PDA

View Full Version : Poly Track Should Be MANDATORY at EVERY track


fouroneone
05-22-2006, 11:58 AM
Why do we sit on our hands and do nothing?

Why do we treat it as "an unavoidable part of the game"?

When Dale Earndhart was killed what happened? Mandatory Head Restraints and "Safe Barriers" EVERYWHERE!

This sport has a chance to make a change for the better, i hope it takes it.

JimG
05-22-2006, 12:37 PM
I wondered when somebody would post this post-Preakness. Many gamblers, including many on this board do not want Polytrack as it eliminates some dirt bias' that players have been using and cashing in on. Also, many horses that run on the dirt do not transfer the same form to the Polytrack. Detractors also point to the composition of the Polytrack surface stating that there is insufficient data to determine whether breathing of the fibers has long term ill affects on horses and jocks. Finally, detractors point out that injuries still will occur and nothing can completely prevent that from happening.

I believe that Polytrack significantly reduces injuries to the horses based on the recent meet at Turfway and other information I have read. Another positive to installation of Polytrack is it reduces the number of days adverse weather affects track closure.

For me the bottom line is do we want to take every reasonable effort to make tracks safer for the animals and jockeys? Thankfully Barbaro did not fall and Prado did not get thrown to the ground in the Preakness or he could have been stampeded.

I think emphasizing safety will improve the bottom line of racetracks in the long term as it does many safety-related businesses. As a gambler I do not really want the Polytrack surface everywhere, but with the horses faster, bred for speed, and more fragile than 50 years ago, I think my wishes as a gambler are outweighed by the need to provide the safest environment possible for the horses and jockeys. This will benefit racing long term.

One man's opinion,

Jim

Joe L.
05-22-2006, 12:48 PM
I believe that Polytrack significantly reduces injuries to the horses based on the recent meet at Turfway and other information I have read.

Jim
Jim, I would be interested in reading this info as well. Can you post a link to it?
Thanks

parlay
05-22-2006, 01:17 PM
Polytrack may be safer, but for who?
For the drugged up cripples that we allow to run?
For the physically challenged that we permit to be bred?
Some people just seem to always want to treat the symptoms.
Polytrack may be better than some but not neccessarily all other racing surfaces.
When will the caretakers of this great sport/game/business start
addressing the real problems?
GREED has got to be put aside before it is to late!

ezpace
05-22-2006, 01:38 PM
tracks some time and see what they do to jocks and horses breathing the crap after a few years and also how the track changes... it will have biases and be unsafe in spots .. what do rubber and chemicals do after a few years of temperature change and the elements??

RXB
05-22-2006, 01:45 PM
There is one training yard in England that has had Polytrack for almost twenty years and some others that have had it for 10 - 12 years. No reports of surface problems and no reports of exercise riders or anybody else getting sick from it.

They've been racing on it in England for five years and everyone says it's a big improvement from the other all-weather surfaces (Equitrack and Fibresand).

kenwoodallpromos
05-22-2006, 01:53 PM
I am a supporter of the Polytrack idea.
Requiring immediate installing of Polytrack would incur great cost to part-time tracks, like at Ca fairs in some in other areas; it could close some tracks.
Do I care? No! We have on-track, off-track, phone, and internet betting. A smaller number of tracks and closing of some whose groups cannot afford the short-term cost of Polytrack does not bother me in the least!

ezpace
05-22-2006, 02:03 PM
There is one training yard in England that has had Polytrack for almost twenty years and some others that have had it for 10 - 12 years. No reports of surface problems and no reports of exercise riders or anybody else getting sick from it.

They've been racing on it in England for five years and everyone says it's a big improvement from the other all-weather surfaces (Equitrack and Fibresand).
*******************

Well exercise riders aren't going to get sick from it . Jocks behind a few horses is where it it bad(the cloud) from what people in Turfway told me. Do they run races in Britain at that place or is it just a training track??

RXB
05-22-2006, 02:09 PM
Lingfield and Wolverhampton have used Polytrack for five and three years, respectively. A new course, Great Leighs, will open with a Polytrack surface later this year.

Horses often gallop in teams in Europe so I'm sure that exercise riders would be getting some kickback here and there.

blind squirrel
05-22-2006, 02:12 PM
Why do we sit on our hands and do nothing?

