Legal question regarding Santa Anita situation?

[so.cal.fan]

Any lawyers on board here?
I would like to know why Santa Anita, a privately owned business can't sue the CHRB?
I know they are a state agency which governs and licenses racetracks and their dates.
A man at Santa Anita told me you can't sue the CHRB.
Why not?
I don't know all the facts here, and I'm not advocating anyone should sue the CHRB.
That said, they did ORDER the major California tracks to install a synthetic surface.
What are the legalities here, if any?

Just curious,
so.cal.fan

[garyoz]

I'm not a lawyer but I would point out that the surface at Golden Gate is holding up just fine. CHRB did not specify the vendor or specs to the extent that SA had to select the specific surface it has. I would think that would weaken any argument for culpability. It seems like it is just another course of business (bad) decision by Magna. Bad choice of vendor.

[so.cal.fan]

That makes sense, Gary, exept, contrary to all we are reading and hearing about Golden Gate......
a vet at Santa Anita commented that several horses are starting to come up with injuries on that surface.
Another man commented that horses were evolved to handle certain natural surfaces. Dirt and grass for example.
Not, synthetic substances. His theory was that since they were not evolved to handle such surfaces, different types of injuries will occur.
He may be sort of right here.
While I am quoting opinions, a leading clocker at Santa Anita opined that all these surfaces will wear out and wear out fast, including the new GG surface.
I understand Hollywood is already showing signs of wear, will they be able to handle a Santa Anita meet on that surface, followed by their own Spring/Summer meet? Don't know. Perhaps, Santa Anita will run at Hollywood and Hollywood will run at Santa Anita.
The huge consensus at Santa Anita is that horses have been running on dirt and turf for hundreds of years and results have been pretty satisfactory.
Why change?

[garyoz]

I would agree tracks have been in a rush to convert to artificial surfaces (esp. the regulatory mandate in CA) However, I'm probably in the minority on PA, but I like synthetic surfaces so far. I think that Keeneland and Turfway experiences have been positive. Turfway in particular, with its freeze/thaw cycle. Likewise I think Woodbine & Arlington (although I have less knowledge of them) have had overall positive or comparable to dirt experiences. Also I think that just about any dirt track would have cancelled with 5 inches of rain (that's the amount the track GM said they had when interviewed on HRTV). Hence, I would think that any legal arguments would be weak.

As a handicapper I really like betting synthetic tracks--(although that's irrelevent to this discussion).

[HUSKER55]

I am starting to wonder if Santa Anita can reopen at all with this last episode. The problem is the drainage system does not work but Hollywood Park does. How does a contractor make that kind of mistake? Or an engineer either for that matter.

I am suspecting that something is seriously wrong and this track will not recover and will have to be rebuilt.

[so.cal.fan]

You suspect rightly, Husk.
They put asphalt down as a base, put wax on it along with the cushion junk.
It was 110' in August when they did this. I watched them do it.
I know nothing of these things, but it didn't make sense to me what they did at the time......I remember asking friends "won't the wax melt in this heat", in which my friends all answered "that's what we were thinking"!
This is what happened.
The track will obviously have to be redone.
All that said.......the fact remains that these synthetic surfaces do not last very long. They wear out. We have seen it at Hollywood Park.
Del Mar, I don't know. It's polytrack, it's slow. I have no idea if it drains or anything about it.

[Jeff P]

The huge consensus at Santa Anita is that horses have been running on dirt and turf for hundreds of years and results have been pretty satisfactory.
Why change?Funny. That's what I've been thinking all along.

AP and DMR had real problems with horses breaking down prior to installing artificial surfaces. My opinion is that simply re-doing the base and installing a regular dirt surface would have provided the desired result.

In my opinion other tracks did not have real surface problems beforehand. Putting in artificial surfaces at TP, WO, KEE, and GG did nothing to improve the racing... it only lined the pockets of those selling artificial surfaces.

Had AP, DMR, TP, WO, KEE and GG put down new DIRT surfaces, my opinion is that they would have seen the same increases in field size, handle, and purses that came from installing the artificial stuff... IOW I'll make the argument that putting in a new dirt surface at those venues would have produced the same benefits.

As a horse player I would love to see the pendulum swing back the other way - where artificial surfaces are abhorred and a thing of the past. There is a certain aesthetic beauty to the game - which in my opinion is missing whenever I see horses "running" on rubber and wax.

And before anyone thinks otherwise... Yes, I've actually done quite well betting races on rubber and wax. I just think what "they" have done to the game that I love is a travesty.

-jp

.

[whobet]

Another example of Magna destroying our race tracks.

Magna has to go. No more Magna

[so.cal.fan]

You can't blame Magna.
Stronach doesn't want any of his tracks to be synthetic surface.
He was forced to by the CHRB.
So was Del Mar and Hollywood Park.

[David-LV]

Funny. That's what I've been thinking all along.

