2
training centres, reported that the total number of fractures each year ranged from approximately
1,250 to 2,000 (JRA, 1991). The total number of fractures was higher during training. However,
when racing and training fractures were expressed in terms of the number of horses raced and the
number of horses in training, the rate of fracture was greatest during racing. Furthermore a greater
percentage of fractures that occurred during a race resulted in death, or lost performance. On the
other hand the majority of fractures that occurred during training resulted in a rest from racing for up
to one year.
5
Kobluk et al. (1990) and Lindner and Dingerkus (1993) found that approximately 60% of horses in
training were affected by a MSI severe enough to reduce or prevent training . However, these studies
did not report detail the types of MSI.
In Australia a two-year cohort study involving 169 young Thoroughbred racehorses reported 85% of
horses suffered some health problem that resulted in a modified training day and/or time resting at
pasture (Bailey, 1998). The majority of problems encountered by this cohort were low-grade injuries
and disease as outlined in Table 2. The most common health problems were shin soreness and fetlock
problems, which affected 42 and 25% of horses respectively. Of the horses that suffered from shin
soreness, 40% developed the problem for a second or third time by the end of the 3-year-old racing
season. The recurrence rate for fetlock problems was 48%. In the 2-year old racing season, shin
soreness accounted for the most modified training days and weeks spent resting at pasture. However,
in three-year olds, cuts/traumatic injuries caused the greatest number of modified training days,
whilst fetlock problems caused the greatest number of weeks spent resting at pasture (Table 3). Over
the 2 and 3-year-old racing seasons, respiratory problems and cuts/traumatic injury resulted in the
greatest percentage of modified training days (Table 4).
Table 2: The prevalence and incidence rate for first and multiple occurrences of major health
problems in a 165 horses during the two and three-year-old racing seasons
Health problem Prevalence (%) Incidence rate (per 100 horse weeks)
First Multiple occurrences
occurrence
Shin soreness 42 1.68 1.63
Fetlock Problems 25 0.94 1.15
Coughs/nasal discharge 16 0.77 0.75
Laceration/traumatic injury 13 0.75 0.75
Foot problems 9 0.32 0.36
Carpal problems 7 0.25 0.40
Data from Bailey (1998)
Table 3: Impact of health problems in terms of modified training and weeks spent resting at pasture
in 169 horses during the 2 and three-year old racing seasons
Health Problem Days training modified (%) Weeks spent resting at
pasture (%)
2-year-olds 3-year-olds 2-year- 3-year-
olds olds
Fetlock Problems 8.5 6.5 23.7 21.5
Shin Soreness 19.5 11.3 27.7 7.4
Knee Problems 6.5 10.6 6.7 13.3
Cough/nasal discharge 19.0 11.3 7.0 10.3
Miscellaneous 7.3 7.7 4.6 8.5
Lameness
Other joint problems N/R N/R 5.7 3.4
Cuts/traumatic injury 9.2% 27.0 4.0 7.7
Ligament sprain 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.7
Tendon strain N/R N/R 2.8 4.4
Fever 3.8 5.4 N/R N/R
Sesamoid Problems 6.2 0.5 2.2 3.0
Data from Bailey (1998) N/R Not reported
Table 4: Impact of health problems in terms of modified training days in 165 Thoroughbred
racehorses during the two and three-year-old racing seasons.
Complaint Days Modified (%) Average days modified
6
per case (range)
Fetlock Problems 7.7 3 (1-10)
Shin Soreness 14.8 4 (1-20)
Knee Problems 8.2 3 (1-34)
Cough/nasal discharge 15.8 5 (1-14)
Miscellaneous Lameness 7.4 8 (3-24)
Foot Problems 6.0 3 (1-14)
Cuts/traumatic injury 16.8 4 (1-18)
Ligament sprain 4.1 5 (2-18)
Fever 4.5 3 (2-12)
Sesamoid Problems 3.8 3 (2-36)
Data from Bailey (1998)
Similarly, a two-year prospective study involving 314 racehorses in the UK reported that 36% of
horses suffered from a lameness that resulted in training being reduced or prevented (Rossdale et al.,
1985). It was also found that lameness accounted for 68% of all modified training days. Rossdale et
al. (1985) reported that the most common causes of lameness were foot problems (19%), muscular
problems (18%), knee joint problems (14%), fetlock joint problems (14%) and tendon problems
(14%), whilst shin soreness affected only 9% of study population.
Track related risk factors for MSI