Why do we treat it as "an unavoidable part of the game"?

When Dale Earndhart was killed what happened? Mandatory Head Restraints and "Safe Barriers" EVERYWHERE!

This sport has a chance to make a change for the better, i hope it takes it.

with polytrack there were some breakdowns at
TURFWAY this winter.....if it will improve the well being of the
horse,i'm all for the change.

RXB
05-22-2006, 02:19 PM
It was three versus 20-- three being the number of catastrophic breakdowns at TP in five months of racing w/ Poly, versus 20 in the preceding five months of racing on dirt at TP.

alysheba88
05-22-2006, 02:27 PM
The day they mandate it at every track is the day I stop playing the horses

alysheba88
05-22-2006, 02:29 PM
Polytrack may be safer, but for who?
For the drugged up cripples that we allow to run?
For the physically challenged that we permit to be bred?
Some people just seem to always want to treat the symptoms.
Polytrack may be better than some but not neccessarily all other racing surfaces.
When will the caretakers of this great sport/game/business start
addressing the real problems?
GREED has got to be put aside before it is to late!


Exactly. The proponents of Polyrack are like those who say the best way to be fit is get your stomache stapled. Missing the point on everything.

Tracks can be safe without Polytrack. But the powers that be will not take on the real problem. Juice and the running of hurt horses. If safety is the only concern why not just mandate every race be run on the turf?

RXB
05-22-2006, 02:35 PM
Exactly. The proponents of Polyrack are like those who say the best way to be fit is get your stomache stapled. Missing the point on everything.

Tracks can be safe without Polytrack. But the powers that be will not take on the real problem. Juice and the running of hurt horses. If safety is the only concern why not just mandate every race be run on the turf?

Who says it's a cure-all? It's an improvement. And according to the stats, it's a big improvement.

I doubt there's a dirt track that runs as many races over five months as TP that only had three catastrophic breakdowns in that span.

The horses are running hurt in part because they are all being bred for speed, which dirt favours. Take stamina out of the breeding and you end up with more infirmities. Polytrack is less speed-favouring so some of those hot speed sires will be a little less attractive.

Turf is safer than dirt but you can't run on grass in the winter unless you're in a mild climate.

I agree that drugs are a problem but this is a separate issue.

alysheba88
05-22-2006, 02:46 PM
Its not a separate issue to me. I can see juicing becoming even more a factor with Polyrack. Bettors fund the game and if the move to Polytrack takes the ability to win out of the equation, or greatly reduces it, then it will not work. I like that tracks have their own nuances.

RXB
05-22-2006, 02:52 PM
The vast majority of bettors lose year after year and still go to the races. And the tracks don't increase the takeout when they install Polytrack. It will may require some different methods of thinking and calculating; some will adjust better than others. But it's not going to drive people away from the game-- especially if it increases field sizes, or at least prevents them from shrinking even further.

I don't understand the suggestion that Polytrack would increase the likelihood of juicing.

alysheba88
05-22-2006, 02:55 PM
If its perceived as safer, I can see the chemists figuring they can go to town.

RXB
05-22-2006, 02:58 PM
The chemists are already going to town.

alysheba88
05-22-2006, 03:01 PM
I understand. And its only going to get worse. Until its really addressed all this talk about "safe" tracks and caring about horses will remain a joke.

Ponyplayr
05-22-2006, 03:02 PM
Jim, I would be interested in reading this info as well. Can you post a link to it?
ThanksHere is a link to some Poly info....The video takes a while to load. http://www.polytrack.com/presentation/index.html (http://www.polytrack.com/presentation/index.html)

PaceAdvantage
05-22-2006, 03:30 PM
It was three versus 20-- three being the number of catastrophic breakdowns at TP in five months of racing w/ Poly, versus 20 in the preceding five months of racing on dirt at TP.

You do realize that while encouraging, this sample size is entirely too small to rely upon. Pure randomness could easily come up with stats like that after one meet.

Does Turfway have any data past last year? If they averaged at least 15-20 catastrophic breakdowns for the last 10 years, and then the first year with Polytrack, they only had 3, THAT would mean something!

Tom
05-22-2006, 03:34 PM
There is one training yard in England that has had Polytrack for almost twenty years and some others that have had it for 10 - 12 years. No reports of surface problems and no reports of exercise riders or anybody else getting sick from it.