AP and DMR had real problems with horses breaking down prior to installing artificial surfaces. My opinion is that simply re-doing the base and installing a regular dirt surface would have provided the desired result.

In my opinion other tracks did not have real surface problems beforehand. Putting in artificial surfaces at TP, WO, KEE, and GG did nothing to improve the racing... it only lined the pockets of those selling artificial surfaces.

Had AP, DMR, TP, WO, KEE and GG put down new DIRT surfaces, my opinion is that they would have seen the same increases in field size, handle, and purses that came from installing the artificial stuff... IOW I'll make the argument that putting in a new dirt surface at those venues would have produced the same benefits.
Jeff,

As a horse player I would love to see the pendulum swing back the other way - where artificial surfaces are abhorred and a thing of the past. There is a certain aesthetic beauty to the game - which in my opinion is missing whenever I see horses "running" on rubber and wax.

And before anyone thinks otherwise... Yes, I've actually done quite well betting races on rubber and wax. I just think what "they" have done to the game that I love is a travesty.

-jp

.

I'm sure that most of us agree with you, and that lining the pockets of certain people was the main reason installation of these synthetic surfaces happened. Money Talks.

I think the time has come for all members of the CHRB to hand in their resignation letters.

__________
David

[garyoz]

I am starting to wonder if Santa Anita can reopen at all with this last episode. The problem is the drainage system does not work but Hollywood Park does. How does a contractor make that kind of mistake? Or an engineer either for that matter.

I am suspecting that something is seriously wrong and this track will not recover and will have to be rebuilt.

As posted on another thread, TVG reported that there will be a meeting to discuss relocating the meet to HOL. HRTV did not report the same, nor has any publication at this point. Did see the interview with the SA General Manager on HRTV and he looked really stressed and depressed.

I wonder about blaming Frankie? True CHRB required the change, but other tracks have not had problems approaching this magnitude. Name one thing that Magna has ever done right (maybe launching the Magna 5? or maybe launching HRTV?). I do think most of the blame is with the CHRB. Regulators tend to be idiots or handmaidens to special interests. Interfering in the marketplace often has unintended consequences.

[hibiscus]

Has anyone stopped to consider what the advent of synthetic surfaces has done or will do to the breeding side of the business? Operations that have collectively invested hundreds of millions of dollars in stallions and mares with expectations of producing superior dirt runners now have the carpet pulled out from under them as tracks begin to do away with dirt. Common consensus is that synthetic surfaces play to horses with turf breeding. So now we have turf courses and "dirt" (synth) courses that play like turf. Where are the dirt horses supposed to run? To whom are the breeders with stallions and mares with dirt pedigrees supposed to sell their horses? Who will buy them? What about owners who have made big investments in runners that relish the dirt?

I tend to believe that the order to replace the surfaces was made without any significant study or analysis. I think it was extremely premature. As a traditionalist I miss the dirt and hope the synthetics ultimately go the way of Astroturf. Watching races on a synthetic surface reminds me of watching 1970’s baseball played at Veterans Stadium on that Brady Bunch backyard rug. I think the money that was spent on the installation and maintenance of the synthetic surfaces could have been spent on studies on how to improve the dirt surfaces and probably would have produced some good improvements.

Making a wholesale change to something as fundamental as the surface over which the game is played is very serious. To do it half-cocked and without proper fact-finding is reckless. Imagine the NHL deciding that the ice is causing too many player injuries and therefore the all teams in Toronto, Chicago, and California are going to play floor hockey from now on. It’s too ludicrous to even imagine.

[so.cal.fan]

We discussed this at Del Mar, hibiscus.
Del Mar put in a polytrack, it was very slow and we immediately noticed that horses who were bred to go longer and usually classier breeds were winning more than their share. When you see first time starters by Giant's Causeway winning sprints......it raises some questions.
Horses needed extra stamina to win on that Del Mar track.
Calif. sires like Swiss Yodeler were really at a disadvantage, even in Cal Bred races on that surface.
Even on the lightning fast Santa Anita cushion and the fast Hollywood surface, horses don't throw up an dirt/dust so it doesn't favor the front runners anymore than the others.
Horses can't seem to make a long sustained run. The jockeys rate them like turf races, making a mad dash up the stretch.
They are weird to watch. Jockeys are fooled. No one can say races are fixed by jockeys anymore. It's true. Jockeys think they have a winning horse, only to see it fade at the wire. Or, they think their horse is going nowhere and all of a sudden it fires.
But, you're right about the breeding industry, very good point.
I have to agree with you.

[theiman]

You suspect rightly, Husk.
They put asphalt down as a base, put wax on it along with the cushion junk.
It was 110' in August when they did this. I watched them do it.
I know nothing of these things, but it didn't make sense to me what they did at the time......I remember asking friends "won't the wax melt in this heat", in which my friends all answered "that's what we were thinking"!
This is what happened.
The track will obviously have to be redone.
All that said.......the fact remains that these synthetic surfaces do not last very long. They wear out. We have seen it at Hollywood Park.
Del Mar, I don't know. It's polytrack, it's slow. I have no idea if it drains or anything about it.