The role that factors associate with racetrack design and management play in the onset of MSI is
unclear. Hill et al. (1986) concluded that there was not a significant difference in injury rate between
racetracks. However, subsequent examination of the data showed a significant difference in fracture
rates between Saratoga and Aqueduct. Pelso et al. (1994) also reported that there was no difference in
injury rates at four Kentucky racetracks. However, the group compared injury rates on the basis of
number of racing days rather than the number of starts. Therefore their analysis does not truly reflect
the opportunity for injury at each track (Bailey, 1998).
In contrast, when the fatality rate per start was compared at 39 flat race tracks in the UK there was a
significant difference, with injury rates ranging from 0.03% to 0.21% (McKee, 1995). Studies in the
USA have reported that the fatality rate for two-year-olds racing on different dirt tracks ranged from
0 to 4.14 per 1,000 (Wilson et al., 1996). However, it is possible that variation in fatality rates may be
due to differences in the age and sex distributions of race entrants (Estberg et al., 1996). When using
a multivariate analysis, to control for factors such as age and sex, Mohammed et al. (1991) found that
horses racing at one track were at less risk of sustaining a MSI. In contrast when using a multivariate
approach to analysis risk factors for injury at two racetracks in Sydney, Australia, there was no find a
significant difference between tracks (Bailey et al., 1997b). However, multivariate analysis of risk
factors for serious injuries at four metropolitan racetracks in Melbourne, Australia, reported that there
was a significant increase in risk associated with one track (Bailey et al., 1998a). Furthermore,
studies have reported a reduction in injury rates following track reconstructions (Evans and Walsh,
1997; Oikawa et al., 1994).
Whilst the results of these studies are conflicting there appears to be sufficient evidence to support a
hypothesis that factors associated with the design and management of racetracks are risk factors for
MSI. To date the majority of research has focused on the geometric design, surface and condition of
the track. It is possible that other factors such as camber and crossings may be risk factors for MSI.
Racetrack geometry
Several studies have reported a clustering of severe and fatal race day accidents at or near the home
turn (Oikawa et al., 1994; Wilson et al., 1996; Clanton et al., 1991; JRA, 1991; Peloso et al., 1994;
Hill et al., 1986). Fredricson et al. (1975) suggested that the increased risk of injury associated with
turns is attributable to centrifugal force. Centrifugal force creates an outward pull on the horse and
tends to divert the animal from the track. Studies in Standardbreds show that moving around corner
7
causes abnormal gait and increased the temperature in the fetlock joint (Crawford and Leach, 1984).
Research in Thoroughbreds reported that when moving around a turn the strain on the outside limb
was consistently more than that on the inside limb (Davies, 1996). The magnitude of the force and
the difference in forces between the forelimbs is accentuated when speed is increased (Davies, 1996)
and the radius of corner is reduced (Fredricson et al., 1975b).
Therefore, it follows that decreasing the speed that the horse enters the turn or increasing the radius
of the turn will reduce the centrifugal force and possibly the risk of MSI (Fredricson et al., 1975a;
Fredricson et al., 1975b). This is supported by evidence from a racetrack reconstruction in Japan
(Oikawa et al., 1994). The third and forth turns were widened and an incline added in the straight
between the two turns. Following reconstruction there was a reduction in racing times. Examination
of injury rates pre and post reconstruction found a significant reduction in fatal MSI.
Another way of reducing the centrifugal force acting on the horse when it negotiates a turn is to
increase the banking (Fredricson et al., 1975a; Fredricson et al., 1975b). The amount of banking
required is dependent on the radii of the curve and the speed with which the horse enters the turn
(Table 5).
Table 5: Optimum superelevation (%) at different radii and velocities
Velocity Curve radius (m)
(m/minute)
50 75 100 125 150 175 200
857 42 28 21 17 14 12 10
800 36 24 18 15 12 10 9
750 32 21 16 13 11 9 8
705 28 19 14 11 9 8 7
666 25 17 13 10 8 7 6
Adapted from Fredricson et al. (1975)
When a horse enters and exits a corner it must readjust its balance, thereby increasing the force on its
limbs (Fredricson et al., 1975a; Fredricson et al., 1975b). It is possible to minimise the unbalancing
effect of corners by the use transitional curves that is curves with differing radii. The introduction of
transition curves can be beneficial even if the curve is underbanked. However, the unbalancing
effects can only be fully reduced by adequate banking.
Increasing the banking of semicircular curves and introducing transitional curves at one Scandinavian
Standardbred racetrack resulted in a marked reduction in gait asymmetry and heat in fetlock joint
(Fredricson et al., 1975a; Fredricson et al., 1975b). These results suggest that the strain on the limbs
whilst negotiating the corners had been reduced and it was hypothesised that this would reduce injury
rates. Subsequent surveys of trainers at the reconstructed racetrack found that the majority perceived
that there had been a reduction in injuries (Fredricson et al., 1976). However, there was no
quantitative analysis of injury data pre and post track reconstruction.
Analysis of injury data from a Standardbred racetrack in Sydney, Australia, pre and post
reconstruction found a significant reduction in injury rates (Evans and Walsh, 1997). The banking
was increased from 4.8 to 5.7 degrees. Whilst the degree of banking was not optimal for an 800-
metre track there was a significant reduction in total injury rate from 8.5 to 6.6 per 1000 starts.
These results suggest that reducing the speed with which horses enter the corner, widening the
corners, introducing transitional curves and banking turns could significantly reduce injury rates.
Ideally, all turns at a racetrack will be adequately banked and make use of transitional turns.
8
However, given the clustering of injuries around the home turn (Oikawa et al., 1994; Wilson et al.,
1996; Clanton et al., 1991; JRA, 1991; Peloso et al., 1994; Hill et al., 1986) priority should be given
to the home turn.
Track surface
The relationship between risk of MSI and surface is unclear. Davies (1996) reported that changes in
surface did not alter bone strain. This would seem to suggest that surface type is not a risk factor for
MSI. This is supported by Robinson et al. (1988) who found that there was no difference in injury
rates between turf and dirt surfaces at one racetrack in Minnesota . However, analysis of data from
all racetracks in the USA (Mundy, 1997) and Japan (JRA, 1991) found that the average fatality rate
was lower for turf races.
Examination of injuries at New York Association racetracks reported that the incidence of fractures
was greatest on dirt, however there was no difference in the soft tissue injuries between dirt and turf
surfaces (Hill et al., 1986). These findings are supported by a case-control study that found horses
racing on dirt were approximately three times more likely to sustain an injury than horses racing on
turf (Mohammed et al., 1991). Furthermore, horses racing on turf were less likely to sustain a severe
injury (Mohammed et al., 1992). In the UK the injury rate was significantly greater for horses racing
on equitrack and fibersand than for those racing on turf (Williams et al., 2001). In particular the rate
of sesamoid/fetlock injuries and flexor tendon/suspensory injuries was almost double that recorded
during turf races. The difference in injury rates for other types of injuries was not significant.
Studies examining resistance of sand and soil material found that soil surfaces are better at
cushioning the impact and preventing hoof rotation (Zebarth and Sheard, 1985). Examination of
training surfaces, in the USA, suggests that training on wood fibre may decrease the occurrence of
shin soreness. The study found that 34% of horses trained exclusively on dirt developed shin soreness
compared to 13.5% of horses trained on woodchip. In addition the horses trained on woodchip
accumulated 86 miles of fast work before the onset of shin soreness, whilst horses trained on dirt
accumulated only 32 miles (Moyer and Fisher, 1992; Moyer et al., 1991). It should be noted that in
this study horses were trained not only on different surfaces but also at different training centres. It is
therefore possible that the different injury rates were due to factors other than the differences in the
surfaces, such as the track geometry.
Track Condition
There are conflicting results in the literature with regards to the role surface condition plays in the
onset of MSI. Hard training surfaces have long been considered a contributing factor to training
injuries such as shin soreness (Buckingham and Jeffcott, 1990). Hard tracks are a problem because
the ground reaction forces are increased thereby increasing the strain on the bone. Alternatively
training on soft surfaces, whilst providing cushioning, may hasten muscle fatigue (Brunker et al.,
1999), which would also increase the strain on the bone (Davies, 1996; Yoshikawa et al., 1994).
An investigation of racing injuries detected by the race day veterinarian at two racetracks in Sydney,
Australia, reported that track condition was not a risk factor for MSI (Bailey et al., 1997a). Similarly,
Wilson et al. (1986) reported that there was no association between track surface and overall injury
rates, however there was an increased risk of fracture in two-year-old racing on non-fast dirt tracks.
Mohammed et al. (1991) and Pelso et al. (1994) also found no association between track condition
and injury rates.
In contrast, Cheney et al.(1973) reported that there was a positive linear association between track
hardness and the percentage of horses reported as injured. However, injury data was collected by
sending a questionnaire to trainers therefore the results could have been affected by recall bias and
response rates. Furthermore, the analysis did not control for other factors that might have affected the
results. A study of serious injuries at four metropolitan racetracks in Australia found that after
controlling for age, racetrack and type of racing that the risk of injury was 3.4 times more on a fast
track than on a slow track (Bailey et al., 1998b). Similarly, a study of MSI in flat races and the
9
National Hunt in the UK reported that there was a reduction in fatalities as the racing surfaces
became softer (Williams et al., 2001).
Hill et al. (1986) reported that the risk of fracture at one dirt track was greatest on a muddy track and
soft tissue injuries were more likely to occur on a fast dirt track . However, these associations were
not repeated at any other racetracks in the study and overall injury rates were not affected by the
condition of the track. A study of two-year-old Thoroughbred and Quarter horses found that injuries
were associated with a non-fast track (Wilson et al., 1996). Furthermore, comparison of factors
associated with severe and less severe injuries showed that horse racing on dirt when it was muddy
were at increased risk of sustaining a severe injury (Mohammed et al., 1992). Similarly, a study of
MSI in Japan reported that horses racing on dirt were at more risk when racing on heavy tracks (JRA,
1991). The researchers suggested that this was because the high water content reduced or eliminated
the shock-absorbing qualities of the cushioning sand.
The results of these studies show that the water content of the surface alters risk of injury. Soil
moisture and therefore surface hardness can be controlled through irrigation and drainage (Zebarth
and Sheard, 1985). More research is required to determine optimal water levels for training and
racing surfaces so as to minimise the risk of injury.
Camber
Racetracks may be designed with camber to the inside rail to allow adequate drainage (Fredricson et
al., 1976). Davies (1996) reported that there was no change in strain on the bone when the camber
was altered. However, studies in humans suggest that uneven ground and slanted roads are a risk
factor for MSI in runners because they increase the force on the lower extremity (Brunker et al.,
1999; Knutzen and Hart, 1996). It has been suggested that when runners regularly train on a slanted
surface they alter their direction in order to even out the forces (Knutzen and Hart, 1996). Whilst the
direction of a race is determined by racing regulatory bodies it is possible that reversing the direction
that horses gallop during training could reduce the risk of injury.
Starting chutes
Claton (1991) reported that the majority of MSI that resulted in the horse being removed by
ambulance occurred near high traffic areas such as starting chutes. Laboratory studies have shown
that cantering a horse over a surface that has been used during daily training increased the peak
vertical forces on the limb (Kai et al., 1999). This would seem to suggest a reason for high traffic
areas being associated with MSI. However, there is insufficient evidence to prove a casual
relationship.
Thatch accumulation and grass roots

