PDA

View Full Version : Another breakdown at Keeneland


Fager Fan
10-10-2015, 09:17 AM
Reported to be a Pletcher horse and rumored to be Rock Fall but not seen verification of the horse yet.

andtheyreoff
10-10-2015, 09:25 AM
It was Rock Fall, per Jennie Rees of the Louisville Courier-Journal .Unbelievably tragic.

Kash$
10-10-2015, 10:04 AM
Reported to be a Pletcher horse and rumored to be Rock Fall but not seen verification of the horse yet.

Cheap shot at Keeneland?

Wait til Aqueduct rolls around make sure you post the breakdowns

Another breakdown at Aqueduct

Sad news of the connections

Bigadam119
10-10-2015, 10:07 AM
Four stakes horses break down in a week! While the bear this for our sport is for AP to run in the classic. The absolute worst thing that can happen is for something to happen to him. If something were to happen to him the countdown to the end will start.

Fager Fan
10-10-2015, 10:18 AM
Cheap shot at Keeneland?

Wait til Aqueduct rolls around make sure you post the breakdowns

Another breakdown at Aqueduct

Sad news of the connections

Are you just totally oblivious to the fact that 4 horses have died of breakdowns at KEE in the past week, with at least 3 of them (I think all 4) stakes horses? And that $100m in horseflesh are or will be working or racing over that track over the next few weeks, with 2 of those racedays being nationally televised and covered heavily by the press?

You've got some warped thinking if you don't think there is and should be concern about this among trainers, owners, KEE, and the BC and instead think this is a "cheap shot."

cj
10-10-2015, 10:21 AM
Who are the other horses besides Rock Fall that have broken down?

Fager Fan
10-10-2015, 10:28 AM
Who are the other horses besides Rock Fall that have broken down?

Skyring, Tacticus, and Shore Runner.

cj
10-10-2015, 10:35 AM
Skyring, Tacticus, and Shore Runner.

Hard to really pin this on the track. One was on turf, one was a horse that had run predominantly on turf on a sloppy track, and two were in training. It is possible something is off, but most likely it is just a bad statistical anomaly. Horses don't break down in neat patterns, evenly over time.

So while worthy of investigating, I doubt it is the track.

SandyW
10-10-2015, 10:42 AM
A lot of rain at KEE this meet probably did not help.

Fager Fan
10-10-2015, 10:59 AM
Hard to really pin this on the track. One was on turf, one was a horse that had run predominantly on turf on a sloppy track, and two were in training. It is possible something is off, but most likely it is just a bad statistical anomaly. Horses don't break down in neat patterns, evenly over time.

So while worthy of investigating, I doubt it is the track.

I chalked it up to the rain/weather affecting the track last Sat/Sun, but another happening has me concerned that the effect isn't over. Breaking both front ankles is a severe and unusual breakdown yet that's what happened to at least 2 of the three to breakdown on the dirt (Tacticus and Rock Fall). I don't know the exact injury to Shore Runner.

Grits
10-10-2015, 11:24 AM
Hard to really pin this on the track. One was on turf, one was a horse that had run predominantly on turf on a sloppy track, and two were in training. It is possible something is off, but most likely it is just a bad statistical anomaly. Horses don't break down in neat patterns, evenly over time.

So while worthy of investigating, I doubt it is the track.

Everyone is aware that the breakdowns were on both the dirt and the turf course. Yet, I'm stunned, given this short a period of time, that you're stating this. Really stunned, particularly being stakes horses.

Grits
10-10-2015, 11:42 AM
Cheap shot at Keeneland?

Wait til Aqueduct rolls around make sure you post the breakdowns

Another breakdown at Aqueduct

Sad news of the connections

Cheap shot? Don't think so.

You're still relatively new. I promise you, breakdowns at Aqueduct have always been chronicled here. If this place is anything, it's equal opportunity when problems arise.

Rex Phinney
10-10-2015, 11:50 AM
When Del Mar and Aqueduct had problems with breakdowns no one gave them a pass, Keeneland sure as hell shouldn't either. They better at least try a few things to improve the surface before the BC.

biggestal99
10-10-2015, 12:00 PM
Hard to really pin this on the track. One was on turf, one was a horse that had run predominantly on turf on a sloppy track, and two were in training. It is possible something is off, but most likely it is just a bad statistical anomaly. Horses don't break down in neat patterns, evenly over time.

So while worthy of investigating, I doubt it is the track.

Betya these 3 dirt deaths would Not have happened on the poly.

Keeneland poly was REALLY SAFE for horses.

Allan

Fager Fan
10-10-2015, 12:10 PM
Betya these 3 dirt deaths would Not have happened on the poly.

Keeneland poly was REALLY SAFE for horses.