So Cal fan
did you ever see them install the drainage pipes at SA?

I only ask as I posted on the DM forum about it. I will copy my post here for others to think about.

Perhaps an interesting observation about the underground drainage system installed at HP vs SA vs DM.

I am giving you the links for the HP picture gallary and the SA slide show. For the SA slide show you may need to install something called Active X control.
Look at the HP link first to get yourself familiar with what to expect. Then go to the SA link.

I see the drainage grid on the HP photo gallery show
http://www.hollywoodpark.com/bet_the_races/racing_news/cushion_track_photo_gallery.html (http://www.hollywoodpark.com/bet_the_races/racing_news/cushion_track_photo_gallery.html)

If you go down to the 8th-11th row of pictures for HP, you can see the grid installed.

When you go to the SA slide show you never see anything like that grid installed
http://www.santaanita.com/cushiontrack/ (http://www.santaanita.com/cushiontrack/)

According to the SA slide show it a picture taken every hour from 12 noon to 5pm from 7/25/07 onward. It is possible that they missed taking pictures or the camera wasnt on for a few days.
However, when was a similar drainage system installed? Maybe they used a different format? I see some white piping in a few shots, but I think that is the inside and outside railing.

Could they have installed something only on the inside rail and outside rail and nothing in the middle of the track??
They also could have installed it before 7/25 and it wasnt part of the slide pictures. I think the track closed for training around the 6th ot 7th of July. But the HP pictures seem to show that they had work to do around the track before the drainage was installed so I would think a similar approach was taken at SA.

Lets add in DM installation.
According to the DM site groundbreaking started on Feb 2nd 2007
the link below takes you to Feb 12th and shows the pipes being installed. By clicking on next you go to the next group of slides. Although DM is poly and not cushion it still needed a similar drainage.
http://www.dmtc.com/season/polytrack.php?date=20070212 (http://www.dmtc.com/season/polytrack.php?date=20070212)

I remember someone once posted on the DM site they remember the drainage installed at SA. I just wonder if it was done similar to HP and DM. Most likely the drainage was put in before the SA slide show started, just strange it wasnt part of the show.

[kenwoodallpromos]

1) Any one can sue anyone including the CHRB they want; in fact 1 reason I was given by Dr. Arthur for the tracks and CHRB not denying stall spaces was that they might get sued.
2) No one was forced to put in synthetic surfaces. But if they did not they could not run races 4+ weeks per year. They could have done what BM did and get an exemption based on soon quitting racing, or ran less than 4 weeks per year, or ran Quarterhorse races.

[kenwoodallpromos]

1) Any one can sue anyone including the CHRB they want; in fact 1 reason I was given by Dr. Arthur for the tracks and CHRB not denying stall spaces was that they might get sued.
"by Jack Shinar
Date Posted: March 29, 2005
Last Updated: April 1, 2005

A determined California horse owner has turned to the courts in her attempt to force the California Horse Racing Board to produce records of its dealings with trainer Frank Monteleone during the investigation of a recently settled civil fraud case.
Mary Frances Rowe filed her lawsuit against the CHRB March 25 in Sacramento County Superior Court. She is seeking a judicial ruling that compels the CHRB, the lone defendant, to comply with the California Public Records Act. No date for a hearing has been set, according to Rowe's attorney, Lisa M. Carlson of Riverside."


2) No one was forced to put in synthetic surfaces. But if they did not they could not run races 4+ weeks per year. They could have done what BM did and get an exemption based on soon quitting racing, or ran less than 4 weeks per year, or ran Quarterhorse races.
"by Jack Shinar
Date Posted: May 26, 2006
Last Updated: May 28, 2006

Synthetic surfaces will be mandatory at major Thoroughbred race tracks in California by the end of next year under a regulatory amendment given final approval by the state's Horse Racing Board on May 25.
The change, which requires the installation of an artificial polymer type surface by Jan. 1, 2008, pertains to any racing association seeking a license "that operates four weeks of continuous Thoroughbred racing in a calendar year."
The Ca satate Government gives the CHRB certain authorities which can be found on the CHRB website.