They've been racing on it in England for five years and everyone says it's a big improvement from the other all-weather surfaces (Equitrack and Fibresand).

And they do not race anywhere near as often on it as we run here.

dccprez
05-22-2006, 03:52 PM
Let's hold on a minute;

Poly track MAY be ONE partial-answer to inproving safety but from all indications there simply isn't enough data to determine exactly how much of a "fix" offers, if any at all. One meet at Turfway doth not a study make...

I am speculating (read that; guessing-with-no-facts-to-base-this-on whatsoever-other-than-my-own-personal-opinion) when we look at which horses have a greater chance of breaking down/being injured we find a greater propensity for the lower-level claiming horses, and posisbly horses running at "lower level tracks (no disrespect intended) vs. the Graded Stakes caliber horses that are babied and like royalty.

So if (IF) that's correct, perhaps we need to wait until the polytrack is installed at a number of those tracks/parks and see if there is a noticable reduction in catastrophic injuries to those horses that are more likely to break down BEFORE we push through some mandatory directive (as if we could without a centralized governing body for racing) that ALL tracks need to switch to polytrack. (I can see the locals and historical preservationists here in Saratoga going absolutely ape-shit if that word came down from NYRA...).

RXB
05-22-2006, 04:15 PM
I am speculating (read that; guessing-with-no-facts-to-base-this-on whatsoever-other-than-my-own-personal-opinion) when we look at which horses have a greater chance of breaking down/being injured we find a greater propensity for the lower-level claiming horses, and posisbly horses running at "lower level tracks (no disrespect intended) vs. the Graded Stakes caliber horses that are babied and like royalty.

So if (IF) that's correct, perhaps we need to wait until the polytrack is installed at a number of those tracks/parks and see if there is a noticable reduction in catastrophic injuries to those horses that are more likely to break down



Um, what is Turfway winter racing, if not primarily a haven for cheap horses that are more likely to break down? The September meet isn't exactly a class-fest either-- Ellis Park Part Deux, really.

RXB
05-22-2006, 04:32 PM
You do realize that while encouraging, this sample size is entirely too small to rely upon. Pure randomness could easily come up with stats like that after one meet.


Even allowing for the modest sample size, that gap is very unlikely to be generated by pure randomness. Not impossible, but decidedly improbable. 20 to 3 is a large difference.

robert99
05-22-2006, 04:35 PM
UK experience is that polytrack and similar materials have been adopted gradually over time for both race tracks and for trainer gallops. There are still advantages for some horses on turf and other gallop materials such as wood-chip. Probably training gallops use is the best indicator for the safety of increasing polytrack use as the last thing trainers want is for horses to break down in training just before the race they have been prepared for.

To have a blanket introduction across USA would not be sensible as a huge investment would be needed with tracks closed for 6 months. Polytrack is evolving with experience and to do all at once would mean the tracks would be stuck in time.

What is fact is that horses really do run their races on the polytrack cushion.
There is no kickback on polytrack for closing horses. The fibres are too large in any case to cause lung irritation if inhaled - unlike the tiny fibres of asbestos, say. After about 5 years the wax coating and rubber oxidise to dust which can clog the drainage - you then ship in fresh polytrack. The surface is practically all-weather for rain and frost. There are strong barrier biases but it is true the longitudinal biases disappear and horses can win from the front or come from behind. Each UK polytrack definitely has its own characteristics so there is a remaining variance. Caught with the slightest positive test for any tiny amount of chemicals leads to severe penalties in UK, so one thing positive USA could do is to ban any drugs on polytrack. Once the public think racing is all fixed by chemists it is a huge turn off for the sport.

RXB
05-22-2006, 04:37 PM
One slight correction: I've been saying that the difference was 20 versus 3. I was mistaken; it was actually 24 - 3. Even further proving the point.

Valuist
05-22-2006, 04:40 PM
There is no kickback on polytrack for closing horses. The fibres are too large in any case to cause lung irritation if inhaled - unlike the tiny fibres of asbestos, say.

Maybe that's the case in the U.K. but it definitely is not the case at Turfway. The kickback at Turfway is quite considerable.