Allan

Styrofoam peanuts are also really safe.

ronsmac
10-10-2015, 12:37 PM
Racing horses around ovals isn't safe. That's just how it is. Thousands of horses have died since I first started watching racing.

cbp
10-10-2015, 01:03 PM
Bring by poly. Make racing down there interesting again.

SandyW
10-10-2015, 01:22 PM
Betya these 3 dirt deaths would Not have happened on the poly.

Keeneland poly was REALLY SAFE for horses.

Allan

Poly may a fraction safer for horses, but not to safe for track handle.
Let's run all races on the grass, "wait a minute", horses break down on grass also.
Way too many variables as to why horses break down.

nijinski
10-10-2015, 03:23 PM
Wet weather along with seasonal temp changes create more work and analysis of the the track surfaces . With the breakdowns and and the BC approaching this should be stepped up greatly . some here are right though , can't always blame the track . Could be underlying issues with a particular horse along with the bad step .unfortunate .

castaway01
10-10-2015, 03:28 PM
Poly may a fraction safer for horses, but not to safe for track handle.
Let's run all races on the grass, "wait a minute", horses break down on grass also.
Way too many variables as to why horses break down.

Except handle was at a record high with poly and plummeted when they put the dirt back in. Try again.

Stillriledup
10-10-2015, 03:47 PM
Are you just totally oblivious to the fact that 4 horses have died of breakdowns at KEE in the past week, with at least 3 of them (I think all 4) stakes horses? And that $100m in horseflesh are or will be working or racing over that track over the next few weeks, with 2 of those racedays being nationally televised and covered heavily by the press?

You've got some warped thinking if you don't think there is and should be concern about this among trainers, owners, KEE, and the BC and instead think this is a "cheap shot."

It's not the track re: rock fall.

Grits
10-10-2015, 05:01 PM
A question for anyone who is a track super, an engineer, or a trainer, even.

I've read three pieces this afternoon about Keeneland's replacing of the poly because these stakes horse's deaths troubles me. When the poly was replaced..going back to the dirt track it seems Keeneland's work was more labor intensive than Santa Anita's. Or, for that matter, Delmar's.

http://www.courier-journal.com/story/sports/horses/horse-racing/2014/04/02/keeneland-replace-polytrack-dirt/7206025/

Keeneland plans to keep the macadam constructed for Polytrack and build the dirt surface of sand, silt and clay.

My having no clue regarding highway construction, or racetrack construction for horses, of course, I wanted to know what macadam is...a porous paving of rock and gravel, rolled many times to hardness combined with asphalt or cement.

http://www.britannica.com/technology/macadam-road-construction

Keeneland debuted the new state of the art surface in detail in this piece. A portion of the piece is in the quote; one can read it further at the link. With this all included, as you, gentlemen, can see I know nothing, which I readily admit as I've seldom walked across track surfaces. So, I ask the question. Do all racetracks have macadam as their base or was this only a poly component that Keeneland chose to leave in place? Could it be problematic for dirt when copious amounts of rainfall are added? If so, is 6 inches of sand, clay and silt enough cushion for horse's legs while their 1200 lbs of force hit the ground with each stride?


https://www.keeneland.com/racing/keeneland-debuts-new-dirt-surface-main-race-track

Construction of the dirt track got underway in mid-May when workers began removing 16,000 tons of Polytrack to reach the existing layer of porous asphalt that covers a complex drainage system installed during the 2006 track renovation. The porous asphalt was then covered by Mirafi 140N geotextile fabric, which maintains the integrity of the 26,000 tons of Class I sand placed on top of it to form the base of the track.

The dirt track features a unique drainage system, the first of its kind in North America, along the inside and outside rails that works in tandem with the existing system beneath the track.

Under the inside rail and along the outer rail through the straights and chutes, interlocking EcoRain drainage cells filled with pea gravel were stacked horizontally and covered by a flexible porous paving material made from recycled tires. This system is designed to consistently collect and discharge water into the existing drainage system and away from the track surface.

A blend of approximately 19,000 tons of sand, silt and clay native to Kentucky forms the main track’s six-inch racing surface. The surface composition consists of approximately 87.5 percent sand and 12.5 percent clay and silt.

Keeneland will employ GPS technology via custom-made equipment to carefully monitor the consistency of the dirt racing surface. The data gained will be an invaluable tool in outlining proper maintenance, which is a key to making the track as safe as possible for horse and rider.

Fager Fan
10-10-2015, 05:15 PM
It's not the track re: rock fall.

You'd know this how?

Stillriledup
10-10-2015, 05:34 PM
You'd know this how?


Did you see Rock falls last race as well as his pre race warmup?

nijinski
10-10-2015, 05:56 PM
Grits , it's all very interesting . Looks like the major ingredient is sand ind the surface with the smaller percentage of clay , perhaps the macadam is what's used outside of the rails for the drainage . Perhaps someone in the business of maintainingg the surface can elaborate as you have said .