[so.cal.fan]

Theiman,
I didn't see them put them in!
I've read your post and links, pretty disturbing.
I just don't know how they are going to correct this, I really don't.
It's just hideousl

[so.cal.fan]

Well, Ken.....Santa Anita and Hollywood race a lot more than 4 weeks.
What were they to do?
So does Del Mar.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Well, Ken.....Santa Anita and Hollywood race a lot more than 4 weeks.
What were they to do?
So does Del Mar.
They have to comply with the rules. Here is the citation:

"
Rule No. Rule Title
1433 Application for License to Conduct a Horse Racing Meeting.
Rule Text (a) Unless the Board requires an earlier filing, at least 90 days before the time allocated by the Board for a race meeting to start, the association shall file with the Board an Application for License to Conduct a Horse Racing Meeting, CHRB-17 (Rev. 12/06), which is hereby incorporated by reference. Note: CHRB-17 incorporates by reference, the Personal History Record, CHRB-25A (Rev. 7/93). A California fair shall file with the Board an Application for License to Conduct a Horse Racing Meeting of a California Fair, CHRB-18 (Rev. 12/06), which is hereby incorporated by reference. Copies of the CHRB-17 and CHRB-18 may be obtained at the California Horse Racing Board headquarters office. (b) No racing association that operates four weeks or more of continuous Thoroughbred racing in a calendar year shall be licensed to conduct a horse racing meeting at a facility that has not installed a polymer synthetic type racing surface. This Subsection shall become operative on January 1, 2008. NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 19420 and 19440, Business and Professions Code. Reference: Sections 19480, 19481 and 19562, Business and Professions Code. HISTORY: 1. Amendment filed 8-28-80; effective 9-27-80. 2. Amendment filed 1-11-94; effective 2-10-94. 3. Amendment filed 7-7-95; effective 7-7-95. 4. Amendment filed 6-3-96; effective 7-3-96. 5. Amendment filed 6-19-97; effective 6-19-97. 6. Amendment filed 4-14-98; effective 5-14-98. 7. Amendment filed 10-11-01; effective 11-10-01. 8. Amendment filed 10-12-05; effective 11-11-05. 9. Amendment filed 1-26-07; effective 2-25-07. 10. Amendment filed 5-08-07; effective 6-7-07."

[kenwoodallpromos]

Well, Ken.....Santa Anita and Hollywood race a lot more than 4 weeks.
What were they to do?
So does Del Mar.
They have to comply with the rules. Here is the citation:

"
Rule No. Rule Title
1433 Application for License to Conduct a Horse Racing Meeting.
Rule Text (a) Unless the Board requires an earlier filing, at least 90 days before the time allocated by the Board for a race meeting to start, the association shall file with the Board an Application for License to Conduct a Horse Racing Meeting, CHRB-17 (Rev. 12/06), which is hereby incorporated by reference. Note: CHRB-17 incorporates by reference, the Personal History Record, CHRB-25A (Rev. 7/93). A California fair shall file with the Board an Application for License to Conduct a Horse Racing Meeting of a California Fair, CHRB-18 (Rev. 12/06), which is hereby incorporated by reference. Copies of the CHRB-17 and CHRB-18 may be obtained at the California Horse Racing Board headquarters office. (b) No racing association that operates four weeks or more of continuous Thoroughbred racing in a calendar year shall be licensed to conduct a horse racing meeting at a facility that has not installed a polymer synthetic type racing surface. This Subsection shall become operative on January 1, 2008. NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 19420 and 19440, Business and Professions Code. Reference: Sections 19480, 19481 and 19562, Business and Professions Code. HISTORY: 1. Amendment filed 8-28-80; effective 9-27-80. 2. Amendment filed 1-11-94; effective 2-10-94. 3. Amendment filed 7-7-95; effective 7-7-95. 4. Amendment filed 6-3-96; effective 7-3-96. 5. Amendment filed 6-19-97; effective 6-19-97. 6. Amendment filed 4-14-98; effective 5-14-98. 7. Amendment filed 10-11-01; effective 11-10-01. 8. Amendment filed 10-12-05; effective 11-11-05. 9. Amendment filed 1-26-07; effective 2-25-07. 10. Amendment filed 5-08-07; effective 6-7-07."

Here is a Bloodhorse quote from Shapiro:
"I still believe in our decision. These synthetic surfaces, despite their newness and the learning curve to properly maintain them, have contributed to a nearly 50-percent decrease in equine racing fatalities."
I guess Stronach, Magna, and Santa Anita can try to sue if the races are moved to Hollywood; then they can testify as to why they changed the size of the sand to a smaller size that clogs the drains and was an alteration from Hollywood's, and Steve Woods can testify as to why he quits as track super after 1 week of the installation process.
What Santa Anita was to do was what Hollywood did (correctly).

[so.cal.fan]

Thanks, Ken,
I have an attorney who will like to read this.
She asked me about a law suit.
Her and her husband are land use attorneys, now living in New Zealand.

[APguy]

.
AP and DMR had real problems with horses breaking down prior to installing artificial surfaces. My opinion is that simply re-doing the base and installing a regular dirt surface would have provided the desired result.

In my opinion other tracks did not have real surface problems beforehand. Putting in artificial surfaces at TP, WO, KEE, and GG did nothing to improve the racing... it only lined the pockets of those selling artificial surfaces.