Other areas of concern are thatch accumulation, mowing height and turf roots. Examination of impact
and sheer resistance suggests that thatch accumulation and mowing height do not have a significant
impact on racing surface hardness (Zebarth and Sheard, 1985). In contrast, turf roots were
responsible for an increase in impact and sheer resistance. Whilst, surface hardness is a risk factor for
MSI there is no direct evidence linking the accumulation of turf roots and MSI.
Conclusion
Whilst, there has been progress towards understanding the track related risk factors for MSI there is
still insufficient information to produce guidelines for the design and management of “safer”
racetracks. Furthermore, there is a need to conduct research that is specific for the Australian racing
industry. Therefore, it is necessary to introduce an organised system of data collection and analysis.
It is hoped that a racetrack design and performance database will provide some of the necessary
information. In addition, a national system for the recording of race day injuries should also be
established. The introduction of such a system, combined with the racetrack design and performance
database, would greatly facilitate future research into track related risk factors for MSI.
10
References
Bailey, C. J., Reid, S. W., Hodgson, D. R., Suann, C. J. and Rose, R. J. (1997a) Risk factors
associated with musculoskeletal injuries in Australian Thoroughbred racehorses. Preventive
Veterinary Medicine, 32 (1-2): 47-55.
Bailey, C. J., Reid, S. W. J., Hodgson, D. R., Suann, C. J. and Rose, R. J. (1997b) Risk factors
associated with musculoskeletal injuries in Australian Thoroughbred racehorses. Preventive
Veterinary Medicine, 32 (1): 47-55.
Bailey, C. J. (1998) Wastage in the Australian Thoroughbred racing industry. Rural Industries
Research and Development Corporation, Canberra
Bailey, C. J., Reid, S. W., Hodgson, D. R., Bourke, J. M. and Rose, R. J. (1998a) Flat, hurdle and
steeple racing: risk factors for musculoskeletal injury. Equine Veterinary Journal., 30 (6): 498-503.
Bailey, C. J., Reid, S. W. J., Hodgson, D. R., Bourke, J. M. and Rose, R. J. (1998b) Flat, hurdle and
steeple racing: risk factors for musculoskeletal injury. Equine Veterinary Journal, 30 (6): 498-503.
Brunker, P., Bennell, K. and Matheson, G. (1999) Stress Fractures, Blackwell Science Asia, Carlton,
Victoria.
Buckingham, S. H. W. and Jeffcott, L. B. (1990) Shin soreness: a survey of Thoroughbred trainers
and racetrack veterinarians. Australian Equine Veterinarian, 8 (4): 148-153.
Caine, C. G., Caine, D. J. and Lindner, K. J. (1996) The epidemiological approach to sports injuries
In Epidemiology of sports injuries, Caine, D. J., Caine, C. G. and Lindner, K. J. (eds) pp 1-13.
Human Kinetics:Champaign, USA
Carrier, T. K., Estberg, L., Stover, S. M., Gardner, I. A., Johnson, B. J., Read, D. H. and Ardans, A.
A. (1998) Association between long periods without high-speed workouts and risk of complete
humeral or pelvic fracture in thoroughbred racehorses: 54 cases (1991-1994). Journal of the
American Veterinary Medical Association, 212 (10): 1582-7.
Clanton, C., Kobluk, C., Robinson, R. A. and Gordon, B. (1991) Monitoring surface conditions of a
Thoroughbred racetrack. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 198 (4): 613-20.
Crawford, W. H. and Leach, D. H. (1984) The effect of racetrack design on gait symmetry of the
pacer. Canadian Journal of Comparative Medicine, 48 (4): 374-80.
Davies, H. M. S. (1996) The Effects of Different Exercise Conditions on Metacarpal Bone Strains in
Thoroughbred Racehorses. Pferdeheilkunde, 12 (4): 666-670.
Estberg, L., Strover, S. M., Case, J. T., Johnson, B. J., Gardner, I. A., Ardans, A., Read, D. H.,
Anderson, M., Barr, B. C., Daft, B. M., Kinde, H., Moore, J., Stoltz, J. and Woods, L. W. (1993)
Case-control study of racing related risk factors for catastrophic injuries of the Thoroughbred
racehorse. In Proceedings. 39th Annual Convention of the American Association of Equine
Practitioners; 129-130
Estberg, L., Gardner, I. A., Stiver, S. M., Johnson, B. J., Case, J. T. and Ardans, A. (1995)
Cumulative racing-speed exercise distance cluster as a risk factor for fatal musculoskeletal injury in
Thoroughbred racehorses in California. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 24 253-263.
Estberg, L., Stover, S. M., Gardner, I. A., Johnson, B. J., Case, J. T., Ardans, A., Read, D. H.,
Anderson, M. L., Barr, B. C., Daft, B. M., Kinde, H., Moore, J., Stoltz, J. and Woods, L. W. (1996)
Fatal musculoskeletal injuries incurred during racing and training in Thoroughbreds. Journal of the
American Veterinary Medicine Association, 208 (1): 92-96.
Evans, D. L. and Walsh, J. S. (1997) Effect of increasing the banking of a racetrack on the occurrence
of injury and lameness in Standardbred horses. Australian Veterinary Journal., 75 (10): 751-2.
Fredricson, I., Dalin, G., Drevemo, S., Hjerten, G. and Alm, L. O. (1975a) A biotechnical approach to
the geometric design of racetracks. Equine Veterinary Journal, 7 (2): 91-96.
Fredricson, I., Dalin, G., Drevemo, S., Hjerten, G. and Alm, L. O. (1975b) Ergonomic aspects of poor
racetrack design. Equine Veterinary Journal, 7 (2): 63-65.
Fredricson, I., Dalin, G., Drevemo, S. and Hjerten, G. (1976) Adequate geometric design of
racetracks. In Proceedings. 22nd Annual convention of the American Association of Equine
Hill, T., Carmichael, D., Maylin, G. and Krook, L. (1986) Track condition and racing injuries in
thoroughbred horses. Cornell Veterinarian, 76 (4): 361-79.
11
Jeffcott, L. B., Rossdale, P. D., Freestone, J., Frank, C. J. and Towers-Clark, P. F. (1982) An
assessment of wastage in thoroughbred racing from conception to 4 years of age. Equine Veterinary
Journal, 14 (3): 185-98.
Johnson, B. J., Stover, S. M., Daft, B. M., Kinde, H., Read, D. H., Barr, B. C., Anderson, M., Moore,
J., Woods, L. and Stoltz, J. (1994) Causes of death in racehorses over a 2 year period. Equine
Veterinary Journal, 26 (4): 327-30.
JRA (1991) Preventing accident to racehorses: studies and measures taken by the Japan Racing
Association. Report of the committee on the prevention of accidents to racehorse. Japan Racing
Association,
Kai, M., Takahashi, T., Aoki, O. and Oki, H. (1999) Influence of rough track surfaces on components
of vertical forces in cantering thoroughbred horses. Equine Veterinary Journal. Supplement, 30 214-
7.
Kaneene, J. B., Ross, W. A. and Miller, R. (1997a) The Michigan equine monitoring system. II.
Frequencies and impact of selected health problems. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 29 (4): 277-92.
Kaneene, J. B., Saffell, M., Fedewa, D. J., Gallagher, K. and Chaddock, H. M. (1997b) The Michigan
equine monitoring system. I. Design, implementation and population estimates. Preventive
Knutzen, K. and Hart, L. (1996) Running In Epidemiology of sports injuries, Caine, D. J., Caine, C.
G. and Lindner, K. J. (eds) pp 1-13. Human Kinetics:Champaign, USA
Lindner, A. and Dingerkus, A. (1993) Incidence of Training Failure among Thoroughbred Horses at
Cologne, Germany. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 16 (2): 85-94.
McKee, S. L. (1995) An update on racing fatalities in the UK. Equine Veterinary Education, 7 (4):
202-204.
Mohammed, H. O., Hill, T. and Lowe, J. (1991) Risk factors associated with injuries in
Thoroughbred horses. Equine Veterinary Journal, 23 (6): 445-8.
Mohammed, H. O., Hill, T. and Lowe, J. (1992) The risk of severity of limb injuries in racing
Thoroughbred horses. Cornell Veterinarian, 82 (3): 331-41.
Moyer, W., Spencer, P. A. and Kallish, M. (1991) Relative incidence of dorsal metacarpal disease in
young Thoroughbred racehorses training on two different surfaces. Equine Veterinary Journal, 23
(3): 166-8.
Moyer, W. and Fisher, J. R. S. (1992) Bucked Shins: Effects of differing track surfaces and proposed
training regimes. In Proceedings. 38th Annual convention of the American Association of Equine
Mundy, G. D. (1997) Review of risk factors associated with racing injuries. In Proceedings. 43rd
Meeting of the Association of American Equine Practioners; 204-210
Oikawa, M., Ueda, Y., Inada, S., Tsuchikawa, T., Kusano, H. and Takeda, A. (1994) Effect of
restructuring of a racetrack on the occurrence of racing injuries in Thoroughbred horses. Journal of
Equine Veterinary Science, 14 (5): 262-268.
Peloso, J. G., Mundy, G. D. and Cohen, N. D. (1994) Prevalence of, and factors associated with,
musculoskeletal racing injuries of thoroughbreds. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical
Association, 204 (4): 620-6.
Reid, S. W. (1998) Why epidemiology: and introduction. In Proceedings. Epidemiology workshop
for equine research workers; 1-6
Robertson, I. (1998) Epidemiological study designs. In Proceedings. Epidemiology workshop for
equine research workers; 11-22
Robinson, R. A., Kobluk, C., Clanton, C., Martin, F., Gordon, B., Ames, T., Trent, M. and Ruth, G.
(1988) Epidemiology studies of musculoskeletal racing and training injuries in Thoroughbred horses,
Minnesota, USA. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, Suppl. (84): 340-343.
Ross, W. A. and Kaneene, J. B. (1996a) An individual-animal-level prospective study of risk factors
associated with the occurrence of lameness in the Michigan (USA) equine population. Preventive
Veterinary Medicine, 29 59-75.
Ross, W. A. and Kaneene, J. B. (1996b) An operation-level prospective study of risk factors
associated with the incidence density of lameness in Michigan (USA) equine operations. Preventive
Veterinary Medicine, 28 209-224.
12
Ross, W. A., Kaneene, J. B., Caron, J. P., Gallagher, K. F. and Gardiner, J. C. (1999) Factors
influencing recovery from and duration of lameness in Michigan (USA) horses. Preventive
Rossdale, P. D., Hopes, R., Digby, N. J. and Offord, K. (1985) Epidemiological study of wastage
among racehorses 1982 and 1983. Veterinary Record, 116 (3): 66-9.
Rossdale, P. D. (1989) The epidemiology of wastage in thoroughbred horses. Pro Veterinario, 9 (2):
5-6.
Samet, J. M. and Munoz, A. (1998) Evolution of the cohort study. Epidemiologic Reviews, 20 (1): 1-
14.
Szklo, M. (1998) Population-based cohort studies. Epidemiologic Reviews, 20 (1): 81-90.
Thrusfield, M. (1995) Veterinary Epidemiology, Blackwell Science Ltd, Oxford, UK.
Williams, R. B., Harkins, L. S., Hammond, C. J. and Wood, J. L. (2001) Racehorse injuries, clinical
problems and fatalities recorded on British racecourses from flat racing and National Hunt racing
during 1996, 1997 and 1998. Equine Veterinary Journal, 33 (5): 478-86.
Wilson, J. H., Jensen, R. C. and Robinson, R. A. (1996) Racing Injuries of Two Year Old
Thoroughbreds and Quarter Horses. Pferdeheilkunde, 12 (4): 582-587.
Yoshikawa, T., Mori, S., Santiesteban, A. J., Sun, T. C., Hafstad, E., Chen, J. and Burr, D. B. (1994)
The effects of muscle fatigue on bone strain. Journal of Experimental Biology, 188 217-33.
Zebarth, B. J. and Sheard, R. W. (1985) Impact and shear resistance of turf grass racing surfaces for
Thoroughbreds. American Journal of Veterinary Research, 46 (4): 778-84.
13
5. Racetrack Design & Performance
Database Survey
A number of recent, major racetrack constructions were surveyed, and in some cases visited, to
gather data on methods, costs, schedules, results, lessons learnt and maintenance practices. The
opportunity was taken at several locations to collect a range of descriptive technical data as a
foundation for an industry racecourse database. This information has been compiled in a website,
together with other relevant data, for scrutiny and analysis < www.users.bigpond.net.au/computurf >.
Survey Results
Randwick, New South Wales

