Have We Seen The Last Breeders' Cup On Dirt?

[Bobzilla]

It seems to me his would seem to be the direction we're headed at the present time.

For the first time in the history of the event, the 2008 Breeders' Cup will take place at a venue where "dirt" championships will in large part be decided based on a synthetic surface performance. To date, I personally haven't heard if a decision has been made in regard to the 2009 venue. I don't believe it has. I do believe, however, that there will be much pressure from industry officials on the Breeders' Cup organizers to, from this point on, only chose those sites where "dirt" races can be conducted on a surface which, unfortuately, plays more like synthetic grass rather than synthetic dirt.

Because of this, I believe we might have seen our last BC at Churchill Downs, though I heard recently that CD doesn't particularly care if they ever have one again or not. As we all know, Frank totally ruined the possibility of it ever being held in South Florida again. And Belmont would seem to be out for the time being. Indeed, one can foresee the immense pressure to be placed on whoever ends up with the NY franchise to fall into lockstep and "get with the program" to immediately convert over to a synthetic surface, and to make it snappy. Obedience to this industry mandate will be expected.

IMO, there are many reasons for the industry's rush to convert all of North America's major tracks from a tradtional dirt variation over to Polytrack or one of its cousins. I wouldn't suggest that sincere humanitarian concerns would not be on the list, but I certainly do not think that equine welfare would be on the top of the industry's list. It's obvious there are many short term economic gains to be realized by turning the entire world of North American Main Track Horse Racing totally on its head by converting. We're all familiar with the larger fields, horses running more often, owners protecting their investments, etc., etc; One I don't see mentioned often is that it represents an internationalization of the sport, the desire to broaden American racing's exposure abroad and to broaden its appeal, much like what the NFL is currently doing. Seems to me, Euros have always had a disdain for our dirt racing anyway. Many of the trainers who have been vocal in their desire for this change are ex-pats. The tragic end to George Washington's life this past weekend has been a rallying cry for Euros to demand we in America change, a call which will be heard loud and clear by the Breeders' Cup, though I don't recall hearing any such outrage and demands for Arlington to covert its grass course to synthetic in the wake of the Landseer tragedy in 2002.

Personally, I have concerns over the rampant change to switch over and question the wisdom of doing it so expeditiously. I do understand, and relate to the sense of compassion those who are strongly in favor of conversion have towards the racehorse. I do not believe, however, that those in that camp have a market on compassion.

So what do you think? Was the 2007 Classic held at Monmouth Park on the 27th of October 2007 the last time a Breeders' Cup race will ever be held on a traditional dirt surface?

[betovernetcapper]

I voted no, but do acknowledge a disquieting trend in that direction. For a disgusting PITA like article on the subject, check out

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/158689.html

[Bobzilla]

Thanks for the link.

I hadn't read that article until just now though I saw it was referred to in a DRF article by Jay Hovdey. It illustrates perfectly the European perspective of racing on conventional dirt.

[Bruddah]

on a well written post. Additionally, you covered most of the points, with the exception of introducing more Euro breeding into American racing. It's obvious the money to be made is in Breeding.

As I see it, if it was just a matter of racing Horses between Continents then Grass racing would suffice and unifying whether these races would be 'left or right turn' would be sufficient. This nothing more than a "Blue Blood" conspiracy to get rid of dirt sire influences in the breeding shed. (JMHO) ;)

[PaceAdvantage]

I'm glad you mentioned Hovdey's article, as it brings up some interesting points. I like the way he started his article by relating the death of a lightly raced 2yo the same Saturday that GW broke down at Monmouth. This 2yo died on an ARTIFICIAL track, in a race at Santa Anita to be exact.
So Hovdey puts into perspective, once again, this silly artificial surface rallying cry. He also brought up a good point in questioning why racing refuses to entertain the notion of postponing a marquee event such as the BC when course conditions turn up borderline treacherous as they did last Saturday.

He points to events such as The Masters, Wimbledon, etc. that have postponed their events in the past due to the fact that the surface itself, and not the players, would play the major role in the outcome of the event.