Fager Fan
10-10-2015, 06:11 PM
Did you see Rock falls last race as well as his pre race warmup?

No, I didn't. What about them?

theiman
10-10-2015, 06:19 PM
NYRA tracks must be unsafe too.

There have been 45 deaths so far this year at the 3 NYRA tracks(from racing and training)
Big A 16
Belmont 16
Saratoga 13

Is the track? Is it the horse? The trainers methods? Some sort of combo?
A lot of people like to point the blame without anyone really knowing.

Stillriledup
10-10-2015, 06:21 PM
No, I didn't. What about them?

Ill just say this, I made a large (losing) wager against him. Had show bets against his minus pool also.

Tall One
10-10-2015, 06:35 PM
It happens because it's horse racing, and it's an unfortunate part of the game we have to accept. Our heroes are strong but fragile, and maybe after the first/last BC out there, they'll go back to a poly. Doubt it, but it's a possibility I guess. I'll never get over Go for Wand breaking down and the eerie silence out at Keeneland during the simulcast. It was literally like all the oxygen in the place was taken away.

Broad Brush
10-10-2015, 09:23 PM
I have loved racing for over forty years and know that it is part of the game.
But, I do not remember seeing the number of fatal breakdowns that we see today.
I know that there are several reasons for this--but I believe it is mostly
due to trainers that are too stupid to know or don't care to know when a horse should not be running in a race.

Today at Thistledown in the 1st race, there was a horse named "Doyouseemecoming". This horse had not run since 8/1/13.
His last three races were at: Delmar, Hollywood & Hollywood.
His Beyer Figs for those races were: 90, 98 & 95.
He was entered for $4,000 Claiming. I knew this was not going to end well for him and it didn't. He tried to keep pace and dropped back after a 1/4
of a mile. He faded to last and did not make it to the 1/8 pole. He went down
and that was it for him. It is things like this that almost make me hate myself for being such a fan of this game.

People will say that it is not fair to blame trainers for this---I disagree.
I could list many trainers who I rarely see have their horses suffer fatal breakdowns and not just at major tracks--at small tracks too.

Stillriledup
10-10-2015, 09:51 PM
It happens because it's horse racing, and it's an unfortunate part of the game we have to accept. Our heroes are strong but fragile, and maybe after the first/last BC out there, they'll go back to a poly. Doubt it, but it's a possibility I guess. I'll never get over Go for Wand breaking down and the eerie silence out at Keeneland during the simulcast. It was literally like all the oxygen in the place was taken away.

Owners and trainers are not as good as they could be at knowing when their horses are 'over the top' and when they are getting ready to enter a horse in a race where they have 'no' shot. Did rock fall have a pre existing injury? We won't know for sure, but ill tell what we do know and that is he went to the bottom of the well to win his last race. I don't remember him having to work that hard to win in his start before his last one, when he hit the wire in his most recent win I knew I was lining up to make a large play against him, I colored him "no shot" going forward and this isn't even counting that i thought he had a very shaky warmup, combine that with an all out driving win and it's not a recipe for the type of horse I like to bet going forward.

nijinski
10-10-2015, 09:51 PM
:10: I have loved racing for over forty years and know that it is part of the game.
But, I do not remember seeing the number of fatal breakdowns that we see today.
I know that there are several reasons for this--but I believe it is mostly
due to trainers that are too stupid to know or don't care to know when a horse should not be running in a race.

Today at Thistledown in the 1st race, there was a horse named "Doyouseemecoming". This horse had not run since 8/1/13.
His last three races were at: Delmar, Hollywood & Hollywood.
His Beyer Figs for those races were: 90, 98 & 95.
He was entered for $4,000 Claiming. I knew this was not going to end well for him and it didn't. He tried to keep pace and dropped back after a 1/4
of a mile. He faded to last and did not make it to the 1/8 pole. He went down. N n n
and that was it for him. It is things like this that almost make me hate myself for being such a fan of this game.

People will say that it is not fair to blame trainers for this---I disagree.
I could list many trainers who I rarely see have their horses suffer fatal breakdowns and not just at major tracks--at small tracks too.
When it is obvious to the public that this may not end well , yeah I say shame on the owner and trainer and more Vet track commish etc . Poor thing RIP .

Stillriledup
10-10-2015, 09:55 PM
I have loved racing for over forty years and know that it is part of the game.
But, I do not remember seeing the number of fatal breakdowns that we see today.
I know that there are several reasons for this--but I believe it is mostly
due to trainers that are too stupid to know or don't care to know when a horse should not be running in a race.