Club Australian Jockey Club
Track Royal Randwick
Area 82 hectares
Track Manager Norm James
Classification Metropolitan
Climate Temperate
Irrigation sources Bore
Annual water usage 200-250 megalitres
Meetings (last year)
Number per year 35
Lost due to track condition nil
Lost due to weather nil
Number of races at each distances (last year) 285
< 1000m 0
1000 – 1200m 57
1200 – 1500m 130
1500 – 2000m 58
2000 – 3000m 39
> 3000m 1
Staff employed
Full time – track 19
Full time - gardens 10
Part time / casual 4-5 (seasonal)
Annual Budget (track maintenance & gardening) > $1 million
Number of tracks 8
Used for both racing and training 1
Used for racing only 1
Used for training only 6
Trainers 26
Horses in work 600 approx.
Race day preparation
Before
- Irrigated to achieve good rating.
- Final irrigation no later than 2 days before meeting.
- Normally rolled with light roller on day prior to meeting and again on race
morning (weather permitting).
- Track mown to 100mm two - three days prior to meeting.
During
- Divots raked in between races
After
- Rolled in direction opposite to horse travel
- Irrigated
- Divots Filled
14
15
Race Track Details - Randwick
Course Proper Kensington Track
Activities
Main activity Racing Racing
Other activities Gallops (Carnival) Training
Age of track 18 months 4 years
Year of construction 2001 May 1999 – Jan 2000
Track dimensions
Circumference 2224 m 2087 m
Average width 28 m 18 m
Length of front straight 400 m 401 m
Length of back straight 307 m 300 m
Camber on straights 2.5 % 1-2 %
Number of turns 3 3
Camber on turns 5% 3-5 %
Track surface
Turf types Kikuyu Kikuyu
Reinforce material No Reflex Mesh elements
Profile depth / Root zone 300 mm 300 mm
Track drainage Yes Yes
Drainage configuration half herringbone half herringbone
Drainage spacing 5m 5m
Average penetrometer
2000/2001 4.62
2002/2003 4.56
Rail Movements (last year) 33 7
Shortest interval 1 day 30 days
Longest interval 2 weeks 5 months
Maximum number of horses
that can race on this track 20 14
(given widest rail movement)
Usage (horses over last 1000m)
Racing 3,000 800
Training 400 200
16
Race Track Maintenance - Randwick
Course Proper Kensington Track
Irrigation
Irrigated Yes Yes
Irrigation type In-ground pop-up In-ground pop-up
Irrigation control system Auto. controllers Auto. controllers
Maintenance:
Fertiliser types Organic, Granular, SR Organic, Granular
Total nitrogen applied 427 kg N/ha per year 300 kg N/ha per year
Wetting agents No No
Pest control
Insecticides Yes No
Fungicides Yes No
Herbicides Yes Yes
Nematicides No Yes
Renovations
Vertidrain Jan 02 Summer 02 x 1
Core Summer 02 x 1
Scarrify Summer 02 x monthly
Mowing
Summer 2/week @ 100mm 2 weeks @ 100mm
Autumn 2/week @ 100mm 1 week @ 100mm
Winter 1/week @ 60-80mm 1-2 weeks @ 70mm
Spring 2/week @ 100mm 1 week @ 70mm
Rolling – Course Proper
Track rating % of year Rolling frequency Roller details
- Good 70 % 1 before / 1 after 2 tonne / 3 drum
- Dead 19 % 2 before / 1 after do.
- Slow 8% 1 after do.
- Heavy 2% Nil -
Rolling – Kensington Track
Track condition % of year Rolling frequency Roller details
- pre-post raceday Once 3 tonne / 1 drum
- trackwork damage 25 % do. 4.5 m brush roller
- raceday damage do. 1 tonne / 3 drum
17
Reconstruction / Major Works – Course Proper - Randwick
Summary of Works
The entire surface was removed to the designated depth. Crushed sandstone base was installed. Half herringbone
drainage installed. Gravel blanket over drainage to depth of 120mm. 300mm of mixed sandy loam applied and
levelled using laser grading. Washed Kikuyu maxi rolls layed to track. Irrigation – Toro 690.
Reason for Works

Criticism had been levelled at the track for a number of years and several areas had been reconstructed to
remedy the problem areas. The track was uneven, patchy and lacked consistency.
Comments and Lessons Learnt

The most successful part of the reconstruction was the laser grading of the different layers of the profile. Ensure
that irrigation is over specified in preference to under specification.
Timetable Proposed Actual Total Costs

Start date May 01 May 01 Budgeted $5.5 Million
End date November 01 December 01 Actual $5.5 Million
Contractors/ Consultants used
Name Purpose
Young Consulting Engineers Design and Project Management
Kingston Industries Construction Contractor
Agripower Drainage Contractor
McMahons Laser Grading Contractor
Qualturf Turf Supply and installation
Hydroplan Irrigation Design
Reconstruction / Major Works – Kensington Track – Randwick
Summary of Works
The old track was removed completely and disposed of off site. A base was formed and a half herringbone
drainage system was installed along with a gravel drainage blanket. A layer of specified sand was installed to a
depth of 120mm and then the reinforced layer was placed on top. Irrigation was installed and washed kikuyu turf
was placed on the reinforced layer.
Reason for Works

During the wet year of 1998 Randwick lost 6 meetings due to wet weather. The committee decided to install a
reinforced sand profile in an attempt to ensure that meetings would not be lost as a result of any wet weather.
Proposed Actual Total Costs

Start date May 1999 June 1999 Budgeted $6 Million
End date January 2000 February 2000 Actual $6.5 Million
Purpose
Kingston Industries Construction Contractors
Aussie Drain Drainage Contractor
Qualturf Turf supply and installation
Strathayr Mesh element supply and install
Hydroplan Irrigation Design
18
Training Track Details - Randwick
Steeple Grass B Grass Dirt Sand Jump Out
Activities
Main activity Training Training Training Training Training
Other activities Barrier trials Barrier trials
Age of track 35 years approx. 35 years 8 years 18 months 4 years
Year of construction approx. 1995 2001
Track dimensions
Circumference 1800 m 1500 m 1942 m 1440 m 1000 m
Average width 15 m 15 m 13 m 6.5 m 13 m
Front straight length 370 m 300 m 400 m 250 m 250 m
Back straight length 280 m 200 m 300 m 200 m 250 m
Number of turns 3 3 3 3 1
Track surface
Type Kikuyu Kikuyu Sand & fine wood Botany bay Kikuyu
fibre sand
Profile depth 300 mm 300 mm 70 mm 300 mm
Track drainage Yes No Yes Yes No
Drainage type Sand slits Natural Natural
Drainage spacing 3m
Irrigation Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Irrigation type In ground pop-up Water truck
Irrigation control Automatic Automatic Nil Automatic Automatic
Fertilisers granular Granular Granular
Total N applied/yr 300 kg/ha 300 kg/ha 300 kg/ha
Soil conditioners No No
Pest control Herbicides Herbicides Herbicides
Usage (no. of horses)
Max. capacity 110/week 100/week 400+/day 100/day 100/week
Annual training load 3000 4000 130,000 30,000 2000
Mowing
Summer 2 weekly - 100mm As for
Autumn weekly – 100mm Steeple
Winter 1-2 weekly – 70mm grass
Spring weekly – 70mm
Rolling
Trackwork damage 4.5m brush roller & As for 2.5 m
3x1 tonne 3 drum Steeple Cambridge
grass roller daily
Barrier trials 3x1 tonne 3 drum
Renovation 20 tonne water truck
Renovation Top up material – Top up material
annually in summer – autumn 2000
19
Randwick Racecourse
20
Moonee Valley, Victoria
Club Moonee Valley Racing Club