Had AP, DMR, TP, WO, KEE and GG put down new DIRT surfaces, my opinion is that they would have seen the same increases in field size, handle, and purses that came from installing the artificial stuff... IOW I'll make the argument that putting in a new dirt surface at those venues would have produced the same benefits .

Just a FYI, AP DID put a new dirt surface just over a year before they installed poly. The problem that I was seeing, was that the horses that were "breaking down" were also racing at the max dates alotted. In one instance, I had a horse that had to get put down the first week of June, still listed as a scratch a week and a half later.

If horses race without some kind of "decent" rest, we wouldn't be much of a problem.

[Jeff P]

Sorry to hear that one of your horses had to be put down. That's a shame, really.

I was not aware AP had put in a new dirt surface the prior year. Seems like whoever did it failed to do it properly. Just wondering out loud... did they put in a new base? Or did they just scrape away the old dirt and replace it with a different mixture... new dirt?

Aside from the breakdowns, what I was seeing while watching races run on the dirt surface duing the AP 2006 meet was a "dead spot" along the rail between the quarter pole and the top of the stretch. It seemed like any horse with the lead who ran over that spot stopped badly. It also seemed like the riders were afraid to go to the lead and tried to take back so they could circle around the field on the outside and avoid that spot. To my eyes as I watched races being run there it affected the outcome of a LOT of races.


-jp

.

[Indulto]

Has anyone stopped to consider what the advent of synthetic surfaces has done or will do to the breeding side of the business? Operations that have collectively invested hundreds of millions of dollars in stallions and mares with expectations of producing superior dirt runners now have the carpet pulled out from under them as tracks begin to do away with dirt. Common consensus is that synthetic surfaces play to horses with turf breeding. So now we have turf courses and "dirt" (synth) courses that play like turf. Where are the dirt horses supposed to run? To whom are the breeders with stallions and mares with dirt pedigrees supposed to sell their horses? Who will buy them? What about owners who have made big investments in runners that relish the dirt?

I tend to believe that the order to replace the surfaces was made without any significant study or analysis. I think it was extremely premature. As a traditionalist I miss the dirt and hope the synthetics ultimately go the way of Astroturf. Watching races on a synthetic surface reminds me of watching 1970’s baseball played at Veterans Stadium on that Brady Bunch backyard rug. I think the money that was spent on the installation and maintenance of the synthetic surfaces could have been spent on studies on how to improve the dirt surfaces and probably would have produced some good improvements.

Making a wholesale change to something as fundamental as the surface over which the game is played is very serious. To do it half-cocked and without proper fact-finding is reckless. Imagine the NHL deciding that the ice is causing too many player injuries and therefore the all teams in Toronto, Chicago, and California are going to play floor hockey from now on. It’s too ludicrous to even imagine.It could be argued that breeders are responsible for the conversion to synthetic surfaces in CA because they have de-emphasized soundness and stamina in favor of precocity and speed. Indeed it was breeders who chose to install it at KEE.

The remaining traditional venues hosting the Triple Crown events and preps are unlikely to substitute synthetic for dirt, So quality dirt horses will probably continue to run at GP, FG, CD, PIM, BEL, SAR, and HAW; hopefully with fuller fields. BC preps will be populated according to the host surface. Non-turf preps at SA and TP should prove more competitive than those at BEL and HAW in 2008.

SoCal tracks will continue to make progress with larger field sizes on functioning synthetic surfaces, and then prosper when a) breeders adjust to them, and b) maintenance experience becomes sufficiently broad and stable to allow data to prove whether it is the physical implementations or the jockeys that are more responsible for failures to adjust.

It may be too early to throw the baby out with the rainwater. ;)

There seemed to be considerable research and debate prior to the CHRB mandate, but industry politics forced simultaneous rather than phased implementation, and apparently little consideration was given to SA’s role as an important Triple Crown prep venue. It initially appeared that SA made a conservative decision to use Cushion Track after its demonstrated functionality at HOL, but obviously wet weather performance wasn’t tested.

Any future sales by the vendor of cushion Track would require the situation at SA be corrected, but maybe nothing can save their reputation now, and a lawsuit might just put them out of business with little remaining to satisfy a judgment in SA’s favor.

The CHRB is about to join the beleaguered NYRA as the target of politicians and journalists if the following blog entry is any indication:

http://paulmoranattheraces.blogspot.com/2008/01/california-horse-racing-board-which-is.html
Welcome to Hollywood
By Paul MoranThe California Horse Racing Board, which is ultimately responsible for the mess in which Santa Anita …
… will this week meet to consider moving the meeting to Hollywood Park

With the region pounded by winter storms over the weekend, there is really no hope of salvaging the track at Santa Anita any time soon. The aforementioned board, in the jerk of a knee, mandated that the state’s major track install synthetic surfaces or face the loss of racing dates. …

… Ultimately it is almost inevitable that Santa Anita will be forced to remove the malfunctioning drainage system and resurface the track, the cost of which will be enormous when added to the ancillary loss of revenue. …This may be the straw that tips Magna into bankruptcy and Shapiro out of the CHRB chairmanship. The Sunshine Millions on Jan. 26 seems a likely casualty unless they delay the SA events or switch them to GP. It also looks bad for the Monday promotion designed to boost attendance. Murphy's law reigns.

