Good point. I can offer that years ago I did a detailed study on form at the now discontinued Moss Vale track. It had no supergrass in front of the boxes but when they installed it the times were cut by 0.5 sec because they had better purchase.

This supports your point that absence of supergrass causes dogs to slip and slide somewhat when launching themselves.

Yet another reason to get rid of drop-ins - go to the Grafton solution (or at other spots as well).

An experimental design, at very high cost ,that compromises trialling as the track doesnt join up, a home straight that isnt a straight, and eliminates distance racing, so to compensate for these negatives the racing experience needs to deliver big time.

With a pending reconstruction at Cranbourne given rail infrastructure failure and a long overdue remediation needed for the track surface, we can only hope that the GRV spruikers dont take over a proper consideration of a track design that meets racing and trialing objectives and doesnt require tunnels at massive expense.

And decent gold standard drainage and track surface wouldnt go astray if GRV bother to utilise soil science experts as part of the design team - missed at Traralgon.

It is especially frustrating as a wide open circuit like this could be expected to offer much cleaner running. It doesn't.

A general inclination for some runners to veer towards the rail is normal - here it is the high degree to which this happens. Bunching is never good. Unacceptable!

The design obviously came out of a textbook, not out of practical observations of how dogs race.

For example, some dogs jump smartly and lead early, others jump with them and then run to the lead if they have the pace, still others take time to gather speed so they need space. Traralgon tends to defeat this outcome.

Oddly, the new Grafton track does the opposite with starts well off the main circuit - apparently with success.

I can think of no Oz track which supports good results from tightly located boxes. (Dapto would be the worst).

In other words, a drop-in close to the rail is poor design. The only possible improvement is to knock down the fence, re-locate the boxes and widen the running area - viz Hobart 461m, which works brilliantly (albeit sectional data is terrible). That offers the added advantage of allowing a supergrass mat in front of the boxes.

I accept that it is early days but, having watched every single race at least once, it is plain that this one will not work well. Bad design never does.

This interference and boaring over hard left is a myth , same as putting boxes extremely right off track and using Grafton as the example it works couldnt be more wrong , Ive raced there and every single trainer agrees you get wiped out from dogs extremely crashing left and its the tracks number 1 pet hate !

But apparently theres been minimal falls on reports ? So this means it isnt happening and trainers who do trials and races there know nothing ?

Bruce has walked the tracks ! Never loaded or been involved with 30 trials over 2 months and seen patterns from behind the box or observed his dog that he knows inside out ?

Maybe the dogs from inside boxes at Traralgon arent used to jumping in a straight line and they are being fooled box rise (unfamiliar position) and baulking ?
Have u thought the further off a track the boxes are , the wider boxes are clearly more disadvantaged in pure further distance to cover to the corner , its fact , another pet hate at Grafton not being able to cross from wide boxes even when you have the fastest dog in times .
This advantage is taken away at Traralgon , hence wider boxes winning 4/1 to inner boxes which might I add Bruce said drop in boxes clearly favour inside draws ?
Really , results say other wise , Id say its a massive leveller !

Nether the less , its no where near as hazardous or more to every other track at present losing half the field either on a bend or into first corner over 500
Dont believe me , watch wenty, Sandown , meadows ,Albion park one night and then watch Traralgon ....... chalk and cheese

Your eyes are correct Micheal , the reports are wrong as usual
Does look like a track your dog would appreciate a couple of looks for the different layout to what they have been on else where previously , which is shit !

Cheers

I will have a look at some of these points later when more info is available.

Meantime, the extensive data from drop-ins at Shepparton and Horsham (which is what I was talking about) clearly show that box 1 in particular produces more winners than any comparable Vic trip. Falls/interference are also up.

I also instanced widely located starts at Ipswich and Bathurst, both of which encourage minimal interference as - broadly speaking - the field tends to spread out more in the run to the turn.

Conversely, Dapto 520, with its tightly sited boxes, encourages inside dogs to move right at the jump, creating interference, with the result that winners come more often from 7 and 8 than any other circle track in the country.

Back in town, Meadows is harder to win from the outside than at Sandown - due to the differing shapes of the circuit.

What it all comes back to is that the peculiarities of each and every track dictate the most popular winning box and the way races will be run.

So far, what is happening at Traralgon is that most dogs are veering hard left in most races. The odd race is cleaner than the average but I think that's just luck. You can't always tell from the basic video - need to check the head-on shot.

Incidentally, UTS has been involved in both Traralgon and Grafton designs. So why are they so different?

Watching your next presented wide boxes success story Bathurst , are you even watching the races ?

The last turn is a nightmare thats had dogs hit the fence missing it
The 450 is a demolition job on the turn and a complete jackpot who comes out the other side
The 500 dogs come out sideways in wider boxes and prob the best example to show how flawed wide boxes are due to the camera being at the tower looking head on from box rise
Just watch this weeks meeting , your kidding Bruce

The reasons why Grafton and Traralgon differ is
Clearly Grafton has its boxes 15 mtr off the track ? Traralgons are behind the arm

Grafton races from box to finish line mirror each other
Run up into corner , big corner , fair run to line
Traralgon looks like its start heavy , meaning long runs into corner , big corner and then a skip to the line coming out of turn
Hence lopsided to be start heavy in relation to how the race is run , I havent trialled there but , only screen watching

Similar in ways but also different
These are my last words at informing you of the obvious that wont be found in books or on paper

In every single race, 7 or 8 dogs make a beeline for the rail, thereby bunching and encouraging more bump and shove - ie interference. Happily, no falls yet.