Track Moonee Valley
Track Manager Greg Barker
Climate Temperate
Irrigation sources Dam & Mains
Annual water usage 115 megalitres
Number per year 34
< 1000m 60
1000 – 1200m 54
1200 – 1500m 8
1500 – 2000m 69
2000 – 3000m 52
> 3000m 13
Staff employed
Full time – track & gardens 18
Part time / casual 5 (seasonal)
Annual Budget (track maintenance & gardening) $1.3 million
Number of tracks 2
Before
- Move rail to allocated position
- Penetrometer readings 3 days before and up to race day
- Moisture readings 3 days before and up to race day
- Roll when required
- Replace divots after track gallops (Tuesday)
During
- Penetrometer
- Set up hurdles and steeples when required
- Change running rail for start positions
- Check for any safety requirements
- Inspection with stewards at the course
- Staff putting back divots during race meeting
- Track committee meeting if require
After
- Mandrake or vacuum course removing divots
- Roll when required
- Fill divots with sand and seed
- Multi-core when required
- Oversow when required
21
Race Track Details – Moonee Valley
Course Proper
Activities
Main activity Racing
Other activities Steeple racing
Age of track 8 years
Year of construction 1995
Track dimensions
Circumference 1805 m
Average width 24 m
Length of front straight 178 m
Length of back straight 162 m
Camber on straights 2.5 %
Number of turns 4
Camber on turns 7.5 %
Track surface
Turf types Cool season grasses – Ryegrass & Kentucky Blue – on
ACI Sports 40 sand with 10% peatmoss
Reinforce material Netlon mesh – 6kg/cubic metre
Profile depth / Root zone 150 mm
Track drainage Yes
Drainage configuration Herringbone
Drainage spacing 8.5 m
Avg. penetrometer Summer Autumn Winter Spring
Pre-renovation 2002/3 4.31 4.55 5.01 4.52
Post-renovation 2002/3 4.32 4.57 5.01 4.56
Rail Movements (last year) 33
Shortest interval 2 hours
Longest interval 15 days
that can race on this track 16
Racing 2619
Training 133
Steeple racing 75
Steeple training 49
22
Race Track Maintenance – Moonee Valley
Course Proper
Irrigation
Irrigated Yes
Irrigation type Rainbird Master 3
Irrigation control system Automatic controllers
Maintenance
Fertiliser types Organic, Soluble, Granular, Slow release
Total nitrogen applied 500 kg N/ha per year
Wetting agents Yes
Pest control
Insecticides No
Fungicides Yes
Herbicides Yes
Nematicides No
Renovations
Vertidrain Spring & Autumn – 2002/2003
Core Spring to Autumn – 2002/2003 After each race meeting-with rail moves
Scarify November - 2002
Mowing
Summer Once/week @ 90mm
Autumn Once/week @ 90mm
Winter Once/week @ 100mm
Spring Twice/week @ 100mm
Rolling
Condition Spring Summer Autumn Winter
Proportion of year 40% 10% 20% 30%
Frequency of rolling Pre & post meetings When required Pre meetings Pre & post meetings
Roller size 2m x 1.5 m 1.5 tonne 1 tonne 2 tonne 3 tonne
Roller type Steel-split roller do. do. do.
23
Reconstruction / Major Works – Course Proper – Moonee Valley
Summary of Works
Following several years trials of turf surfaces and profiles at Moonee Valley in the early 90’s the old track was
completely replaced with the Strathayr profile. This consisted of 55,000 square metres to a depth of 360mm
which included a root zone layer of 150mm over 113mm of sand and another 100mm of gravel blanket. Half
herringbone drainage was installed plus an automated irrigation system with soil sensors.
Reason for Works

Meetings had been lost due to wet weather, changes were required to improve surface crossfall and reduce
hardness, and re-alignment of the course proper and chutes was required.
Comments and Lessons learnt

Material required for track repairs has been reduced by two thirds. The track has peformed well under a range of
weather conditions and no meetings have been lost. The new track has a much narrower range of ratings, from
good to slow, whereas the old track ranged from fast to heavy.

Start date 1995 1995 Budgeted $ Million
End date Actual $6.2 Million
Name Purpose
Akron Construction Contractor
Aquafield Irrigation Design
Moonee Valley Racecourse
24
Doomben, Queensland
Club Brisbane Turf Club

Track Doomben
Area 45 hectares
Track Manager Warren Williams
Climate Sub-tropical
Annual water usage 140 megalitres
Number per year 46
< 1000m 0
1000 – 1200m 140
1200 – 1500m 79
1500 – 2000m 51
2000 – 3000m 37
> 3000m 0
Staff employed
Full time – track )16
Full time - gardens )
Part time / casual 2
Annual Budget (track maintenance & gardening) $520,000
Number of tracks 5
Used for both racing and training
Trainers 47
Horses in work 185
Before
- Cut twice in previous week
- Position movable running rail
- Monitor weather patterns for watering
- Penetrometer readings prior two days and again on raceday
- Watering regime dependent on penetrometer readings and weather pattern
During
- Monitor damage – usually nothing
After
- Repair surface, roll, then aerate racing pad
25
Race Track Details – Doomben
Course Proper
Activities
Other activities
Track dimensions
Average width 27 m
Camber on straights 2%
Number of turns 4
Camber on turns 5%
Track surface
Turf types Kikuyu
Reinforce material No
Track drainage Yes
Drainage configuration Half herringbone
Drainage spacing 3m
Average penetrometer Summer Autumn Winter Spring
4.57 4.76 4.06 3.69
Shortest interval 2 days
Longest interval 2 weeks
Racing 3,445
Training
26
Race Track Maintenance – Doomben
Course Proper
Irrigation
Irrigated Yes
Irrigation type In-ground pop-up
Irrigation control system Auto. controllers
Maintenance:
Fertiliser types Soluble, Slow release
Total nitrogen applied 75-100 kg N/ha per year
Wetting agents Yes
Pest control
Insecticides Yes
Fungicides Yes
Herbicides Yes
Nematicides No
Renovations
Vertidrain Annually since 1996 – 4 times a year – each season
Core Each Spring since 2001
Scarify Each Spring since 2001
Top dress with sand Spring of 2000 & 2002
Mowing
Summer 2/week @ 100mm
Autumn 2/week @ 100mm
Winter 1/week @ 100mm
Spring 2/week @ 100mm
Rolling
Track condition % of year Roller size & type
- levelling track after meeting 50% 1-2 m wide 750kg split drum
- levelling track after repairs 30% do.
27
Reconstruction / Major Works – Course Proper - Doomben
Summary of Works
Total reconstruction of the track which included: removal of existing turf and soil; shaping the track and
constructing a new subgrade with cambers; installation of new drainage and irrigation sytems; importing new
soil and turf; building new stewards towers; installing new timing electronics; re-designing the mounting yard;
and installing new rails.
Reason for Works

To increase the track’s ability to handle more racing on a more even surface by changing the profile, improving
drainage and correcting cambers.

The track now drains well, even after heavy rain, and provides mostly ‘Good’ ratings.

Start date September ‘96 do. Budgeted $3 Million
End date December ‘96 do. Actual $3.3 Million
Name Purpose
Robert Bird & Partners Design and Contracting
Basic Construction Civil Works
Brisbane Turf Club Project Management
Doomben Racecourse
28
Training Track Details - Doomben
No 2 Grass No 3 Grass Cinders Sand Bull Ring
Activities
Main activity Training Training Training Training Training
Other activities
Age of track 40 years 20 years 60 years 20 years 40 years
Year of construction 1960 1983 1983 1960
Track dimensions
Average width 14 m 17 m m 10 m 8m
Front straight length 280 m 250 m 260 m 100 m 50 m
Back straight length 280 m 250 m 260 m 100 m 50 m
Number of turns 4 4 4 2 2
Track surface
Type Kikuyu Kikuyu Cinders – from Sand Cinders
burnt coal
Profile depth 225 mm 350 mm
Track drainage Mostly natural Yes Yes No No
Drainage type half h/bone-400 m half h/bone Gate drain on
inside
Drainage spacing 3m 6m 50 m
Irrigation Yes Yes No
Irrigation type Bank of 4 heads Impact head
pop-up
Irrigation control Automatic Automatic
Fertilisers Granular, Slow Granular, Slow
release release
Total N applied/yr 75-100 kg/ha 75-100 kg/ha
Soil conditioners Yes Yes
Pest control Insecticides Insecticides
Fungicides Fungicides
Herbicides Herbicides
Max. capacity
Annual training load 3120 3120 31,000 13,000 2,600
Mowing
Summer 2 weekly - 100mm As for
Autumn weekly – 100mm No 2 grass
Winter every 10 days –
100mm
Spring 1-2 weekly –
100mm
Rolling
After every training 1-2 m 750kg split As for
session drum No 2 grass
Renovation Vertidrain once/yr Top up material Top up sand –
- spring/summer – periodically spring 2001
Scarify twice/yr –
spring & summer
Coring twice/yr –
spring & summer
29
Rosehill, New South Wales
Club Sydney Turf Club

Track Rosehill
Area 86 hectares
Track Manager Lindsay Murphy
Climate Temperate
Annual water usage not known
Number per year 29
< 1000m 0
1000 – 1200m 74
1200 – 1500m 126
1500 – 2000m 52
2000 – 3000m 32
> 3000m 0
Staff employed
Full time – track ) 24
Full time - gardens )
Part time / casual
Annual Budget (track maintenance & gardening) $250-500,000
Number of tracks 5
Used for racing only
Trainers 36
Horses in work 320
Before
- Mowing
- Watering and monitoring moisture levels
- Rolling if needed
- Penetrometer readings
- Rail movements as required
During
- Knock in divots
- Rolling if needed
- Visual inspection
After
- Divot filling
- Turfing
- Sweeping
- Fertilising
- Watering
- Mowing
- Rolling
30
Race Track Details – Rosehill
Course Proper
Activities
Other activities Training
Track dimensions
Average width 27 m
Camber on straights 1-1.5 %
Number of turns 4
Camber on turns 3-5 %
Track surface
Turf types Kikuyu, oversown with Tetila Rye in winter
Reinforce material No
Track drainage Yes
Drainage configuration Herringbone
Drainage spacing 5m
Average penetrometer Summer Autumn Winter Spring
4.46 4.73 4.82 4.68
Shortest interval 1 week
Longest interval 3 weeks
Racing 3,720
Training 333
31
Race Track Maintenance – Rosehill
Course Proper
Irrigation
Irrigated Yes
Irrigation type Computerised Site-Pro 6-90 heads
Irrigation control system Auto. controllers
Maintenance:
Fertiliser types Granular
Total nitrogen applied 1042 kg N/ha per year
Wetting agents Yes
Pest control
Insecticides Yes
Fungicides No
Herbicides Yes
Nematicides No
Renovations
Vertidrain Once – Spring 2002
Core
Scarify
Mowing
Summer 1-2/week @ 89mm
Autumn Weekly @ 89mm
Winter Weekly @ 102mm
Spring 1-2/week @ 89mm
Rolling
Track condition % of year Frequency Roller size & type
Good 75 % Each meeting 2 tonne Split drum flat
Dead 15 % do. do.
Slow 6% Nil
Heavy 4% Nil
Rosehill Racecourse
32
Reconstruction / Major Works – Course Proper - Rosehill
1. Tunnels
Summary of Works
Construction of tunnels under course for vehicle, horse and pedestrian access.
Reason for Works

To allow access to the infield area for vehicles and for horses to training tracks, and to allow access for
pedestrians from infield parking areas to stands.

