Mark,
Wherever I have checked I have found that Masters dogs may well lose a little toe in the 1st sectional but most are able to maintain their overall times quite well. This is certainly true over 400m-460m where most race. In any event they will be in the minority in the 300m category.

But full marks to clubs which have advanced the Masters cause over the last decade. Many thought it a silly idea originally but it has proved its worth and is still increasing.

Of course clubs like to see track records broken and pay special attention to feature nights. But this is chest-thumping and preaching to the converted etc as the vast majority of the public would not have a clue, even if there was extensive real advertising - which there isn't.

What the public like to see is good clean racing where their investment gets a real chance going around the corner. No 300m race does that (straight tracks excepted), nor are they conducive to the betterment of the breed.

Finally, my copy of the GRV Track Manual (it's a bit old) contains 15 pages of instructions about surfaces and is designed to "allow the greyhounds to grip into the surface and ... remain balanced while running". Whether they do that in practice is another matter altogether.

PS The Sandown record almost went down in a trial over the weekend but I see no publicity about that. Maybe later?

PS2 The current Sandown record is in place only because GRV installed different timers at the boxes. SO it is actually false if you want to put it that way. Apples and oranges.

John,
Sadly, I can't comment on the detail at Bundy because the Australia-wide analysis we did regularly was necessarily confined to TAB tracks - which Bundy was not. It's a TAB newcomer. However there are firm principles available.

First, on every circle or one-turn track an event of 400m or less will produce higher fall rates than longer trips (except that some 600m-650m races are messier than others, depending on box placement). BY definition, all such starts will be closer to the turn.

Cleaner racing can be achieved in those cases by placing the boxes in a mini-shute - ie off the track proper - but nobody does it due to outmoded thinking. (Canberra 600m was an exception).

Second, fall rates and interference levels are not necessarily in the same order. For example, 600m starts lead straight into the nearby turn, meaning dogs are busy positioning themselves and usually not at top speed. Interference can be high but falls not so much.

Third, speed kills. That's why most falls otherwise occur around the turn when dogs have reached max speed and are less able to react to circumstances. Commonly in Oz, cambers are too low, making it hard for some to maintain a consistent course. (NB the turn radius also has to be highish and even all the way round).

Fourth, I am befuddled by the comment that dogs "learn to wait" when negotiating nasty bend starts. Sure, older dogs tend to be more careful about what the field is doing and their experience may well suggest not going like a bull in a china shop. But that is fairly small beer. Still, observation (not stats) shows that a fall most frequently occurs when a slower beginner tries to make its way through the field.

Fifth, the last comment is demonstrated at Albion where the worst fall rate occurs in 331m and 395m races (ie high speed into the corner) while the best or lowest fall rate is over the 600m trip (ie lower speed into the adjacent corner).

Mind you, bear in mind that the home turn at Albion is poorly cambered - something which particularly affects 710m runners as well as those out of the 331m and 395m starts. (I gather this is one of the negative effects of constraining the area available for the track - due to trots' demands for training circuits).

The basics are clear: maximise the distance to the first turn and increase the cambers on the turn (to 10%) and well into the home straight.

For tipping I would want to know all the relevant first sectional performances. But I am not a tipster. In fact I stopped betting a few years ago for three reasons; lousy pools; too many low quality fields; too many crook tracks.

Mark, my experience and observations are the opposite. The mugs do like to see their choice get a decent run for the money and that is not available for the shorts.

I should also add that the "changing times" are an outcome of what trainers do, not what the customers want (is that investigated?).

All this is readily available in the bowels of state authorities but they don't let it out (albeit SA is much better than others and GWIC in NSW publishes helpful data).

To take a tiny example, GRNSW has just told us that tonight's Bulli meeting replaces the usual Wenty meeting. But they don't say why. What's the big secret?

The broad objective - almost everywhere - is to tell us as little as possible. This is an arrogant mindset.