Joe L.
05-22-2006, 05:56 PM
Here is a link to some Poly info....The video takes a while to load. http://www.polytrack.com/presentation/index.html (http://www.polytrack.com/presentation/index.html)
Thanks Pony :cool:

Lefty
05-22-2006, 08:14 PM
I've heard that the CA racing board has mandated this stuff be put on every major track in CA. Also it's supposed to be put on Keenland. I think this stuff needs much more testing. The blowback on TP seems to be a lot.

Tom
05-22-2006, 08:50 PM
Who pays for all this mandated stuff?
If the industry were really concerned with horse's well being, they would outlaw bute and lasix. This is the stuff that, as predicted when it went legal, has weakened the breed.

dccprez
05-23-2006, 01:12 PM
Um, what is Turfway winter racing, if not primarily a haven for cheap horses that are more likely to break down? The September meet isn't exactly a class-fest either-- Ellis Park Part Deux, really.

To reiterate; ONE track, ONE meet does not equal a "study".

dccprez
05-23-2006, 01:19 PM
Even allowing for the modest sample size, that gap is very unlikely to be generated by pure randomness. Not impossible, but decidedly improbable. 20 to 3 is a large difference.

Interesting point - and it MAY prove to be wholly accurate...

But it is difficult to back up the statement that it is "improbable" - and certainly not "decidely improbale" - until you factor in EVERY component some of which are the number of total races, total entrants, weather conditions, type of races, filles vs. colts, mean temperatures, age of entrants. etc. etc. and to establish a base-line and THEN find a set of non-poly track years with similar conditions.

Again, it may prove that the PT is, in fact, a genuinely huge difference but without solid data we cant be certain...

robert99
05-23-2006, 04:11 PM
Valuist,

You may be interested in the video playbacks of today's polytrack racing at Kempton on the racingpost site. These show that polytrack has no kickback above the pasterns. Earlier materials used to plaster horse and jockey in stinging sand. How significant kickback has come about at Turfways Park with the same material is a mystery, unless Homer Simpson got the contract or AlQaeda have reversed local gravity.

http://www.racingpost.co.uk/horses/race_monitor.sd?crs=KEM&r_date=2006-5-23&flag=0

Need to register (free) then go to Results/ Kempton and click on video replay icon for any of the races.

JustRalph
05-23-2006, 05:35 PM
To reiterate; ONE track, ONE meet does not equal a "study".


Amen............

kenwoodallpromos
05-23-2006, 06:41 PM
Who pays for all this mandated stuff?
If the industry were really concerned with horse's well being, they would outlaw bute and lasix. This is the stuff that, as predicted when it went legal, has weakened the breed.
_________________________
You and I pay, who else?

fouroneone
05-23-2006, 07:19 PM
Who paid for the rail covers over the rails to protect jockeys from being impaled? Who pays the asst. starters salary so there is one per horse? Who paid for the safer barriers at Nascar/Indy events.

Raise takeout one percent or something, who cares........this is humans/animals lives we are talking about here.

Just like when helmets were made law in certain states or seat belts were made law, there will be nay sayers and fighters who will insist that there is no evidence, but if all this costs a billion dollars to do, and one jockey is saved frm being paralyzed or one horse doesnt break down when he would have on the dirt then it was worth every penny.

DJofSD
05-23-2006, 08:10 PM
The day they mandate it at every track is the day I stop playing the horses

I'll miss your money at DMR in 2007. Please wager as many races as you can during the DMR 2006 meeting since that'll be the last time they run over the dirt. :)

RXB
05-23-2006, 09:24 PM
Interesting point - and it MAY prove to be wholly accurate...

But it is difficult to back up the statement that it is "improbable" - and certainly not "decidely improbale" - until you factor in EVERY component some of which are the number of total races, total entrants, weather conditions, type of races, filles vs. colts, mean temperatures, age of entrants. etc. etc. and to establish a base-line and THEN find a set of non-poly track years with similar conditions.

Again, it may prove that the PT is, in fact, a genuinely huge difference but without solid data we cant be certain...

I understand what you're saying, but the fact is that the samples are comparable. The TP September meet and the winter meet comprised both samples: one for 04/05 and the other for 05/06. The total number of races in each sample is approximately equal. The mean temperatures over a five-month span are not going to be very different, and wouldn't have that much of an effect anyway. And TP is TP; the races are going to be generally of the same nature from year to year.