Today at Thistledown in the 1st race, there was a horse named "Doyouseemecoming". This horse had not run since 8/1/13.
His last three races were at: Delmar, Hollywood & Hollywood.
His Beyer Figs for those races were: 90, 98 & 95.
He was entered for $4,000 Claiming. I knew this was not going to end well for him and it didn't. He tried to keep pace and dropped back after a 1/4
of a mile. He faded to last and did not make it to the 1/8 pole. He went down
and that was it for him. It is things like this that almost make me hate myself for being such a fan of this game.

People will say that it is not fair to blame trainers for this---I disagree.
I could list many trainers who I rarely see have their horses suffer fatal breakdowns and not just at major tracks--at small tracks too.

The trainer and track are mostly to blame with small blame to the rider for accepting a mount like that. Lots of blame to go around.

affirmedny
10-10-2015, 10:47 PM
I have loved racing for over forty years and know that it is part of the game.
But, I do not remember seeing the number of fatal breakdowns that we see today.


Because if it didn't happen in a race we only heard about them if it was written up in the racing form and even then we only heard about them if it was a top horse.

andtheyreoff
10-11-2015, 01:19 AM
Owners and trainers are not as good as they could be at knowing when their horses are 'over the top' and when they are getting ready to enter a horse in a race where they have 'no' shot. Did rock fall have a pre existing injury? We won't know for sure, but ill tell what we do know and that is he went to the bottom of the well to win his last race. I don't remember him having to work that hard to win in his start before his last one, when he hit the wire in his most recent win I knew I was lining up to make a large play against him, I colored him "no shot" going forward and this isn't even counting that i thought he had a very shaky warmup, combine that with an all out driving win and it's not a recipe for the type of horse I like to bet going forward.

Ah yes, the ol' "I totally saw this one coming", only saying it in a really squirrelly way.

Mulerider
10-11-2015, 07:52 AM
Today at Thistledown in the 1st race, there was a horse named "Doyouseemecoming". This horse had not run since 8/1/13.
His last three races were at: Delmar, Hollywood & Hollywood.
His Beyer Figs for those races were: 90, 98 & 95.
He was entered for $4,000 Claiming. I knew this was not going to end well for him and it didn't. He tried to keep pace and dropped back after a 1/4
of a mile. He faded to last and did not make it to the 1/8 pole. He went down
and that was it for him. It is things like this that almost make me hate myself for being such a fan of this game.

People will say that it is not fair to blame trainers for this---I disagree.
I could list many trainers who I rarely see have their horses suffer fatal breakdowns and not just at major tracks--at small tracks too.

I almost wish I hadn't seen your post. I handicapped that race. I was struck by the names of the jockeys that rode "Doyouseemecoming" in his 10 2-3-3 career in 2012 and 2013. EspinozaV. SmithME. RosarioJ. GarciaM.

I knew the horse dropped back. I did not know the outcome. Very sorry to hear this.

Ruffian1
10-11-2015, 10:17 AM
A question for anyone who is a track super, an engineer, or a trainer, even.

I've read three pieces this afternoon about Keeneland's replacing of the poly because these stakes horse's deaths troubles me. When the poly was replaced..going back to the dirt track it seems Keeneland's work was more labor intensive than Santa Anita's. Or, for that matter, Delmar's.

http://www.courier-journal.com/story/sports/horses/horse-racing/2014/04/02/keeneland-replace-polytrack-dirt/7206025/



My having no clue regarding highway construction, or racetrack construction for horses, of course, I wanted to know what macadam is...a porous paving of rock and gravel, rolled many times to hardness combined with asphalt or cement.

http://www.britannica.com/technology/macadam-road-construction

Keeneland debuted the new state of the art surface in detail in this piece. A portion of the piece is in the quote; one can read it further at the link. With this all included, as you, gentlemen, can see I know nothing, which I readily admit as I've seldom walked across track surfaces. So, I ask the question. Do all racetracks have macadam as their base or was this only a poly component that Keeneland chose to leave in place? Could it be problematic for dirt when copious amounts of rainfall are added? If so, is 6 inches of sand, clay and silt enough cushion for horse's legs while their 1200 lbs of force hit the ground with each stride?


https://www.keeneland.com/racing/keeneland-debuts-new-dirt-surface-main-race-track

I walked tracks for a long time. I also watched John P. totally rebuild from scratch,the Laurel track surface many years ago. Keep in mind, Laurel is built on and in the middle of a swamp. Also watched him fix the mess over the tunnel at the 1/8th pole at Pimlico.
Neither place has macadam under it. Macadam , in my mind, is asphalt. If that is the case, when the water saturates the 6 inches of soil mix, where does it go? If it goes into and under the macadom, as soon as we get multiple feeeze-thaws, the macadam will have to crack, just like a driveway would.
I am no track super but too me, macadam is the last thing I would assume you would want underneath a surface.
Biggest problem though is in this day and age, everybody can criticize anybody for anything even though they have no idea of what they are talking about. They only THINK, they know what they are talking about. So I do want to stress that just because I have never heard of it, and too me it makes no sense, does not mean it is incorrect.
Lastly, I don't remember the exact depth of the Laurel track from the bottom of the base but it is many more than 6 inches. Not the cushion, the bottom of the base that supports the cushion.

foregoforever
10-11-2015, 10:50 AM
Macadam , in my mind, is asphalt.