This bunching at the start does not occur at Grafton - or in 400s at Warrnambool, Geelong or Ballarat, which have widely spaced boxes, although in the latter three cases the proximity to the upcoming turn does squeeze the field up. Note the two differing situations - one is right after the jump, the other is going into the turn.

Incidentally, those same three trips enjoy fall rates which are much higher than the national average - again an outcome of squeezing going into the turn.

Grafton is also better served by its big 62m turn radius - which is more comparable to Traralgon but much bigger than the other three Vic tracks.

While I hesitate to talk about Traralgon figures at this early stage it is also evident that middle boxes are getting squeezed up - fairly natural, I suppose, but also consistent with the routine bunching that takes place.

The first aim of track design should be to keep runners separate wherever possible. Grafton does that, Traralgon doesn't. Nor do the re-positioned boxes at Horsham or Shepparton (where plenty of data is available).

The comments about Bathurst are misplaced. I spoke about the run to the turn at Bathurst and Ipswich 500s - nothing else, not the turn itself, not other distances. And, yes, both have horror 400s which are a disgrace to the industry.

Grafton and Horsham and Bulli are all boxed off the track and tends to spread the dogs out better giving some room

My reasoning as to why the boxes are in close is because the track is so long and testing, nippy beginners that can't run a strong 400m who normally would be better suited to a tighter track have a better chance to get a long lead over 395m with tightly placed boxes

You only have to watch the races over the Shepparton 385m to see the carnage, very rarely the leader doesn't win due to the interference and the corner coming up fast, the 390m start off the track was a much fairer start

The 500m start at Traralgon has a fairly long run to the corner and looks very testing distance even for a two turn 500m dog and thus a strong dog looks suited

Its a way of evening up the playing field

Havent ever heard a bad word about the place , looks a treat watching old replays

Its the best track i have raced dogs at

Mind you I can't wait to get up to Grafton to have a live look at their track , it looks super on TV especially where you get the shots of the dogs going around the turns - it looks very clean racing to me

Stewards reports note that (7) dogs hit the running rail and (3) dogs fell during the meeting - extreme stats, even for a new track that has been experiencing plenty of interference and unusual running patterns since the first meeting.

GRV CEO in the latest public monthly update talks of the state of the art track optimised for safer racing. Time will tell on the impacts of the track design features including the monster back straight, boxes installed close to the rail, and home straight that is not a straight, and whether the number of dogs hitting the rail will subside.

GRV announced they would harrow the track today - the day prior to the next meeting - albeit they say a light harrow. We can only hope the rain doesnt come, and indeed that rain is off the radar for winter, given this $6 million track has bog standard drainage and not gold standard by design.

Under GRV rules trainers cant scratch due to track conditions once fields are drawn so take your chance on the conditions. The trackman can only do his best under these circumstances he has been given.

(5) dogs hit the running rail today at a twilight meeting, February 7 at this state of the art trackin another day of disturbing stewards reports for this radical design which cost $6 million plus.

Observation of outcomes that dont bear up the promises of modelling because real world animal behaviour of a group of 8 dogs is not factored in, is ignored as regulators embark on expensive experiments such as Traralgon.

GRV have spent over $1 million with UTS in recent years as per Annual Report consultancy figures, and that doesnt include whatever they paid for the Traralgon design of the J Track.

The race night dramas continue at Traralgon with recent meetings on February 11 and 14, with multiple falls (4 last night) and dogs hitting the rail at both meetings and another lure malfunction.

Small fields seem to be the norm now and even with these smaller fields, interference is still an issue in most races. It may well be a good solo trial track if you have a super strong and well conditioned dog, and on race night if you are a leader and can avoid the trouble - happy days.

A hard run now will become even tougher in winter with decent rain as drainage is not designed at gold standard despite GRV being advised to review their drainage design principles to achieve best practice.

Nathan,

HPK (grass) featured widely spaced boxes and a big turn with excellent banking. The 457 was demanding enough to sort out the men from the boys. It even handled 10 starters for quite a while. So, yes, a great example to copy.

V'Landys, who ran the trots, was no help and effectively sent the racing over to WPK.

Maitland tried but never quite got there. Fiddling with the rail on the turn made it worse (more biased). Bulli never got there either - even after flood reconstruction - for a few reasons including a flat turn and an ill-advised cut away in the rail prior to the main turn. Its old dual circuit (pre-reconstruction) was no different.

The new Grafton is the next best available, mostly because of the wide sweeping turn for 450m trips. By comparison. Casino and Lismore are third rate.

Purga (Ipswich) is to be assessed and no track measurements have been published and the draft shows bend starts as well.

To date, it seems that Traralgon is not even on the same page. So much for GRV corporate spin.