So we are talking about very comparable samples here, and the count is 24 catastrophic breakdowns on dirt versus three on Poly.

cj
05-23-2006, 09:33 PM
...Raise takeout one percent or something, who cares........this is humans/animals lives we are talking about here...


I would care. Why not cut purses a little to pay for it? How about jockey fees? Why is it always the horse player? We pay purses anyway. I say we cut back on those rather than taking more from our pocket, which hurts the business in the long run anyway.

RXB
05-23-2006, 09:36 PM
Right on. Besides, they shouldn't need to skim anything from anywhere. If there are more horses and more races because the horses stay fitter, the handle should go up. Plus, there are major savings on maintenance costs.

JPinMaryland
05-23-2006, 09:51 PM
You do realize that while encouraging, this sample size is entirely too small to rely upon. Pure randomness could easily come up with stats like that after one meet.

Does Turfway have any data past last year? If they averaged at least 15-20 catastrophic breakdowns for the last 10 years, and then the first year with Polytrack, they only had 3, THAT would mean something!

I dont know if you have ever taken a course in statistics PA, but it would seem that the sample from turfway would certainly be of signficant size to draw some conclusions at least at that park, at that time of year with those types of horses.

Remember the sample size is not just 24 vs 3. It is the number of horses that actually ran in the meet. Assuming a breakdown rate of 500-1, then you are probably talking about a sample size of 12,000 horse starts for each year. That's probably not a random accident that you are looking at.

12,000 is certainly large enuf to start having some confidence. Even a sample size of 40-50 begins to start it..

RXB
05-23-2006, 10:56 PM
Even a sample size of 40-50 begins to start it..

Well, not with a breakdown rate of a few hundred to one, or (in the case of Polytrack) a few thousand to one...

But with samples as reasonably comparable as these, it's very unlikely that other factors, including randomness, can explain such a wide margin. Polytrack is clearly the safer surface in terms of preventing serious injuries to horses.

PaceAdvantage
05-24-2006, 12:57 AM
If you don't like my randomness argument, try this doozie on for size.....

Maybe the breakdown rate decreased sharply at Turfway not because of the Polytrack surface, but because track maintenance was being super careful in grooming this brand new surface. Perhaps they put in a lot more TLC into their day to day maintenance then they would had this been the same old dirt surface they are used to taking care of.

I'm not saying this is true, I'm just saying it's a possible cause as to why the breakdown rate decreased....not necessarily because of Polytrack. In my opinion, there is not enough out there (yet) to support a rapid switch to this new surface nationwide.

RXB
05-24-2006, 01:35 AM
Man, you are really fishin' now.

toetoe
05-24-2006, 01:47 AM
Why not just training tracks with the fake stuff? Isn't the training where 99% of the running and the injuries happen?

Those of us who quit altogether over this won't be missed, as it's becoming a lottery/slot machine sport. They're wooing the mindless hatpin-method folks almost exclusively, it seems.

PaceAdvantage
05-24-2006, 03:23 AM
Man, you are really fishin' now.

Am I......? Who's to say?

Valuist
05-24-2006, 10:32 AM
Valuist,

You may be interested in the video playbacks of today's polytrack racing at Kempton on the racingpost site. These show that polytrack has no kickback above the pasterns. Earlier materials used to plaster horse and jockey in stinging sand. How significant kickback has come about at Turfways Park with the same material is a mystery, unless Homer Simpson got the contract or AlQaeda have reversed local gravity.

http://www.racingpost.co.uk/horses/race_monitor.sd?crs=KEM&r_date=2006-5-23&flag=0

Need to register (free) then go to Results/ Kempton and click on video replay icon for any of the races.

I really don't care if there's kickback at Kempton since I don't bet the U.K. I do play Kentucky racing and I am not making this up; the kickback was considerable at Turfway. More than even a conventional dirt track. Just watch the races there. Watch the jockeys, the majority of whom wear masks to avoid breathing in the materials that are kicked back at them. I can't comment on Kempton but unless you've seen Turfway, I don't think you can comment on it.

RXB
05-24-2006, 10:36 AM
One of the advantages of Polytrack is that it doesn't need as much "TLC" to maintain as a dirt surface. It doesn't need constant "grooming" and maintenance the way dirt surfaces do. So that argument is not only unfounded, it is counter to the actual facts.

And Toetoe, you know very well that 99% of thoroughbred injuries do not occur on the training tracks, so why say something like that? By the way, most thoroughbreds train on the very tracks upon which they race.

Tom
05-24-2006, 10:48 AM
How is it that someone with oyur obvious expertise is not employeed in the industry as a czar of somehting?

Read my lips - one short fall season doesnt prove anything.
and how do YOU know what toetoe tninks? And do you have stats top back up your 99% claim?

RXB
05-24-2006, 11:01 AM
One short fall season and one lengthy winter season.

I'm going by what is on the books. And I did take a few stats courses and did pretty well in them, so I have a reasonable idea of what it takes to build a significant level of confidence. I know the sample is only five months, but 24 to 3 is a large gap.

As far as considering myself a "czar" or expert, I've posted my opinions on this board about 700 times in two years. Basically, about one post per day. Not an outrageous rate. There are a couple of subjects that I care about rather deeply and reversing the trend of broken-down animals is one of them. Most of what I've seen and read suggests that Polytrack is a definite step in the right direction. That's all.

Finally, I'm not sure about "how do you know what Toetoe thinks?" I'm going by his exact quote: "Isn't the training where 99% of the running and the injuries happen?" BTW, I have no problems with Toetoe. He's seems like a decent guy; we're just on the opposite side of the fence on this particular issue. I can argue without taking personal offence. (99% of the time. :) )

robert99
05-24-2006, 05:02 PM
I really don't care if there's kickback at Kempton since I don't bet the U.K. I do play Kentucky racing and I am not making this up; the kickback was considerable at Turfway. More than even a conventional dirt track. Just watch the races there. Watch the jockeys, the majority of whom wear masks to avoid breathing in the materials that are kicked back at them. I can't comment on Kempton but unless you've seen Turfway, I don't think you can comment on it.

V,

I am not commenting on Turfway, I am commenting on polytrack. There is no kickback on any polytrack in UK. (If you want to watch the videos that show this then they are still on the site - no masks - no covering with sand). If you have not got that no kickback advantage at Turfway then alarm bells should be ringing as this is not the material that will provide the claimed advantages for wider use in the States.

46zilzal
05-24-2006, 05:10 PM
it holds up in inclement weather, but what is it like after the sun beats down on it all day long? How does this surface react to ADDING amounts of water to it?

robert99
05-25-2006, 06:05 PM
it holds up in inclement weather, but what is it like after the sun beats down on it all day long? How does this surface react to ADDING amounts of water to it?

46zilzal,

High temperatures and sunlight gradually break down and oxidise the rubber and wax components. The material may go more to dust like in about 5 years.
Mechanical harrowing etc also causes gradual deterioration.
Adding small amounts of water and rolling binds the surface tighter and the going gets faster. Large amounts of water drain off rapidly as the base that polytrack is laid on is very permeable and its slopes drain water away.

Tor Ekman
05-27-2006, 08:52 AM
By JERRY BOSSERT
DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/story/421293p-355670c.html


Del Mar, Santa Anita and Hollywood Park all will be required to install a synthetic track, replacing their dirt ovals, by Jan. 1, 2008, after the California Horse Racing Board officially approved the move Thursday.

Chairman Richard B. Shapiro said it was incumbent on the board to deal with the unacceptable problem of racehorse deaths and injuries, and the mandate for synthetic surfaces is part of the solution.

"While it is not just racing surfaces causing the problem, it certainly is a contributing factor," Shapiro said.

The board's action followed several months of discussions, study, and research into the merits of synthetic surfaces, including presentations to the industry by representatives of four different polymer-based surfaces: Polytrack, Tapeta, Cushion Surface and StaLok. All four surfaces include a mixture of fibers and sand coated with wax, which is installed over a vertical drainage system.

Turfway Park, in Kentucky, has been using Polytrack since August and issued this promising release when its meet closed on April 6.

"During the 2005 winter/spring meet, 14 horses suffered catastrophic breakdowns; i.e., on-track injuries that resulted in the death of the horse by euthanasia. During the same meet in 2006, that number was zero. Since the track opened for racing on Sept. 7, 2005, through the close of the 2006 winter/spring meet, three horses have suffered catastrophic breakdowns on track. During the same period in 2004-2005, 24 horses suffered such breakdowns."