The original macadam, as developed a couple of hundred years ago, used little or no binding agent between the compressed stones. That sort of surface drains easily, similar to a typical country road or a fine gravel bike trail.

The practice of using tar as a binding agent (hence "tar-mac") came many years later, mainly to keep the dust down, and that's what you see on asphalt highways. It sacrifices the drainage ability, so they're built with slopes so the water flows off the top.

I'm sure Keeneland's macadam does not have any tar. I don't know anything about track construction, but I'm sure they all have some layer below that provides support and drainage.

I got frustrated back when synthetic surfaces came out, because no one ever wrote a detailed comparison between the various types. Everything always focused on the composition of the top surface, but it seemed to me that the underlying support and drainage systems were more important. I have no idea if the drainage systems for poly, tapeta, cushion, etc., were the same.

Ruffian1
10-11-2015, 11:08 AM
The original macadam, as developed a couple of hundred years ago, used little or no binding agent between the compressed stones. That sort of surface drains easily, similar to a typical country road or a fine gravel bike trail.

The practice of using tar as a binding agent (hence "tar-mac") came many years later, mainly to keep the dust down, and that's what you see on asphalt highways. It sacrifices the drainage ability, so they're built with slopes so the water flows off the top.

I'm sure Keeneland's macadam does not have any tar. I don't know anything about track construction, but I'm sure they all have some layer below that provides support and drainage.

I got frustrated back when synthetic surfaces came out, because no one ever wrote a detailed comparison between the various types. Everything always focused on the composition of the top surface, but it seemed to me that the underlying support and drainage systems were more important. I have no idea if the drainage systems for poly, tapeta, cushion, etc., were the same.
Thank you. The word itself if confusing to me . That base used is very much like a crusher run type. That is, stone mixed in with stone dust and other material . Once it gets wet, it packs very well and hardens. If it gets saturated, it drains well. That is the type of base that was used where I spoke of. Pretty sure it is fairly standard to use that.
If that is the case, it sounds as though they basically reused what would have been called for anyway.
It would be mind blowing if they did not go above and beyond to make it right the first time. I have to believe they did.
I appreciate your input . Thanks for clearing it up in at least my mind.

tanner12oz
10-11-2015, 11:14 AM
The original macadam, as developed a couple of hundred years ago, used little or no binding agent between the compressed stones. That sort of surface drains easily, similar to a typical country road or a fine gravel bike trail.

The practice of using tar as a binding agent (hence "tar-mac") came many years later, mainly to keep the dust down, and that's what you see on asphalt highways. It sacrifices the drainage ability, so they're built with slopes so the water flows off the top.

I'm sure Keeneland's macadam does not have any tar. I don't know anything about track construction, but I'm sure they all have some layer below that provides support and drainage.

I got frustrated back when synthetic surfaces came out, because no one ever wrote a detailed comparison between the various types. Everything always focused on the composition of the top surface, but it seemed to me that the underlying support and drainage systems were more important. I have no idea if the drainage systems for poly, tapeta, cushion, etc., were the same.

bloodhorse had an.in depth article I think on the keeneland track right before the opening meet for the new surface. Had diagrams and stuff might be worth looking through the archives.

last spring keeneland got a ton of rain (a helluva lot more then this year) and their were no breakdown issues. Not sure if this latest phenomenon can be blamed on rain.

foregoforever
10-11-2015, 02:19 PM
bloodhorse had an.in depth article I think on the keeneland track right before the opening meet for the new surface. Had diagrams and stuff might be worth looking through the archives.

I think they had a good description of polytrack's drainage as well. That's the only surface that I ever saw much detail about. When Santa Anita had all their drainage problems some years ago, I wondered if their pro-ride/cushion track had a similar drainage system. I never was able to find any details on it, though.

There is something called porous asphalt, and I think some tapeta tracks use it. Of course, most drainage systems probably work fine at first, but after a few years they can get clogged, particularly if the top surface deteriorates.

I've always wondered how much science and engineering goes into track design and maintenance, as opposed to "art".

cj
10-11-2015, 02:34 PM
Everyone is aware that the breakdowns were on both the dirt and the turf course. Yet, I'm stunned, given this short a period of time, that you're stating this. Really stunned, particularly being stakes horses.