[DanG]

As usual on this subject where people are dug in like the Japanese at Iwo Jima (myself included) My 1 ¾ cents...

1st; We certainly don’t need any encouragement for more litigation in our nation. When hot java brings 7 figures we’ve hit a new low in that cannibalizing industry. :faint: While were at it, lets sue over all of these cancellations that last several years… (Most of which are on dirt btw.)

http://www.equibase.com/products/2007cancellations.cfm

http://www.equibase.com/products/2006cancellations1.cfm

http://www.equibase.com/products/2005cancellations1.cfm

http://www.equibase.com/products/2004cancellations1.cfm

2nd; I find it curious when its mentioned that AP installed new ‘dirt a very considerate reply followed stating “it may have been faulty installation etc…” but, the same reasonable standards are not applied to SA for example.

3rd; In an attempt to appease the speed obsessed / :44 and change crowd the “version” of cushion track never resembled Hollywood’s for example. Pre- heavy rains this track was playing like the ‘Autobahn and my best guess is this was a conscious attempt by track officials (not the installation company) to please the old SA players who salivated over sub- 1:09 6f.

4th; Where did this obsession with dirt ever come from? How did NASCAR ever pave their tracks with a fan base preaching to keep the rocks flying into the crowd? My understanding of American history is a dirt road through Main Street was not a sign of progress. Yet, while the majority of the earth races on grass we obsess over placing million dollar athletes in cow pastures. Like several things currently in vogue…I don’t get it.

At least 10 + years of use, study etc should be in the books to draw conclusions. On the surface I believe Dickenson has developed the best surface, (Tapeta) but time will tell.

[so.cal.fan]

Ken,
my attorney just read your post....here was her comment, she also comments on my eye witness description of the track being installed last summer.

<Here's the thing: There are two elements here. 1) the decision to re-do the track. Not a discretionary action by the track, required by a rule. book closed. 2) the work actually done and by your description it sounds negligent. Sue the contractor for poor workmanship, negligence, etc. in performing work.

Not something I want to get involved in, but it sounds from what you've been saying that something was done wrong, at the wrong time, when the contractor knew or should have known based on his experience that it could produce a problem. The threat of consequential damages (if they haven't been waived by the contract) ought to bring him to the table pretty quick.

Also, it's one thing to be required by regulation to call a meet, but a defense to failure to carry out a meet would be emergency/inability to safely hold a meet/danger to horses and property, etc.

What a horrible mess. I wouldn't want to be the contractor or the contractor's liability insurance company about now.>

[Jeff P]

2nd; I find it curious when its mentioned that AP installed new ‘dirt a very considerate reply followed stating “it may have been faulty installation etc…” but, the same reasonable standards are not applied to SA for example.Dan, just to clarify... I hold SA to the same standard... a standard where work done yields an end result that behaves as designed or promised.

Not discovering the SA track wouldn't drain properly... there can't be any valid excuse for that. Playing armchair quarterback it seems to me all anyone had to do to test out or demonstrate drainage capacity was drive water trucks over the new track and simulate a winter storm by dumping several inches of water on it.

See Mr. Track Owner... we just dumped 10 inches of water on it 15 minutes ago and it all drained straight down. That was 15 minutes ago and now horses are galloping on it.

or...

Oops. We drove a water truck over it six hours ago and that water is still sitting there. Umm... it looks like we still have a little work to do.

Believe me, this is a result of somebody doing a "faulty" job.

-jp

.

[cj]

At least 10 + years of use, study etc should be in the books to draw conclusions. On the surface I believe Dickenson has developed the best surface, (Tapeta) but time will tell.

Hmmm...interesting you say that, since GG is going through a rash of injured horses lately.

I recommend everyone reads the Bloodhorse article about synthetic surfaces. It is very long but well done.

[rrbauer]

SoCalFan:
"That said, they did ORDER the major California tracks to install a synthetic surface.
What are the legalities here, if any?"

CHRB makes the rules. You want to play in California and get race dates you play by their rules. As long as the rules are applied universally (all tracks having race meets of 4 weeks or longer) of course. Since other tracks have installed synthetic surfaces and have not had drainage problems, then Santa Anita (Magna) needs to look to their Cushion Track contractor for any damage-related remedies. The problem is installation-specific. Tell your sea-lawyer friends at the track to hang on to their day jobs!