[Bobzilla]

I agree that the option of postponing a Breeders' Cup event when confronted with biblical rains probably needs to be explored. There are probably all kinds of logistical and political issues that would need to be considered if the organizers were to prepare for such a contingency. I also don't know what degree of latitude would be afforded by the sponsers. Events such as the Daytona 500 and the Super Bowl enjoy mass popularity, more so than the Breeders' Cup, so I'm not sure if the sponsers would be as flexible. Then again, I'm sure the sponsers would much rather sponser an event on a Monday afternoon where all the athletic participants came out of the competition in one piece rather than sponsering one on a Saturday afternoon in which a tragedy occured. Racing fans are passionate about the BC so I'm sure planning for the possibility of a few more days out of town could be accomodated by most.

[alysheba88]

http://paulmoranattheraces.blogspot.com/2007/10/in-defense-of-dirt.html

[Bobzilla]

It's good to see some turf writers still feel free to express their true conviction on the topic. One is always subject to instant vilification when questioning the wisdom of installing synthetic surfaces on American tracks. Either you're for it or you're pro horse death... period!, no in between. Of course that was always part of the plan even before Turfway was converted.

TVG's Matt Carothers initially felt free to express his concerns about the trend. Then suddenly one day on Blinkers Off he made what almost sounded like a public apology for ever questioning the decision for American tracks to convert. An exaggeration for sure, but it's almost as if he'd been taken into some dark room and had had a bright light shined into his face and the burning end of a cigarette applied to his skin to assure immediate compliance.

There are many who stand to enjoy an exciting windfall on the promotion and installation of these surfaces, that much is true. IMO It's still too early to know for sure, but if these synthetic tracks are any safer than I would suggest they're only marginally safer, at least at the present time. Whether marginally safer justifies the fundamental change to the dynamics of American main track races I suppose is a topic open to reasonable discussion.

[PaceAdvantage]

I agree with much of what Moran wrote, but I don't see how he can come to the conclusion that the Monmouth surface had nothing to do with GW's breakdown last week. After all, he wasn't running on air, or swimming in the ocean. He was running on the Monmouth dirt course. It could have very well had EVERTHING to do with the breakdown, or maybe it only had a little bit to do with it....we will never really know.

[Steve 'StatMan']

So much for the new BC Dirt Mile. :rolleyes:

Maybe they'll change the names around, and have the BC Mile on dirt/syntheic, and rename turf event to the BC Turf Mile. (Sponsored by ChemLawn?) :cool:

[Bobzilla]

With the possibility of the Santa Anita Winter 2008 meet being moved across town to Hollywood Park because of the current drainage issues, I cannot help but wonder what must be going through the minds of the Breeders' Cup people at this time. October is a long ways away, but even with the amount of time available to totally overhaul the Cushion surface at Santa Anita, I have to think the Breeders' Cup organizers must be experiencing a degree of queasiness over the situation. It will be interesting to see if they remain commited to conducting the event at Santa Anita given the assurances they will undoubtably receive, or if they will stave off any further uncertainty as soon as possible by exploring the possibility of holding the event at Hollywood Park.


On one of the December episodes of TVG's Blinkers Off, show host Matt Carothers mentioned he had heard the rumor the Breeders' Cup organizers were considering holding the 2009 Breeders' Cup, as well as the 2008 Breeders' Cup, at Santa Anita Park. Two years in a row at SA. Has anyone else heard this rumor? If so, it would seem to bear further evidence to the belief that the Breeders' Cup plans to only conduct their future events, which often go a long way in helping to settle "dirt" championships, on synthetic racing surfaces. I have heard interviews with Greg Avioli where his comments on synthetic surfaces would suggest a trend in this direction. The Euros are definitely calling for it in the wake of the GW tragedy, almost hinging their future participation on this, and the BC would undoubtably prefer to do all it can do to avaoid another PR disaster such as that. Anyone else heard about SA in 2009 op top of 2008?

