Why I won't be scared looking at horses near the top of the weights for a testing-ground Grand National

Not many people seem to have much interest in GoingStick readings but I spend a lot of time on the Turftrax website, and those looking to have a bet in the Grand National on Saturday would be well advised to have a look as well. Staggeringly at the start of the week, there were no readings for Aintree, while there were for meetings at the likes of Leicester and Sedgefield, and I can't help but think that the course executive doesn't want anyone to know what the ground is really like for fear of some of the top horses not turning up.

The same happened at Cheltenham and everyone knows what a complete farce the going description was at the start of that meeting, but what the Turftrax website does say is how much rain there has been recently – which in case you haven't noticed is loads – and what the GoingStick reading has been at Aintree for recent meetings.

There hasn't been a lower reading anywhere in the country than the ones at Aintree for their last couple of meetings and the 2.4 for the fixture in December is as low as any I can ever remember. The reason given was that not only did it hammer down in the lead-up to racing, but also because of 'considerable decompaction of the ground over the summer'. Now I'm no agriculturalist, but my understanding of decompaction of the ground means that it's loosened up, which allows more rain in, hence the incredibly low GoingStick readings.