[so.cal.fan]

My lawyer friend agrees with you, Rick.
Her day job is a barrister for the Maori people of New Zealand, land use rights, etc.
She doesn't know anything about racing.......isn't even a fan.
She just read the CHRB ruling Ken posted and commented on it.
Since I witnessed what they did last August, I was curious about the liability here, if any. That's all.

[DanG]

Hmmm...interesting you say that, since GG is going through a rash of injured horses lately.

I recommend everyone reads the Bloodhorse article about synthetic surfaces. It is very long but well done.
Hmmm;

Did you chime in when dirt tracks have rashes of injuries or do you just pick and choose what suits your agenda? :rolleyes:

[DanG]

Dan, just to clarify... I hold SA to the same standard... a standard where work done yields an end result that behaves as designed or promised.

Not discovering the SA track wouldn't drain properly... there can't be any valid excuse for that. Playing armchair quarterback it seems to me all anyone had to do to test out or demonstrate drainage capacity was drive water trucks over the new track and simulate a winter storm by dumping several inches of water on it.

See Mr. Track Owner... we just dumped 10 inches of water on it 15 minutes ago and it all drained straight down. That was 15 minutes ago and now horses are galloping on it.

or...

Oops. We drove a water truck over it six hours ago and that water is still sitting there. Umm... it looks like we still have a little work to do.

Believe me, this is a result of somebody doing a "faulty" job.
-jp
.
Jeff;

Agreed it’s clearly a poor installation, but it seems to me at least some blame must go on the management who purchased the surface. The times alone it was yielding should have told them it’s closer to a billiard table than a “cushion” surface.

PS: I see your location is Jupiter Fla…Why was I under the impression you were California Based? Hello neighbor, although we are several hours apart. :)

[kenwoodallpromos]

Ken,
my attorney just read your post....here was her comment, she also comments on my eye witness description of the track being installed last summer.

<Here's the thing: There are two elements here. 1) the decision to re-do the track. Not a discretionary action by the track, required by a rule. book closed. 2) the work actually done and by your description it sounds negligent. Sue the contractor for poor workmanship, negligence, etc. in performing work.

Not something I want to get involved in, but it sounds from what you've been saying that something was done wrong, at the wrong time, when the contractor knew or should have known based on his experience that it could produce a problem. The threat of consequential damages (if they haven't been waived by the contract) ought to bring him to the table pretty quick.

Also, it's one thing to be required by regulation to call a meet, but a defense to failure to carry out a meet would be emergency/inability to safely hold a meet/danger to horses and property, etc.

What a horrible mess. I wouldn't want to be the contractor or the contractor's liability insurance company about now.>
All my info comes from Bloodhorse: SA intentionally used smaller sand than others including Hollywwod, which stopped drainagel they twice just added material and still have the smaller drain-gloggig sand in the mix.
The problem is NOT just because it is rubber track; it is because they used the wrong sized sand and never replaced it.

[cj]

Hmmm;

Did you chime in when dirt tracks have rashes of injuries or do you just pick and choose what suits your agenda? :rolleyes:

With 10,000 posts, I would guess I pretty much chime in all the time.

Of course I commented on the rash of injuries on dirt tracks. They needed fixing. Now whether synthic surfaces are the answer is still very much in doubt. I was just commenting on what you said about Tapeta. There have been a lot of injuries lately. So I was wondering if you knew about it while stating you think it is the best. The following is a list from Dan Ilman's blog at DRF of horses that needed assistance to get off the track:

Here's what I found for the last few weeks at Golden Gate:


December 12 - none
December 13 - King of My Castle vanned off, Haint's Deal walked off
December 14 - Roman Wish vanned off
December 15 - Deputy Bertrando walked off, Hampton Way vanned off
December 16 - none
December 22 - Jump Rope Girl broke down
December 26 - Gassan Snow walked off, Guydancefromabove vanned off
December 28 - none
December 29 - Freedom Wins vanned off, Above a Whisper walked off (saddle slipped)
December 30 - none
December 31 - Everlasting Fame walked off
January 1 - Ticketsandtomatoes vanned off, Shawn's Mr. Comet walked off, Fit to Dream vanned off, Mt. Whitney broke down, Inspired Candi vanned off
January 3 - Chestnut Affair vanned off

[robert99]

All my info comes from Bloodhorse: SA intentionally used smaller sand than others including Hollywwod, which stopped drainagel they twice just added material and still have the smaller drain-gloggig sand in the mix.
The problem is NOT just because it is rubber track; it is because they used the wrong sized sand and never replaced it.

That makes sense.
Lingfield, in UK, introduced the first artificial track here with an Equitrack mix.
That was fine and fast until the rubber granules broke down with mechanical grading and the weather (ozone), after a couple of years. The fine particles blocked the drainage and several subsequent meetings were lost with a partly "submerged" track. They replaced equitrack with polytrack which has been fine ever since. The main point being that the track management did not interfere at all with the engineering and the whole thing has to be engineered from past experience to work. Polytrack is a complete system from the base, whole width drainage layers, graded drainage surface, drains and running surface. You have to have each bit just right. It is not pick and mix.