On-going supervision of contractors necessary.

Start date 1999 do. Budgeted $3.2 Million
End date 1999 do. Actual $3.2 Million
Name Purpose
Nace Constructions Civil Contractors
Rooney & Bye Engineers
Evans & Peck Consultants
2. Equi-track Removal
Summary of Works
Removal of Equi-track training track from the outside perimeter of the Course Proper.
Reason for Works

The track was not working properly and was hardly being used. It also affected drainage on the Course Proper.

Start date Aug. 2000 do. Budgeted
End date Dec. 2000 do. Actual
Name Purpose
Dilley Holdings All earthworks, track removal and re-
instatement
33
Training Track Details - Rosehill
Inside Grass Sand A Cinders B Cinders
Activities
Main activity Training Training Training Training
Other activities
Age of track 4 years 40 years
Year of construction 1999 – 1960
reconstructed to
improve condition
Track dimensions
Circumference 1620 m 1800 m 1500 m 1500 m
Average width 23 m 6m 7m 7m
Front straight length 350 m 350 m 300 m 300 m
Back straight length 350 m 360 m 360 m 360 m
Number of turns 4 4 4 4
Track surface
Type Kikuyu-oversown with Kurnell Sand Cinders Cinders
Tetila Rye in winter
Profile depth 350 mm 150 mm 100 mm 100 mm
Track drainage No No No No
Irrigation Yes Water truck Water truck Water truck
Irrigation type Computerised Site-Pro
6-92 heads
Irrigation control Automatic
Fertilisers Granular
Total N applied/yr 1042 kg/ha
Soil conditioners No
Pest control Insecticides
Herbicides
Max. capacity 10 for barrier trials 3 3 2
Annual training load 6,720 22,764 25,268 10,828
Mowing
Summer Weekly – 89 mm
Autumn Weekly – 89 mm
Winter Weekly – 102 mm
Spring Weekly – 89 mm
Rolling As for Course Proper – Daily when dry
4 times per week when (70 % of the time)
track is Good or Dead with1 tonne drum.
Cambridge roller if
wet
Renovation Vertidrain – once in Top up material Top up material Top up material
Spring, 2002 periodically periodically periodically
Rail Movements Witches Hats moved
every 2 days
34
Supplementary Surveys
Brief surveys were also made of several other recent racecourse reconstructions to gather additional information on reasons and results.
Racecourse Ballarat - Victoria Bendigo - Victoria Caulfield - Victoria Elwick - Tasmania

Track New Course Course Proper Course Proper Course Proper
Date of Works 1998/2000 1996 1996 1997
Main Reason for Widen track Correct camber Widen track Renovate track
Works Improve drainage Correct camber Correct camber
Remove crossing
Summary of Work Width up to 30 m Re-cambered turns & straights Width up to 30 m Profile reconstruction
Renew water mains New profile - sandy loam over Re-cambered turns & straights Automatic irrigation system
Install extra drainage drainage blanket and pipes Track re-alignment Extensive sub-soil drainage
Correct cambers Automatic irrigation system Profile reconstruction
Match current profile Tunnel installed
Extra starting positions Extra irrigation & drainage
Comments Track surface improved Reduced number of heavy No more lost meetings Only two lost meetings since
Reliable under range of conditions tracks Reduced range of ratings – Reduced range of ratings –
Full range of ratings – heavy to (only one meeting lost) mostly Good mostly Good
fast Sand/loam mix divots out if wet More gradual home turn allows Profile re-inforcement may have
Problems mixing sand and fine and should drain better - care longer finishing runs helped
loam to get right ratio needed in choosing best mix. Slight wind effect sometimes
Irrigation system too deep at
1.8m for easy maintenance.
Track Dimensions
Width 30 m 25 m 30 m 22 m
Straight length 390 m 380 m 320 m 350 m
Straight camber 1.5 % 3% 3% 2%
Turn camber 1.5 – 4 % 6% 4–6% 2–6%
Track Profile
Turf type Rye/Fescue Rye/Fescue Kentucky Blue/Rye Kentucky Blue/Rye
Root zone layer 300 mm clay/loam 250 mm sandy loam 320 mm sand/loam mix 150 mm of 70/30 sand/soil mix
Reinforcing No No No No
Drainage layer No 150 mm filter sand Filter sand No
Subsoil Volcanic clay Silt/clay
Meetings/Year 19 - 24 25 20 (formerly 31) 32
35
Racecourse Geelong - Victoria Gold Coast - Queensland Mornington - Victoria Mount Gambier – South
Australia
Track Course Proper Course Proper Course Proper Course Proper
Date of Works 1996 2003 1996 2002/2003
Main Reason for Widen track Correct cambers and drainage Replace old track (two way Track had poor configuration,
Works Camber turns from 1300 to 400 m crossfall and no drainage) to reverse cambers, undulations and
Improve drainage cater for more meetings. varying widths.
Summary of Work Track widened from 18 to 24 m Track cross-section and Total reconstruction with a Total re-design and construction
Reverse cambers eliminated and drainage restored to original sandy loam profile, positive to correct these faults. A new
cambers corrected design. cambers, automatic irrigation chute added and in ground
and a drainage system irrigation installed.
Comments Root zone is not deep enough due New section still being Increased meetings possible Track performance greatly
to sandy profile causing a lot more evaluated. but rail moves limited to 6 m. improved due to re-design.
‘chopping out’. Back-up equipment, eg, grader, Drainage rates on track much Some problems with compaction
Turf was sodded. Oversowing necessary to avoid delays. lower than in laboratory tests. from heavy machinery took time
would have been better. Drainage layer would have to alleviate due to wet weather.
helped. Track users should understand
that new surfaces take time to
establish and reach their peak.
Track Dimensions
Width 24 m 26 m 20 m 20 m
Straight length 350 m 400 m 200 m 280 m
Straight camber 1% 1% 2% 1.5 %
Turn camber 4% 2.7 % 4% 3%
Track Profile
Turf type Rye/Kentucky Blue Kikuyu Rye/Poa annua Rye
Root zone layer Imported 2 mm blended sand with 200 mm sand/loam mix 200 mm
existing loam
Reinforcing No No No No
Drainage layer Sand over 7 mm basalt screenings Sand blanket No Some 65 ml coil
Subsoil Sandy loam Clay
Meetings/Year 24 61 21 15
36
Racecourse Mount Gambier – South Mount Gambier – South Sandown - Victoria Warrnambool - Victoria
Australia Australia
Track Sand/Ambulance Steeple Grass Course Proper Course Proper
Date of Works 2002/2003 2002/2003 2002 1998
Main Reason for Sand base sub-standard, patchy As for Course Proper Provide dual circuits. Upgrade original track design
Works and stony. Widen home straight. and improve drainage
Re-design of turf track
Summary of Work Sand from on site used to replace As for Course Proper New track sections, additional Complete removal of old track
existing surface home turn added and chutes and reconstruction to improve
re-aligned. shape, width, cambers and
New sections matched to old drainage.
profile.
Irrigation upgraded
Comments Sand becomes slushy after heavy Better management with fences Some slight variation in rating No lost meetings since works
rain so some water table work possible due to uniform width. between old and new sections completed due to excellent
required. but will settle over time. drainage, however high water
Sprinkler system for dust control Objective of spreading more usage in summer.
only partially effective in windy meetings over two tracks Now scope for rail movements.
conditions. achieved. Herringbone drainage would
have been easier to maintain than
circular type.
Track Dimensions Hillside Lakeside
Width 7m 18 m 30 m 30 m 25 m
Straight length 210 m 250 m 491 m 407 m 300 m
Straight camber 1% 1.5 % 2% 2% 2.4 %
Turn camber 2% 3% 4% 4% 5%
Track Profile
Turf type Sand Rye Kentucky Blue/Rye Kikuyu base, Rye & Fescue
Root zone layer 200 mm 350 mm 50 mm
Reinforcing No No No
Drainage layer 100 mm gravel over drains Washed river gravel
Subsoil Limestone Clay Sandstone
Meetings/Year 15 15 Hillside – 22 Lakeside - 21 16
37
Unfortunately, there is little objective data routinely collected at racetracks in Australia, and even less
from training tracks, that can be studied to properly determine the effects of track design, surface and
maintenance on horse performance and/or injury.
Racetrack surface ratings are universally made for each meeting, many aided by readings from a
penetrometer, Clegg hammer or similar device, as a guide to racing stakeholders of the state of the
track surface with regard to firmness (Fig.1). These have implications for horse safety and
performance and affect betting patterns. The ratings are usually determined initially by the racetrack
manager and ultimately by the stewards. The conventional range of ratings is: Fast, Good, Dead,
Slow and Heavy (Fig.2). These descriptions tend to be subjective and not reflective of any particular
penetrometer scale in Australia. In fact, method of use of the penetrometer, the most commonly used
device, is known to vary between racecourses. This contrasts with a more reliable use of the device
in France and New Zealand where a standardised formula applies (Neylan et al, 1998)
However, these ratings, for any individual racetrack, are some guide to the effectiveness of track
reconstructions where reduction of the number of excessively heavy tracks and regular provision of a
‘Good’ rating is the common goal. The assumption has been made by the industry that a ‘Good’
rating is best for horse performance and safety however there is no clear evidence to this effect.
Race types, distances, field sizes and details, barrier positions, results, times and track ratings are
routinely collected by the racing industry for every meeting and compiled on a national database
located in Victoria. The standard input form is shown in Figure 2. These records have been collected
for several years but would only be a very superficial guide to the relationship between tracks and
horse performance.
Figure 1 : Penetrometer Report - Randwick
38
Figure 2 : Racing Services Bureau Input Form
Injury and fatality records have been kept routinely by racing industry veterinarians for race meetings
with each State operating separate systems (McCaffrey, 2002; Suann, 2003). Only recently has some
of this data been entered into the racing industry database where it can be related to track surface
ratings. Such records for training tracks are unknown, however there has been some research into the
association of training injury with track related risk factors (Cogger at el, 2003).
A number of racecourses are now regularly monitoring their racetrack performance, keeping detailed
records on maintenance procedures, track presentation and user comments. This information will in
time become a valuable resource. Examples are shown in Figures 3 and 4.
39
Figure 3 : Raceday Assessment Form – Doomben, Queensland
40
Figure 4 : Race Meeting Performance Report – Canterbury, New South Wales
41
6. Discussion & Conclusions
Literature Review
The review found that, whilst there has been progress towards understanding the track related risk
factors for MSI, there is still insufficient information to produce guidelines for the design and
management of “safer” racetracks.
General findings were:
• Track geometry
Racing injuries were more common near turns, particularly the home turn, due to strain on the
lower forelegs. Turn radius, camber and speed entering the turn all have an effect. Installing an
incline before the turn, having a more gradual turn and/or transitional turns can reduce injury risks.
Recommended camber on turns at standardbred tracks is about double that found at racetracks.
• Track surface
Evidence from overseas indicate less injuries occur on turf surfaces compared to dirt and some
synthetic tracks, and less shin soreness on woodchip compared to dirt. Turf roots increase impact
and shear resistance. Thatch and mowing height do not appear to have a significant impact on
surface hardness.
• Track condition
Results tend to be inconsistent but more injuries appear to occur on hard, as against slow, turf
tracks, and muddy dirt tracks. Similarly, the most severe injuries occur on the harder ground near
starting chutes and crossings.
The results of a recent study by Cogger et al. (2003) show differences in injury rates between training
venues even after accounting for training methods. The reason for these differences is unknown but it
is possible that factors relating to track geometry and condition of the training surface may play a role.
Track Surveys
Most common reasons given for constructing (reconstructing) tracks are to:
- reduce or eliminate the number of meetings lost due to excessively wet tracks
- achieve a narrower range of track rating, ideally ‘Good’, through the racing calendar
- give a more even and uniform track surface, both across and along the track from start to finish
- improve track drainage and/or irrigation systems
- change track shape and layout, eg, total length, length of straights, width – to allow larger fields
and/or rail movements, more gradual and/or better cambered turns, better camber on straights,
adding chutes, removing crossings
- provide a more durable track surface to cope with extra racing and/or training loads with reduced
maintenance time and costs
- provide a range of surfaces for different training regimes
Some observations and lessons learnt from the case studies included:
- depth of root zone and other profile layers needs careful planning and testing prior to works
- ratio and particle size of sand and soil in root zones is critical to good water retention and drainage
- incorporation of mesh elements in sandy root zone is worth considering
- laser grading of profile layers gives more accurate levels, contributing to a very even track surface
- sufficient irrigation is critical to establishment of new turf and ongoing maintenance of turf vigour
and surface soundness in sand based root zones
- drainage rates need thorough testing and a drainage layer is sound economy
- a herringbone drainage system is easier to maintain than a circular system
- material and time required for track repairs following meetings is substantially reduced
- expectations of users are higher due to the improved surface, however these is usually
compromised by the lack of sufficient time given for new surfaces to stabilise properly
The surveys of a number of actual track constructions in Australia during the last decade, together
with examination of several overseas experiences (Dickinson,1998; Ridley,2001), have revealed
some commonality of approach to track geometry and profile parameters, despite a mix of reasons
42
and budgetary constraints. There have been generally positive outcomes from the constructions in
broad terms such as fewer lost meetings and less extreme variations in track rating. However, there is
a dearth of detailed ‘before and after’ data that could throw light on the relative effect of the varying
changes on horse performance and injury.

This is the area of greatest deficiency in the industry. Some racecourses have monitored racetrack
ratings, weather, irrigation, maintenance procedures and user comments over time but they are
probably in the minority. There appears to have been little detailed analysis of this data to relate
track factors to horse performance.
Injury and fatality data has also been routinely recorded by racing industry veterinarians but this is
only recently being related to track conditions on race days.
There is no evidence of systematic collection of data on training tracks to examine the effects of
surfaces and condition on horse injury or performance.
Track Standards
From the case studies, examination of the literature, and consultations with researchers (Neylan,2003;
Nickson,2003), racing industry suppliers and racecourse managers on the project team, some broad
parameters for track standards can be defined relative to current opinion on requirements for optimum
horse performance and minimum injury risk. There is little objective evidence to support these
parameters, particularly with regard to the actual effects on horses, and further work is required to
more accurately define them.
Track Design/Geometry
• Shape
Dictated by the land area and boundaries available, and in nearly every case, the shape of the
existing track. Convention is to have between two and four straights, in a rectangular or triangular
layout, connected by turns. Chutes, aligned tangentially to the circuit, are added to better
accommodate race starts for certain distances.
Training tracks generally fit inside the main racetrack and conform to the same shape.
• Circumference
Again usually dictated by area available and existing layout. Minimum industry requirement is
1200 metres (Henville,2002). Most racetracks are in the 1700 to 2100 metre range.
Training tracks are necessarily shorter and generally range from 1500 to 2000 metres.
• Width
Many constructions include increased racetrack width as an important criterion. A minimum
width of 25 metres, particularly for the home straight, is the current benchmark (Henville,2002)
with 30 metres or more a desirable goal. This facilitates best use of the movable rail without
unduly restricting field sizes. Width of turf tracks is ultimately dependent on the ability of
irrigation systems to spread water evenly across the surface.
Training tracks can be considerably narrower however sufficient width is required to spread the
wear and tear at any given session. Widths of 10 to 20 metres are common.
Uniform widths around all tracks is recommended to facilitate racing or training patterns, simplify
rail movements, and assist maintenance procedures.
• Straight Lengths
Length of the home straight, the distance from starts to the first turn, and to a lesser extent length
of other straights on racetracks, are critical factors as horses jockey for position and/or settle into
full stride. A minimum straight run from the start to the first turn of about 200 metres is generally
43
required by stewards for most races. Lengths of other straights of 300-400 metres or more is
preferable.
• Turns
On every typical racecourse there has to be a compromise between length of straights and length
and radius of turns. Ideally, the fewer turns the better, however in practice turns are inevitable.
Gradual turns or transitional turns, where radii gradually decrease into the apex of the turn, are
recommended and inclines prior to turns could be considered. Turn length and radius will be
dependent on the area available, track shape and rail position.
• Camber
Camber or crossfall is implemented on straights as an aid to drainage and on turns to lessen strains
on horses by countering the centrifugal forces as they round the turn. Current practice is to have
an even camber towards the inside rail of up to 2 % on straights, increasing to about 5 % at the
apex of the turn and then returning to 2 % out of the turn. Even higher cambers of 10 % or more,
similar to those at standardbred tracks (see p.7), may be more appropriate.
• Rails
Movable rails, for the entire circumference of the track, are now considered mandatory for
provision of an even, uniform racetrack surface for every meeting and to spread wear and tear
across the track. Rail movements and frequency vary from track to track, according to weather,
traffic and labour available. General consensus is to move rails from 2 to 3 metres per shift, as
frequently as feasible, covering as much of the track width as possible, and to stagger the rail
positions across and back to avoid ‘lanes’.
Rail type, material, design and height should aid ease of movement and horse and rider safety.
• Track Crossings
If not replaceable, crossings should be of sufficient width so that a horses normal movement is not
disrupted and can spread machinery and other traffic loads. They should be regularly maintained
to provide an even surface and be covered on racedays with a material resembling a turf surface.
Ideally, crossings should be replaced with tunnels under tracks or movable track modules installed
where feasible.
Track Surface/Profile
• Turf
Dependent on climate and location but the aim is always to provide a durable surface with good
traction for year round racing.
South-eastern locations are usually laying a pre-grown mix of Kentucky Blue and Ryegrass (turf
type) as the main turf species. Kikuyu stolons may be mixed into the root zone layer in some
cases to hasten surface stability and for extra durability. Alternating between Kikuyu and cool
season grasses, according to season, as the turf for this region is considered a viable proposition.
Apart from northern Australia, where Couch grass appears the most suitable variety, most other
areas are using Kikuyu cultivars – male sterile being preferred for turf density, evenness and ease
of containment.
Washed turf is generally preferred to control the root zone sand/soil composition.
• Non-Turf
Training tracks are predominately non-turf to cope with regular, medium to heavy workloads, ie.,
number and frequency of horses training, without excessive maintenance requirements.
Natural surfaces such as sand, dirt and cinders are common because they are inexpensive to lay
and maintain but have low to medium workload capacities compared to synthetic tracks and are
not suitable for fast work. The “American dirt” combination of fine sand and bark fibre copes
with high workloads but is more expensive to construct and maintain.
A range of synthetic tracks such as Proride, Equitrack, Velvetrack and Viscoride, all incorporating
polymers, plastics and/or oils with natural surfaces, have been tried and many are still in use.
They are relatively expensive to establish and have variable maintenance requirements but have
high workload capacities, good impact resistance and can be managed with restricted water
supplies.
44
There have been no controlled, comparative studies of all these training track options.
Performance claims vary whilst some have fallen out of favour.
• Root Zone Layer
The current general standard for this profile layer is a depth of 200 to 300 mm, a mixture of about
80-90 % sand of specified particle size with about 10-20 % silt/loam/organic material, with or
without reinforcing material which is normally required if the sand content is at the upper end of
the range. Particle size specification is critical to the performance of this layer.
The aim is to provide a medium for strong root growth with good infiltration and drainage rates,
good cushioning and stability.
• Reinforcing
Plastic mesh or fibre has been incorporated into the more sandy root zones in some cases,
particularly where a USGA specification sand (medium/coarse) mix has been used, to improve
impact resistance, resilience, stability and durability of this layer. Experience to date supports the
usefulness of this material. There are several alternative products available but no known
comparative studies.
• Gravel Drainage Layer
An essential aid to uniform drainage by allowing lateral movement of water to drainage lines.
Depth of about 100 mm of gravel of a specified type and size is lain directly above drainage
trenches containing the drainage pipes.
• Profile Depth
Total profile depth for a turf surface, including the root zone and drainage layers can range from
300 to 400 mm.
Profile depth for non-turf training tracks should be sufficient to cope with hoof impact during
gallops. This can be up to 150 mm on natural surfaces (Butcher, 2001). Synthetic surfaces are
claimed to reduce the depth of impact.
Typical track profile
• Profile Performance Criteria