Craig Fravel, executive vice president of the Del Mar Thoroughbred Club, referred to the Preakness Stakes and the injury to Barbaro when he said, "I don't want to pretend that the injury would not have happened if there had been Polytrack (at Pimlico), but racing can no longer get along with saying that's all part of horse racing. I think our actions in California will show the way for a lot of people around the country."

The New York Racing Association currently is stuck in limbo as its franchise expires on Dec. 31, 2007, and it doesn't have the money to pay for the new surface. "We would like additional time to study alternative track surfaces such as Polytrack and make a more informed decision," said NYRA senior VP Bill Nader. "While it is true that we do not have the necessary funds available to make that type of investment, the truth is that this a bid decision and we prefer to be cautious in our approach."

Lefty
05-27-2006, 12:11 PM
Yeah, this CA board really gort it togeether. Gordon Jones reports there was 1 member that had to ask what a furlong was.
On THE RACEDAY LAS VEGAS radio show this morn. it was reported that this Polyturf comes in 4 diff types. Also GJ says the statistics at TP shows that there's a greater disparity between the 1st place finisher and last place finisher than on dirt and that there's not been a study of possibe soft tissue damage in horses. Soft tissue damage can take a while to show up.
OUCH!

Lefty
05-27-2006, 12:14 PM
GJ, also says the Polyturf has not been kind to early speed.

BIG49010
05-27-2006, 05:38 PM
They are excavating as you read this at Keeneland, a friend sent me some pictures the other day.


Golden Rail RIP :(

takeout
05-27-2006, 05:48 PM
http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/horseracing/bal-sp.tracks27may27,0,2755152.story?coll=bal-sports-horse

[snip]
"If we ever decided to go to a Polytrack, it would not be in response to Saturday's incident," Raffetto said.
[snip]
"Trainers never complain about our track surfaces or that we speed up the track surfaces for big races. Our track stays the same for every race. We run everything under normal track maintenance. And I'll take our racetrack surface over any Polytrack surface out there."
[snip]

Never sped up surfaces for big races? Wow.

Valuist
05-30-2006, 10:32 AM
I would not be surprised to see the California tracks carding more turf races than ever before. Not every single trainer or owner wants Polytrack and I think you'll see horses who have ok but not tremendous grass pedigrees get their chances on the lawn much earlier than they normally would have. If Polytrack means more turf racing, maybe its a positive.

46zilzal
05-30-2006, 11:10 AM
don't think many or the major ovals can stand too much turf racing as the course would be a mess after not too long.

Valuist
05-30-2006, 11:12 AM
Depends whether or not they have a movable rail. If they do, theres no reason why they should ruin the course.

GeTydOn
05-30-2006, 11:58 AM
If tracks had the option of carding more turf races then they already do they'd be doing it. Don't turf races generate the best wagering dollers? They sure tend to offer the best betting oppotunities.

robert99
05-30-2006, 07:33 PM
V,

The traction and cushion on polytrack are close to good quality turf (without the divots) so what would be the point of wearing out the turf tracks when polytrack provides the same benefit for the horse?

robert

tholl
05-30-2006, 09:01 PM
V,

The traction and cushion on polytrack are close to good quality turf (without the divots) so what would be the point of wearing out the turf tracks when polytrack provides the same benefit for the horse?

robert

I have not read this whole thread but in England do you see a different type of horse winning on the polytrack vs the turf ? --meaning different pedigree/conformation or running style.

robert99
05-31-2006, 05:14 PM
tholl,

We have 4 all weather tracks. The 4th at Kempton opened this year and replaces the Grade 1 turf racing with polytrack. It is a bit too early to say whether good Kempton AW winners can win top class races on turf. Kempton is also right handed. The other 3 AW tracks are for mostly lower class horses. They have been used for preparing horses to win early season races on the turf where fitness counts.

On all the AW tracks the turns are tight, as in USA. Those horses with a short stride are able to win on turf (tight tracks and sprints) and polytrack. They can win from the front or off the pace. Long striding, big and powerful turf horses cannot handle tight tracks at all well and need long stretches of level or rising, straight ground to excel.

Mostly all the top class trainers use polytrack gallops to train their turf horses and claim it is the artifical surface most like turf. They have no science to prove that - just their general opinion.