I've gotten to the point where I realize it is part of the game. Nobody likes it or wants it to happen of course. But that doesn't mean there is a finger to be pointed every time there is a group of breakdowns in a short time. It doesn't hurt to investigate it of course, but sometimes it is just bad luck.

I don't think the stakes horses thing really matters. The better horses don't race as much and are treated with kid gloves these days. I'm not sure they are less likely to break down than battle tested claimers.

PaceAdvantage
10-11-2015, 07:23 PM
Cheap shot at Keeneland?

Wait til Aqueduct rolls around make sure you post the breakdowns

Another breakdown at Aqueduct

Sad news of the connectionsYou act like this hasn't happened in the past...unreal...

Maybe we can blame all these breakdowns at Keeneland on Lukas instead? :bang:

Saratoga_Mike
10-12-2015, 08:34 AM
I don't think the stakes horses thing really matters. The better horses don't race as much and are treated with kid gloves these days. I'm not sure they are less likely to break down than battle tested claimers.

What's the breakdown rate per 1,000 starters at CT vs BEL? I don't have the answer, but I'd bet a ton of money it's higher at CT. I absolutely believe lower-end claimers breakdown more than stakes horses.

PaceAdvantage
10-12-2015, 09:45 AM
What's the breakdown rate per 1,000 starters at CT vs BEL? I don't have the answer, but I'd bet a ton of money it's higher at CT. I absolutely believe lower-end claimers breakdown more than stakes horses.I'd bet it might be higher, but not much higher...

burnsy
10-12-2015, 10:22 AM
I've gotten to the point where I realize it is part of the game. Nobody likes it or wants it to happen of course. But that doesn't mean there is a finger to be pointed every time there is a group of breakdowns in a short time. It doesn't hurt to investigate it of course, but sometimes it is just bad luck.


What? Actual common sense? Why would you think that's good enough? :)
This is the world we live in, especially on the internet. There's got to be blame to go around somewhere. Accidents don't happen, if there's no finger pointing, its no fun. :bang:

Then when there is blame, there's a hundred cop outs, upbringing, too drunk, the other guy, his mother hates him, his father beat him, Bush did it, Obama did it.......what a world.

castaway01
10-12-2015, 10:22 AM
What's the breakdown rate per 1,000 starters at CT vs BEL? I don't have the answer, but I'd bet a ton of money it's higher at CT. I absolutely believe lower-end claimers breakdown more than stakes horses.

When they did the breakdown studies a few years back, the only stats you could easily find were turf vs. dirt vs. synthetic. Just now I tried to find track-by-track stats like the ones you speak of but couldn't. Maybe someone with a database could run that kind of inquiry. Overall, in 2010 there were a little less than 2 fatal breakdowns per 1000 horse starts.

ubercapper
10-12-2015, 10:34 AM
bloodhorse had an.in depth article I think on the keeneland track right before the opening meet for the new surface. Had diagrams and stuff might be worth looking through the archives.

last spring keeneland got a ton of rain (a helluva lot more then this year) and their were no breakdown issues. Not sure if this latest phenomenon can be blamed on rain.

Picture of track & drainage system
http://www.kyforward.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dirt-Track-Diagram_large.jpg

Grits
10-12-2015, 10:37 AM
I'd bet it might be higher, but not much higher...

I'm trying not to be a contrarian, but Mike, when have you ever known 4 graded stakes horses to go down and be euthanized at Belmont inside 8 days? Each, likely, as Cj noted, just a run of bad luck?

We forget the past. When they went down at Del Mar in numbers, it wasn't bad luck, fellas. It was the turf course.

I'm not a "sky is falling" type, however, stakes horses have the finest quality of care in the country. Money isn't a factor for them and yes, they don't run as often. But, they're in training everyday. Yes, finger pointing is never popular. Meanwhile, we can all keep hoping for no more rain of biblical proportion and that luck's on our side between now and October 30th and 31st.

Grits
10-12-2015, 10:40 AM
Picture of track & drainage system
http://www.kyforward.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Dirt-Track-Diagram_large.jpg

Thank you for posting.

aliancia
10-12-2015, 02:08 PM
When they did the breakdown studies a few years back, the only stats you could easily find were turf vs. dirt vs. synthetic. Just now I tried to find track-by-track stats like the ones you speak of but couldn't. Maybe someone with a database could run that kind of inquiry. Overall, in 2010 there were a little less than 2 fatal breakdowns per 1000 horse starts.

The Jockey Club's Equine Injury Database includes track-specific data for most major tracks.

http://jockeyclub.com/default.asp?section=Advocacy&area=11

GatetoWire
10-12-2015, 11:38 PM
I'm trying not to be a contrarian, but Mike, when have you ever known 4 graded stakes horses to go down and be euthanized at Belmont inside 8 days? Each, likely, as Cj noted, just a run of bad luck?