[Bobzilla]

Seems like an appropriate time for me to briefly dredge up a thread I opened in the wake of last year's sea-of-goo Breeders' Cup. I asked fellow board members to take part in a poll and indicate whether or not they felt we had seen the last Breeders' Cup conducted on traditional dirt surfaces. It wasn't a vote on what direction we as individuals would prefer to see, but rather what our instincts told us at that time about the probable direction the Breeders' Cup people would most likely decide to take. As I believe synthetic surfaces are a distinctly different surface altogether and, along with the fact I believe much more could have always been done to make traditional dirt tracks safer, I would prefer to see them always conducted on real dirt. Yet at the time of my poll, my insticts told me I had witnessed the last BC race on real dirt.

Of the 60 people who voted, 53 felt that once again we would see "dirt" championships helped decided based on results of a Breeders' Cup event held on a traditional dirt surface. 7 people, myself included, felt that the Breeders' Cup would decidedly take on an activist role and from that point on swear to never conduct the event on traditional dirt again.

This topic is going to heat up in the weeks to come. I hope the debate can be a civil one. But just as the unfortunate rash of catastrophic breakdowns presents a crisis situation for the industry and one that needs to be dealt with, so does the reality that there still exists a significant resistence among some owners, horsemen, and most notably players and fans to the synthetic revolution based on arguments that are not without merit.

Perhaps in a few weeks I will open another poll on this subject asking the same question I asked last November. It would be interesting to compare the numbers.

[Southieboy]

As of this moment, Woodbine is the favorite for the 2010 Breeders' Cup

[46zilzal]

As of this moment, Woodbine is the favorite for the 2010 Breeders' Cup
Great, THAT Poly runs like Dirt and the Europeans love the turf course as it is the closest thing to one of theirs.

[cj]

Great, THAT Poly runs like Dirt and the Europeans love the turf course as it is the closest thing to one of theirs.

Repeatedly saying the same thing doesn't make it true. At 6f and less, sure, but that is about it.

[cj]

We'll see how happy the horsemen are when the European shippers win all the races. The only reason they haven't shipped for big money races in SoCal is that they don't know any better or because the dollar is in the tank.

[46zilzal]

Repeatedly saying the same thing doesn't make it true. At 6f and less, sure, but that is about it.
Your reality is far differnet from mine DOCUMENTED from years and years of playing that surface. BS, their 7 furlong is unique in all of racing and their routes are early based, always have been.

I often get the idea it is an automatic, knee jerk reaction with you to disagree with everything I write just to expose your being obtuse.

[cj]

Your reality is far differnet from mine DOCUMENTED from years and years of playing that surface. BS, their 7 furlong is unique in all of racing and their routes are early based, always have been.

I often get the idea it is an automatic, knee jerk reaction with you to disagree with everything I write just to expose your being obtuse.

Not true. I've repeatedly posted facts to back up my opinion about Woodbine. The winning router is running about 3/5ths of a second slower to the pace call in relation to final time since the surface switched. This has nothing to do with position, but is based on energy expended. It is fact. There really is no way to spin it any other way.

If that is obtuse, guilty as charged. If you want act like a kid and play name calling, have fun.

[Tom]

I've seen CJ in person,...he is not fat at all!

[classhandicapper]

I've seen CJ in person,...he is not fat at all!

:lol:

[cj]

I've seen CJ in person,...he is not fat at all!

Hmmm...I present facts and as usual, there is no reply.

I am still trying to find the first subject in which 46 is not an expert.

[Charlie D]

Hello guys


During this years Royal Ascot meet, RUK interveiwed a lady (can't remember her name) from NTRA and when asked about the Breeders Cup in the future, she stated the Breeders Cup meet in the future will be held at major tracks like Santa Anita, Churchill and Belmont


So unless Churchill, Belmont etc go synthetic, Breeders Cup should be back on Dirt in a couple of years

[Tom]

Hmmm...I present facts and as usual, there is no reply.

I am still trying to find the first subject in which 46 is not an expert.


Dodging! :lol: