racetrack design & performance€¦ · compilation and analysis of data on race and training...

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

ii

© 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: [email protected] 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: [email protected] Website: http://www.rirdc.gov.au Published in February 2004 Printed on environmentally friendly paper by Canprint

iii

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

iv

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.

v

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

vi

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.

vii

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

viii

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 when an appropriate device has been developed.

9. The best means of combining Kikuyu and cool season grasses on racetracks in south-eastern Australia should be investigated.

1

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.

2

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.

3

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.

4

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

5

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

Study Number of tracks

Racing MSI (per 1000 starts)

Fatality rate (per 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., 2001

UK 1996-1998 19 4.0 NR

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.

6

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

Incidence rate (per 100 horse weeks) Health problem Prevalence (%) First

occurrence Multiple occurrences

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-

olds 3-year-

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 Lameness

7.3 7.7 4.6 8.5

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

7

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

8

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

Curve radius (m) Velocity (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.

9

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

10

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.

11

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 Practitioners; 133-145 Hill, T., Carmichael, D., Maylin, G. and Krook, L. (1986) Track condition and racing injuries in thoroughbred horses. Cornell Veterinarian, 76 (4): 361-79.

12

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 Veterinary Medicine, 29 (4): 263-75. 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 Practitioners; 541-547 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.

13

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 Veterinary Medicine, 40 (2): 127-38. 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.

14

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 Track Area Track Manager

Australian Jockey Club Royal Randwick 82 hectares Norm James

Classification Metropolitan Climate Irrigation sources Annual water usage

Temperate Bore 200-250 megalitres

Meetings (last year) Number per year Lost due to track condition Lost due to weather

35 nil nil

Number of races at each distances (last year) < 1000m 1000 – 1200m 1200 – 1500m 1500 – 2000m 2000 – 3000m > 3000m

285 0 57 130 58 39 1

Staff employed Full time – track Full time - gardens Part time / casual

19 10 4-5 (seasonal)

Annual Budget (track maintenance & gardening) > $1 million Number of tracks Used for both racing and training Used for racing only Used for training only

8 1 1 6

Trainers Horses in work

26 600 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

16

Race Track Details - Randwick Course Proper Kensington Track Activities Main activity Other activities

Racing Gallops (Carnival)

Racing Training

Age of track Year of construction

18 months 2001

4 years May 1999 – Jan 2000

Track dimensions Circumference Average width Length of front straight Length of back straight Camber on straights Number of turns Camber on turns

2224 m 28 m 400 m 307 m 2.5 % 3 5 %

2087 m 18 m 401 m 300 m 1-2 % 3 3-5 %

Track surface Turf types Reinforce material Profile depth / Root zone Track drainage Drainage configuration Drainage spacing

Kikuyu No 300 mm Yes half herringbone 5 m

Kikuyu Reflex Mesh elements 300 mm Yes half herringbone 5 m

Average penetrometer 2000/2001 2002/2003

4.62 4.56

Rail Movements (last year) Shortest interval Longest interval Maximum number of horses that can race on this track (given widest rail movement)

33 1 day 2 weeks 20

7 30 days 5 months 14

Usage (horses over last 1000m) Racing Training

3,000 400

800 200

17

Race Track Maintenance - Randwick Course Proper Kensington Track Irrigation Irrigated Irrigation type Irrigation control system

Yes In-ground pop-up Auto. controllers


Maintenance: Fertiliser types Total nitrogen applied Wetting agents

Organic, Granular, SR 427 kg N/ha per year No

Organic, Granular 300 kg N/ha per year No

Pest control Insecticides Fungicides Herbicides Nematicides

Yes Yes Yes No

No No Yes Yes

Renovations Vertidrain Core Scarrify

Jan 02

Summer 02 x 1 Summer 02 x 1 Summer 02 x monthly

Mowing Summer Autumn Winter Spring

2/week @ 100mm 2/week @ 100mm 1/week @ 60-80mm 2/week @ 100mm

2 weeks @ 100mm 1 week @ 100mm 1-2 weeks @ 70mm 1 week @ 70mm

Rolling – Course Proper Track rating - Good - Dead - Slow - Heavy

% of year 70 % 19 % 8 % 2 %

Rolling frequency 1 before / 1 after 2 before / 1 after

1 after Nil

Roller details 2 tonne / 3 drum

do. do. -

Rolling – Kensington Track Track condition - pre-post raceday - trackwork damage - raceday damage

% of year

25 %

Rolling frequency Once do. do.