We forget the past. When they went down at Del Mar in numbers, it wasn't bad luck, fellas. It was the turf course.

I'm not a "sky is falling" type, however, stakes horses have the finest quality of care in the country. Money isn't a factor for them and yes, they don't run as often. But, they're in training everyday. Yes, finger pointing is never popular. Meanwhile, we can all keep hoping for no more rain of biblical proportion and that luck's on our side between now and October 30th and 31st.

Skyring had been running way over his head for months dancing every dance.
Shore Runner has big gaps in his PP's and was a claimer who got hot for Sharp and started taking on stakes horses.
Rock Fall missed his 2 year old season, didn't start at 3 until the summer, raced 3 times and then had a long layoff. This year they were very careful with lots of time between races.
Pletcher also worked Liam's Map on the same track on Sunday. You think he would have done that if he though the track was to blame with Rock Fall?

Pretty hard to blame the track until you see the vet reports and medical history of each horse.

Grits
10-13-2015, 08:54 AM
Pretty hard to blame the track until you see the vet reports and medical history of each horse.

You're right. Maybe the same can be said for the three that went down at Thistledown this past weekend. They were just claimers. :ThmbUp:

Breakdowns, by the way, are something I'm quite accustomed to, I happen to have great disdain for them in clusters particularly when it's one racetrack and it's rumored that three others were euthanized, but not made public, due to injury in days before the meet opened.

Let's hope all goes well in coming days, and on those two big days. I look especially forward to American Pharoah and Beholder.

Thank you to the poster who shared the Jockey Club link. It would be even more interesting if all racetracks were required to report fatalities..in order to remain open. .... Attrition is a good thing, track attrition, that is.

castaway01
10-13-2015, 09:16 AM
The Jockey Club's Equine Injury Database includes track-specific data for most major tracks.

http://jockeyclub.com/default.asp?section=Advocacy&area=11

Thank you! Only a small number of tracks provided data and no small tracks but still, at least it's some information.

I just looked at a few tracks. From 2009-14, the years, provided, average fatal breakdowns per 1000 starters:

Turfway 1.19
Belmont 1.58
Gulfstream 1.76
Remington 1.90
Laurel 2.15
Delaware Park 2.23

Not sure what that means when Gulfstream would have one year with 3/1000 and then the next it's 1/1000. If there's a trend, it's that synthetic is the safest, followed by higher-class non-synthetic tracks, then cheaper tracks.

PaceAdvantage
10-13-2015, 10:19 AM
Laurel is pretty high up on that list. Weren't they getting lots of love around here just the other day...

Where is Aqueduct?

castaway01
10-13-2015, 11:37 AM
Laurel is pretty high up on that list. Weren't they getting lots of love around here just the other day...

Where is Aqueduct?

Aqueduct is 2.28/1000.
Saratoga is 1.33/1000.
Hawthorne is 1.85/1000.

Again, this is just averaging the past six years' breakdown numbers. I'm sure others could do deeper statistical analyses if they have time.

Most of the other tracks that provided data are CA tracks. The majors have switched surfaces, and the bullrings have very short meets, so I wasn't sure it was worth analyzing them. Synthetic appears to be safest, as Presque Isle is 1.00/1000 and Woodbine is under 1/1000. I didn't want to open that debate here, but it is what it is.

castaway01
10-13-2015, 11:43 AM
If anyone wants to view the stats, these tracks provided data through 12/31/14. Thanks again for that link as I did Internet searches and never found it:

Aqueduct, Belmont Park, Del Mar, Delaware Park, Ferndale, Fresno, Golden Gate, Gulfstream, Hawthorne, Indiana Downs, Keeneland (I know they're the subject of the thread, but since the data was all synthetic track info and they now have dirt, not sure how it's relevant to this meet), Laurel, Lone Star, Pleasanton, Pimlico, Portland Meadows, Presque Isle Downs, Remington Park, Sacramento, Santa Anita, Santa Rosa, Saratoga, Stockton, Suffolk Downs, Turfway Park, Woodbine

ronsmac
10-13-2015, 11:47 AM
Aqueduct is 2.28/1000.
Saratoga is 1.33/1000.
Hawthorne is 1.85/1000.

Again, this is just averaging the past six years' breakdown numbers. I'm sure others could do deeper statistical analyses if they have time.

Most of the other tracks that provided data are CA tracks. The majors have switched surfaces, and the bullrings have very short meets, so I wasn't sure it was worth analyzing them. Synthetic appears to be safest, as Presque Isle is 1.00/1000 and Woodbine is under 1/1000. I didn't want to open that debate here, but it is what it is.It seems like more horses break down on dirt vs. grass. I'm sure you have the numbers to refute or back this up. Aqueduct runs far fewer grass races than Saratoga or Belmont on a daily basis, I'm sure that's one reason for a higher breakdown rate. Saratoga runs4 dirt6races a day with 7 or 8 horses max and 6 or 7 turf races with fuller fields.

cj
10-13-2015, 12:04 PM
It seems like more horses break down on dirt vs. grass. I'm sure you have the numbers to refute or back this up. Aqueduct runs far fewer grass races than Saratoga or Belmont on a daily basis, I'm sure that's one reason for a higher breakdown rate. Saratoga runs4 dirt6races a day with 7 or 8 horses max and 6 or 7 turf races with fuller fields.

Yes, definitely break down more on dirt than turf.

FenceBored
10-14-2015, 05:04 PM
It seems like more horses break down on dirt vs. grass. I'm sure you have the numbers to refute or back this up. Aqueduct runs far fewer grass races than Saratoga or Belmont on a daily basis, I'm sure that's one reason for a higher breakdown rate. Saratoga runs4 dirt6races a day with 7 or 8 horses max and 6 or 7 turf races with fuller fields.

The thing dragging Aqueduct's numbers up is the inner track. Without it their 6-year number for main and turf combined is 1.63. Saratoga, on the other hand, has the turf courses pulling UP their number. The 6-year number for Saratoga's main track alone (even including the bad year they had in 2014) is 1.24, making it the safest dirt track of those making their EID summaries public.

andtheyreoff
10-14-2015, 05:12 PM
The thing dragging Aqueduct's numbers up is the inner track. Without it their 6-year number for main and turf combined is 1.63. Saratoga, on the other hand, has the turf courses pulling UP their number. The 6-year number for Saratoga's main track alone (even including the bad year they had in 2014) is 1.24, making it the safest dirt track of those making their EID summaries public.

Wow, the last time you were seen around these parts, AP was a yearling!

Welcome back! :ThmbUp:

biggestal99
10-14-2015, 05:15 PM
2014 stats for keeneland.

Poly: 0.00 SPRING
Dirt: 2.11 Fall

Allan

FenceBored
10-14-2015, 05:17 PM
Wow, the last time you were seen around these parts, AP was a yearling!

Welcome back! :ThmbUp:

Thanks.

ronsmac
10-14-2015, 05:34 PM
The thing dragging Aqueduct's numbers up is the inner track. Without it their 6-year number for main and turf combined is 1.63. Saratoga, on the other hand, has the turf courses pulling UP their number. The 6-year number for Saratoga's main track alone (even including the bad year they had in 2014) is 1.24, making it the safest dirt track of those making their EID summaries public.Aqueduct runs more dirt races in a yr than Saratoga does in probably 6 yrs, making saratoga's dirt data harder to trust.

ronsmac
10-14-2015, 06:13 PM
The thing dragging Aqueduct's numbers up is the inner track. Without it their 6-year number for main and turf combined is 1.63. Saratoga, on the other hand, has the turf courses pulling UP their number. The 6-year number for Saratoga's main track alone (even including the bad year they had in 2014) is 1.24, making it the safest dirt track of those making their EID summaries public.
6 times more may be a stretch, but great info.

Tom
10-14-2015, 08:56 PM
Dittos, FB....welcome back! :ThmbUp:

RXB
10-14-2015, 09:33 PM
It seems like more horses break down on dirt vs. grass.

Yes, and synthetic is safest of all, by a substantial margin. Fatalities per 1000 starts:

Dirt 2.07
Turf 1.65
Syn 1.22

That includes about 1.6 million dirt starts, 300k turf starts and 270k synthetic starts thus sample sizes are not an issue.

ronsmac
10-14-2015, 09:38 PM
Yes, and synthetic is safest of all, by a substantial margin. Fatalities per 1000 starts:

Dirt 2.07
Turf 1.65
Syn 1.22

That includes about 1.6 million dirt starts, 300k turf starts and 270k synthetic starts thus sample sizes are not an issue.If every track went to synthetic , they wouldn't have to worry about me betting horses. Hmmm, maybe every track should go to synthetic. I'd have more free time on weekends.

SandyW
10-14-2015, 10:00 PM
If every track went to synthetic , they wouldn't have to worry about me betting horses. Hmmm, maybe every track should go to synthetic. I'd have more free time on weekends.
I would be joining your club and also have a lot more free time.

Stillriledup
10-14-2015, 10:46 PM
If every track went to synthetic , they wouldn't have to worry about me betting horses. Hmmm, maybe every track should go to synthetic. I'd have more free time on weekends.

The synthetic thing was a joke, bettors didnt want that, none of us were crying that our handicapping was 'broken' and we needed it fixed. Sport of kings run by clowns.