Optimum standards or ranges for specifications should be prescribed for such overall profile
criteria as Bulk Density, Porosity, Infiltration Rate, Water Holding Capacity and Drainage Rate
(Field, 2002). At present these do not exist.
• Drainage System
45
Drainage pattern, size and spacing of drains, and disposal of excess water need specification.
These issues will be related to climatic conditions, irrigation systems, profile depth and
composition, infiltration rates, etc.
• Irrigation System
Uniform and efficient irrigation, as required, is essential for the maintenance of turf vigour and
uniform track surfaces as regards rating traction and stability. Specifications are needed according
to track size and shape, profile characteristics, amounts and frequency of watering required. Water
auditing techniques, measuring input and outflow using flow monitors, soil moisture sensors,
evapotranspirometers, etc, need prescription. Sub-surface irrigation methods need more study.
Track Maintenance (Turf tracks)

• Aeration
Specifications for depth, spacing and frequency related to monitored infiltration and drainage rates
are needed for each site. Routine physical analysis of profiles should be a pre-requisite to this
procedure
• Dethatching
Thatch levels should be monitored, desirable levels prescribed, and a program and means of excess
removal defined.
• Nutrition
Soil chemical analysis and plant tissue analysis, the latter particularly for slow release fertilisers
and trace element monitoring, should be routine procedures to dictate levels and frequency of turf
nutrition.
• Mowing
Optimum heights to aim for, according to turf type and other factors (weather, racing schedule,
maintenance procedures) to be defined for each site. Removal of clippings considered essential to
control thatch accumulation.
• Annual Renovation
An annual renovation ‘window’ is an important scheduling item to allow major maintenance
works such as dethatching, oversowing, topdressing and weed control.
Monitoring Procedures
Records should be maintained on every track covering track performance, factors affecting track
performance, and maintenance procedures. These should be standardised across the racing industry.
Such records should include:
• Track Ratings – by penetrometer or similar device and conventional terminology
• Horse Performance Data – race distances, fields, times, injuries, training loads and work
• User Comments – jockey, trainer, steward reports
• Rail Movements – positions and duration
• Weather Records – daily rainfall, wind, evaporation, transpiration, temperature and humidity
• Water Audits – inputs and outflow, water analysis
• Profile Performance – density, porosity, infiltration and drainage rates, water retention capacity,
thatch levels, organic matter levels.
• Nutrient Audits – soil and plant analysis (including clippings), nutrient inputs and losses (drainage
water analysis)
• Maintenance Records – dates and details of all practices concerning track maintenance such as
mowing, rolling, aeration, etc.
46
7. Recommendations
1 Standardised race and training track monitoring procedures, as described, should be instituted by
the industry, preferably at all tracks but at least at the main racing and training venues. Means of
collection and analysis of this data to relate tracks with horse performance, possibly in
conjunction with the National Racing Database, should be organised.
2 In conjunction with the implementation of standard monitoring procedures, epidemiological
studies should be conducted to gain further understanding of the relationship between track
surface characteristics and horse injury.
3 Means of measuring the direct effect of track design and surface on horses should be investigated
with the aim of finding or developing a compact and relatively inexpensive device of the strain
gauge type, such as is used for humans.
4 Current international knowledge of horse/track surface interaction, particularly that held by the
Netherlands Sports Federation R & D Department headed by Dr Franklin Versteeg, should be
obtained either by a visit to that institution or by inviting Dr Versteeg to Australia.
5 Trials of different training track surfaces of varying moisture levels, and under a range of
workloads, should be conducted side by side to measure changes in surface physical
characteristics, maintenance requirements and apparent performance. Horse reaction to the
different surfaces should be directly measured when an appropriate device has been developed.
6 Trials of different turf profiles should be conducted side by side in a range of climatic locations,
under horse traffic, to measure turf and profile performance and maintenance requirements.
Horse reaction to the different profiles should be directly measured when an appropriate device
has been developed.
7 Further work is needed in Australia to standardise the use and relationship of penetrometer (or
similar device) readings to track ratings. Alternative surface measuring implements should also
be investigated. The relationship between horse reaction and track ratings should be determined
8 Horse reaction to the impact of various cambers, turns, and slopes should be directly measured
9 The best means of combining Kikuyu and cool season grasses on racetracks in south-eastern
Australia should be investigated.
47
8. References
Butcher, P. (2001). “Track Design – Current Knowledge and Needs”. Proceedings of Racecourse R
& D Workshop, pp 27-29. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation.
Cogger, N.; Evans, D.L.; Hodgson, D.R.; Perkins, N.R and Reid, S.W.J. (2003). “Shin Soreness in
Thoroughbred Racehorses”. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation.
Dickinson, L. (1999). “American Racetracks”. Proceedings of 4th Australian Racecourse Managers
Conference, pp18-23. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation.
Field, T.R.O. and Murphy, J.W. (2002). “Racetrack Preparation”. Manual of Racetrack Management,
pp85-89. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation.
Henville, F. (2002). “Track Surveys”. Manual of Racetrack Management, pp3-5. Rural Industries
Research and Development Corporation.
McCaffrey, J. (2002). Personal communication.
Neylan, J. and Stubbs, A. (1998). “Assessing Racetrack Conditions”, pp10-15. Rural Industries
Research and Development Corporation.
Neylan J. (2003). Personal communication.
Nickson, D. (2003). Personal communication.
Ridley, J.P. (2001). “Monitoring Track Performance”. Proceedings of 6th Australian Racecourse
Managers Conference, pp52-56. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation.
Suann, C. (2003). Personal communication.
48

04 039 PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

04 039 PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Racetrack

A report for the Rural Industries Research

RIRDC Publication No 04/039

ISBN 0 642 5849 3

Racetrack Design and Performance – databaseof current knowledge

Researcher Contact Details

Phone: 03 9844 1135

RIRDC Contact Details

Phone: 02 6272 4819

Published in February 2004

5. Racetrack Design & Performance Database Survey ....................................... 14

6. Discussion & Conclusions ................................................................................ 42

A number of major racetrack constructions or reconstructions that occurred in Australia in recent

Performance Recording Systems

A number of major racetrack constructions or reconstructions that occurred in Australia in recent

Epidemiological approaches to identifying risk factors for MSI

Incidence and description of MSI

Track related risk factors for MSI

Adapted from Fredricson et al. (1975)

Thatch accumulation and grass roots

Randwick, New South Wales

Reason for Works

Comments and Lessons Learnt

Timetable Proposed Actual Total Costs

Reconstruction / Major Works – Kensington Track – Randwick

Reason for Works

Proposed Actual Total Costs

Club Moonee Valley Racing Club

Reason for Works

Comments and Lessons learnt

Timetable Proposed Actual Total Costs

Contractors/ Consultants used

Moonee Valley Racecourse

Club Brisbane Turf Club

Reason for Works

Comments and Lessons Learnt

Timetable Proposed Actual Total Costs

Club Sydney Turf Club

Reason for Works

Comments and Lessons Learnt

Timetable Proposed Actual Total Costs

Reason for Works

Comments and Lessons Learnt

Timetable Proposed Actual Total Costs

Racecourse Ballarat - Victoria Bendigo - Victoria Caulfield - Victoria Elwick - Tasmania

Figure 1 : Penetrometer Report - Randwick

Performance Recording Systems

Typical track profile

• Profile Performance Criteria

Track Maintenance (Turf tracks)

Potrebbero piacerti anche