Roller details 3 tonne / 1 drum

4.5 m brush roller 1 tonne / 3 drum

18

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 End date

May 01 November 01

May 01 December 01

Budgeted Actual

$5.5 Million $5.5 Million

Contractors/ Consultants used

Name Purpose Young Consulting Engineers Kingston Industries Agripower McMahons Qualturf Hydroplan

Design and Project Management Construction Contractor Drainage Contractor Laser Grading Contractor Turf Supply and installation 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 End date

May 1999 January 2000

June 1999 February 2000

Budgeted Actual

$6 Million $6.5 Million


Purpose Young Consulting Engineers Kingston Industries Aussie Drain Qualturf Strathayr Hydroplan

Design and Project Management Construction Contractors Drainage Contractor Turf supply and installation Mesh element supply and install Irrigation Design

19

Training Track Details - Randwick Steeple Grass B Grass Dirt Sand Jump Out Activities Main activity Other activities

Training Barrier trials

Training

Training Barrier trials

Training

Training


35 years approx. 35 years approx.

8 years 1995

18 months 2001

4 years

Track dimensions Circumference Average width Front straight length Back straight length Number of turns

1800 m 15 m 370 m 280 m 3

1500 m 15 m 300 m 200 m 3

1942 m 13 m 400 m 300 m 3

1440 m 6.5 m 250 m 200 m 3

1000 m 13 m 250 m 250 m 1

Track surface Type Profile depth Track drainage Drainage type Drainage spacing Irrigation Irrigation type Irrigation control Fertilisers Total N applied/yr Soil conditioners Pest control

Kikuyu 300 mm Yes Sand slits 3 m Yes In ground pop-up Automatic granular 300 kg/ha No Herbicides

Kikuyu 300 mm No Yes Automatic Granular 300 kg/ha No Herbicides

Sand & fine wood fibre Yes Natural Yes Water truck Nil

Botany bay sand 70 mm Yes Natural Yes Automatic

Kikuyu 300 mm No Yes Automatic Granular 300 kg/ha Herbicides

Usage (no. of horses) Max. capacity Annual training load

110/week 3000

100/week 4000

400+/day 130,000

100/day 30,000

100/week 2000


2 weekly - 100mm weekly – 100mm 1-2 weekly – 70mm weekly – 70mm

As for Steeple grass

Rolling Trackwork damage Barrier trials Renovation

4.5m brush roller & 3x1 tonne 3 drum 3x1 tonne 3 drum

As for Steeple grass

20 tonne water truck

2.5 m Cambridge roller daily

Renovation Top up material – annually in summer

Top up material – autumn 2000

20

Randwick Racecourse

21

Moonee Valley, Victoria

Club Track Track Manager

Moonee Valley Racing Club Moonee Valley Greg Barker


Temperate Dam & Mains 115 megalitres


34 nil nil


256 60 54 8 69 52 13

Staff employed Full time – track & gardens Part time / casual

18 5 (seasonal)

Annual Budget (track maintenance & gardening) $1.3 million Number of tracks Used for both racing and training Used for racing only Used for training only

2 0 2 0

Race day preparation 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

22

Race Track Details – Moonee Valley

Course Proper Activities Main activity Other activities

Racing Steeple racing


8 years 1995


1805 m 24 m 178 m 162 m 2.5 % 4 7.5 %


Cool season grasses – Ryegrass & Kentucky Blue – on ACI Sports 40 sand with 10% peatmoss Netlon mesh – 6kg/cubic metre 150 mm Yes Herringbone 8.5 m

Avg. penetrometer Pre-renovation 2002/3 Post-renovation 2002/3

Summer Autumn Winter Spring 4.31 4.55 5.01 4.52 4.32 4.57 5.01 4.56


33 2 hours 15 days 16

Usage (horses over last 1000m) Racing Training Steeple racing Steeple training

2619 133 75 49

23

Race Track Maintenance – Moonee Valley

Course Proper Irrigation Irrigated Irrigation type Irrigation control system

Yes Rainbird Master 3 Automatic controllers

Maintenance Fertiliser types Total nitrogen applied Wetting agents

Organic, Soluble, Granular, Slow release 500 kg N/ha per year Yes


No Yes Yes No

Renovations Vertidrain Core Scarify

Spring & Autumn – 2002/2003 Spring to Autumn – 2002/2003 After each race meeting-with rail moves November - 2002


Once/week @ 90mm Once/week @ 90mm Once/week @ 100mm Twice/week @ 100mm

Rolling Condition Proportion of year Frequency of rolling Roller size Roller type

Spring Summer Autumn Winter 40% 10% 20% 30% Pre & post meetings When required Pre meetings Pre & post meetings 2m x 1.5 m 1.5 tonne 1 tonne 2 tonne 3 tonne Steel-split roller do. do. do.

24

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.


1995 1995 Budgeted Actual

$ Million $6.2 Million


Name Purpose Young Consulting Engineers Akron Aquafield

Design and Project Management Construction Contractor Irrigation Design

Moonee Valley Racecourse

25

Doomben, Queensland

Club Track Area Track Manager

Brisbane Turf Club Doomben 45 hectares Warren Williams


Sub-tropical Dam & Mains 140 megalitres


46 nil nil


307 0 140 79 51 37 0


)16 ) 2

Annual Budget (track maintenance & gardening) $520,000 Number of tracks Used for both racing and training Used for racing only Used for training only

5 1 4


47 185

Race day preparation 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

26

Race Track Details – Doomben Course Proper Activities Main activity Other activities

Racing


7 years 1996


1715 m 27 m 320 m 320 m 2 % 4 5 %


Kikuyu No 290 mm Yes Half herringbone 3 m

Average penetrometer

Summer Autumn Winter Spring 4.57 4.76 4.06 3.69


46 2 days 2 weeks 20


3,445

27

Race Track Maintenance – Doomben




Soluble, Slow release 75-100 kg N/ha per year Yes


Yes Yes Yes No

Renovations Vertidrain Core Scarify Top dress with sand

Annually since 1996 – 4 times a year – each season Each Spring since 2001 Each Spring since 2001 Spring of 2000 & 2002


2/week @ 100mm 2/week @ 100mm 1/week @ 100mm 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.

28

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


September ‘96 December ‘96

do. do.

Budgeted Actual

$3 Million $3.3 Million


Name Purpose Robert Bird & Partners Basic Construction Brisbane Turf Club

Design and Contracting Civil Works Project Management

Doomben Racecourse

29

Training Track Details - Doomben No 2 Grass No 3 Grass Cinders Sand Bull Ring Activities Main activity Other activities

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training


40 years 1960

20 years 1983

60 years

20 years 1983

40 years 1960


1650 m 14 m 280 m 280 m 4

1550 m 17 m 250 m 250 m 4

1600 m m 260 m 260 m 4

800 m 10 m 100 m 100 m 2

500 m 8 m 50 m 50 m 2

Track surface Type Profile depth Track drainage Drainage type Drainage spacing Irrigation Irrigation type Irrigation control Fertilisers Total N applied/yr Soil conditioners Pest control

Kikuyu 225 mm Mostly natural half h/bone-400 m 3 m Yes Bank of 4 heads Automatic Granular, Slow release 75-100 kg/ha Yes Insecticides Fungicides Herbicides

Kikuyu 350 mm Yes half h/bone 6 m Yes Impact head pop-up Automatic Granular, Slow release 75-100 kg/ha Yes Insecticides Fungicides Herbicides

Cinders – from burnt coal Yes Gate drain on inside 50 m No

Sand No

Cinders No


3120

3120

31,000

13,000

2,600


2 weekly - 100mm weekly – 100mm every 10 days – 100mm 1-2 weekly – 100mm

As for No 2 grass

Rolling After every training session

1-2 m 750kg split drum

As for No 2 grass

Renovation Vertidrain once/yr - spring/summer Scarify twice/yr – spring & summer Coring twice/yr – spring & summer

Top up material – periodically

Top up sand – spring 2001

30

Rosehill, New South Wales Club Track Area Track Manager

Sydney Turf Club Rosehill 86 hectares Lindsay Murphy


Temperate Dam & Mains not known


29 nil nil


284 0 74 126 52 32 0


) 24 )

Annual Budget (track maintenance & gardening) $250-500,000 Number of tracks Used for both racing and training Used for racing only Used for training only

5 1 4


36 320

Race day preparation 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

31

Race Track Details – Rosehill Course Proper Activities Main activity Other activities

Racing Training


12 years 1991


2048 m 27 m 410 m 450 m 1-1.5 % 4 3-5 %


Kikuyu, oversown with Tetila Rye in winter No 400 mm Yes Herringbone 5 m

Average penetrometer

Summer Autumn Winter Spring 4.46 4.73 4.82 4.68


18 1 week 3 weeks 18


3,720 333

32

Race Track Maintenance – Rosehill


Yes Computerised Site-Pro 6-90 heads Auto. controllers


Granular 1042 kg N/ha per year Yes


Yes No Yes No

Renovations Vertidrain Core Scarify

Once – Spring 2002


1-2/week @ 89mm Weekly @ 89mm Weekly @ 102mm 1-2/week @ 89mm Rolling

Track condition % of year Frequency Roller size & type Good Dead Slow

Heavy

75 % 15 % 6 % 4 %

Each meeting do. Nil Nil

2 tonne Split drum flat do.

Rosehill Racecourse

33

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. Comments and Lessons Learnt On-going supervision of contractors necessary.


1999 1999

do. do.

Budgeted Actual

$3.2 Million $3.2 Million


Name Purpose Nace Constructions Rooney & Bye Evans & Peck

Civil Contractors Engineers 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. Comments and Lessons Learnt


Aug. 2000 Dec. 2000

do. do.

Budgeted Actual


Name Purpose Dilley Holdings All earthworks, track removal and re-

instatement

34

Training Track Details - Rosehill Inside Grass Sand A Cinders B Cinders Activities Main activity Other activities

Training

Training

Training

Training


4 years 1999 – reconstructed to improve condition

40 years 1960


1620 m 23 m 350 m 350 m 4

1800 m 6 m 350 m 360 m 4

1500 m 7 m 300 m 360 m 4

1500 m 7 m 300 m 360 m 4

Track surface Type Profile depth Track drainage Irrigation Irrigation type Irrigation control Fertilisers Total N applied/yr Soil conditioners Pest control

Kikuyu-oversown with Tetila Rye in winter 350 mm No Yes Computerised Site-Pro 6-92 heads Automatic Granular 1042 kg/ha No Insecticides Herbicides

Kurnell Sand 150 mm No Water truck

Cinders 100 mm No Water truck

Cinders 100 mm No Water truck


10 for barrier trials 6,720

3 22,764

3 25,268

2 10,828


Weekly – 89 mm Weekly – 89 mm Weekly – 102 mm Weekly – 89 mm

Rolling

As for Course Proper – 4 times per week when track is Good or Dead

Daily when dry (70 % of the time) with1 tonne drum. Cambridge roller if wet

Renovation Vertidrain – once in Spring, 2002

Top up material periodically



Rail Movements Witches Hats moved every 2 days

35

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 Works

Widen track Correct camber Improve drainage

Widen track Correct camber Remove crossing

Renovate track Correct camber

Summary of Work Width up to 30 m Renew water mains Install extra drainage Correct cambers Match current profile Extra starting positions

Re-cambered turns & straights New profile - sandy loam over drainage blanket and pipes Automatic irrigation system

Width up to 30 m Re-cambered turns & straights Track re-alignment Profile reconstruction Tunnel installed Extra irrigation & drainage

Profile reconstruction Automatic irrigation system Extensive sub-soil drainage

Comments Track surface improved Reliable under range of conditions Full range of ratings – heavy to fast Problems mixing sand and fine loam to get right ratio

Reduced number of heavy tracks (only one meeting lost) Sand/loam mix divots out if wet and should drain better - care needed in choosing best mix. Irrigation system too deep at 1.8m for easy maintenance.

No more lost meetings Reduced range of ratings – mostly Good More gradual home turn allows longer finishing runs Slight wind effect sometimes

Only two lost meetings since Reduced range of ratings – mostly Good Profile re-inforcement may have helped

Track Dimensions Circumference Width Straight length Straight camber Turn camber

1900 m 30 m 390 m 1.5 % 1.5 – 4 %

2000 m 25 m 380 m 3 % 6 %

2080 m 30 m 320 m 3 % 4 – 6 %

1980 m 22 m 350 m 2 % 2 – 6 %

Track Profile Turf type Root zone layer Reinforcing Drainage layer Subsoil

Rye/Fescue 300 mm clay/loam No No Volcanic clay

Rye/Fescue 250 mm sandy loam No 150 mm filter sand

Kentucky Blue/Rye 320 mm sand/loam mix No Filter sand

Kentucky Blue/Rye 150 mm of 70/30 sand/soil mix No No Silt/clay

Meetings/Year 19 - 24 25 20 (formerly 31) 32

36

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 Works

Widen track Camber turns Improve drainage

Correct cambers and drainage from 1300 to 400 m

Replace old track (two way crossfall and no drainage) to cater for more meetings.

Track had poor configuration, reverse cambers, undulations and varying widths.

Summary of Work Track widened from 18 to 24 m Reverse cambers eliminated and cambers corrected

Track cross-section and drainage restored to original design.

Total reconstruction with a sandy loam profile, positive cambers, automatic irrigation and a drainage system

Total re-design and construction to correct these faults. A new chute added and in ground irrigation installed.

Comments Root zone is not deep enough due to sandy profile causing a lot more ‘chopping out’. Turf was sodded. Oversowing would have been better.

New section still being evaluated. Back-up equipment, eg, grader, necessary to avoid delays.

Increased meetings possible but rail moves limited to 6 m. Drainage rates on track much lower than in laboratory tests. Drainage layer would have helped.

Track performance greatly improved due to re-design. Some problems with compaction from heavy machinery took time to alleviate due to wet weather. Track users should understand that new surfaces take time to establish and reach their peak.


2040 m 24 m 350 m 1 % 4 %

1985 m 26 m 400 m 1 % 2.7 %

1800 m 20 m 200 m 2 % 4 %

1800 m 20 m 280 m 1.5 % 3 %


Rye/Kentucky Blue Imported 2 mm blended sand with existing loam No Sand over 7 mm basalt screenings

Kikuyu No Sand blanket Sandy loam

Rye/Poa annua 200 mm sand/loam mix No No

Rye 200 mm No Some 65 ml coil Clay

Meetings/Year 24 61 21 15

37

Racecourse Mount Gambier – South

Australia Mount Gambier – South Australia

Sandown - Victoria Warrnambool - Victoria

Track Sand/Ambulance Steeple Grass Course Proper Course Proper Date of Works 2002/2003 2002/2003 2002 1998 Main Reason for Works

Sand base sub-standard, patchy and stony. Re-design of turf track

As for Course Proper Provide dual circuits. Widen home straight.

Upgrade original track design and improve drainage

Summary of Work Sand from on site used to replace existing surface

As for Course Proper New track sections, additional home turn added and chutes re-aligned. New sections matched to old profile. Irrigation upgraded

Complete removal of old track and reconstruction to improve shape, width, cambers and drainage.

Comments Sand becomes slushy after heavy rain so some water table work required. Sprinkler system for dust control only partially effective in windy conditions.

Better management with fences possible due to uniform width.

Some slight variation in rating between old and new sections but will settle over time. Objective of spreading more meetings over two tracks achieved.

No lost meetings since works completed due to excellent drainage, however high water usage in summer. Now scope for rail movements. Herringbone drainage would have been easier to maintain than circular type.


1590 m 7 m 210 m 1 % 2 %

1700 m 18 m 250 m 1.5 % 3 %

Hillside Lakeside 2087 m 1857 m 30 m 30 m 491 m 407 m 2 % 2 % 4 % 4 %

2062 m 25 m 300 m 2.4 % 5 %


Sand Limestone

Rye 200 mm No Clay

Kentucky Blue/Rye 350 mm No 100 mm gravel over drains

Kikuyu base, Rye & Fescue 50 mm No Washed river gravel Sandstone

Meetings/Year 15 15 Hillside – 22 Lakeside - 21 16

38

Performance Recording Systems 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

39

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.

40

Figure 3 : Raceday Assessment Form – Doomben, Queensland

41

Figure 4 : Race Meeting Performance Report – Canterbury, New South Wales

42

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

43

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 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

44

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.

45

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

46

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.

47

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 when an appropriate device has been developed.

8 Horse reaction to the impact of various cambers, turns, and slopes should be directly measured when an appropriate device has been developed.

9 The best means of combining Kikuyu and cool season grasses on racetracks in south-eastern Australia should be investigated.

48

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.

racetrack design & performance€¦ · compilation and analysis of data on race and training...

Documents