The worst thing for the California climate is to incorporate rubber (breaks down even quicker) and fine sand. The sand should be graded with coarser granules of varying sizes so that the rubber breakdown does not block the resultant pores within the sand and the fine sand is retained by the coarser grades. If the "pure" fine sand has any cementitious material in it it goes like concrete. Before that happens the "pure" fine sand washes down and blocks the drainage membrane layer. All basic engineering.

From other posts you can see the longitudinal and cross drainage clearly installed on the SA video. Don't jump to blaming contractors if they were following the design prescribed to them. Thoroughbred horse have developed from Arab and Turk horses bred to English warhorse mares. None of these evolved on dirt, just turf and desert sand (polytrack without the binder).

[so.cal.fan]

CJ!
Interesting post.
I had heard a week ago at Santa Anita that there was big trouble on that Golden Gate track. I heard it from a vet.
Your information validates what he told us.
It's pretty shocking, this stuff wears out. Thousand pound animals running over and over it, take it's toll.
I also understand that while Hollywood Park is okay.....now, it's sure not perfect, a trainer told us there were several horses getting sore on it.
Increased towards the end of the meet.
I'm seriously questioning if it will hold up, IF they have to move the Santa Anita meet over there, even for a couple of weeks. Another thing....the turf course is torn out. They won't be able to run grass races.

[garyoz]

From the DRF Article on Monday's cancellation:

Santa Anita on Monday received a vote of confidence from Greg Avioli, the president and chief executive officer of the Breeders' Cup, which is scheduled to be held at Santa Anita on Oct. 24-25.

"Santa Anita has made a major commitment to the safety of racehorses and jockeys by installing this new surface, and we are confident that the track will be in championship form well before the Breeders' Cup in October," Avioli said.

There are enough near term problems--but no way the surface won't be a big topic at the BC.

[ponyplayerdotca]

I don't mean to sound callous and heartless when I ask these next questions, but I have to ask them and await your responses. I don't know the answers to any of them, but someone does:

1) How many horses nationwide had breakdowns in 2007? Of those horses, what is the estimated valued of each of them combined? Is that number worth enough to justify the grotesque costs spent installing all these artificial surfaces?

2) Despite surface, have the number of horses breaking down or being injured decreased in any measurable way versus before the synthetic revolution?

3) Is the utter despicable disruption to the sport worth all this upheaval?

4) Despite synthetic tracks being installed, horses are still being injured and still breaking down - are any of these changes actually helping in any tangible way?

5) Athletes play or race - they put stress on their bodies and they get hurt. Always have, and always will. Do you really believe surface change will have any true effect on depleting these injuries in the future?

I don't. To me, the cost of racing includes the unspoken knowledge that some of these beloved animals will succumb to injuries and die as a result of having been a thoroughbred race horse. Period.

The very first race at Presque Isle Downs (TAPETA) last September saw a breakdown on the first turn, and subsequent humane destruction.

Horses are fragile. Drugging them up and racing them ragged for our greedy enjoyment is abhorrent in principal. But we all seem to still support this sport with our wagering because it simply isn't important enough to all involved to end the stressful treatment these animals receive.

Whose to say anything in this sport is "right" or "wrong"? The entire sport is derived by exploitation. Management exploits the local governments, the horses, and the players all the time in the name of the almighty dollar.

Synthetic surfaces are another chapter in this exploitation. The proprietors of these products have made buckets loads of money because they sold the idea, even though we will never be sure we even needed it.

Knowing all of this, are any of us going to stop wagering on horse racing now?

No. Why? Because no one collectively cares enough to do the right things with regards to all the problems the sport has.

And so, life goes on, and so will the injuries - regardless of surface.

[David-LV]

I don't mean to sound callous and heartless when I ask these next questions, but I have to ask them and await your responses. I don't know the answers to any of them, but someone does:

1) How many horses nationwide had breakdowns in 2007? Of those horses, what is the estimated valued of each of them combined? Is that number worth enough to justify the grotesque costs spent installing all these artificial surfaces?

2) Despite surface, have the number of horses breaking down or being injured decreased in any measurable way versus before the synthetic revolution?

3) Is the utter despicable disruption to the sport worth all this upheaval?

4) Despite synthetic tracks being installed, horses are still being injured and still breaking down - are any of these changes actually helping in any tangible way?

5) Athletes play or race - they put stress on their bodies and they get hurt. Always have, and always will. Do you really believe surface change will have any true effect on depleting these injuries in the future?

I don't. To me, the cost of racing includes the unspoken knowledge that some of these beloved animals will succumb to injuries and die as a result of having been a thoroughbred race horse. Period.

The very first race at Presque Isle Downs (TAPETA) last September saw a breakdown on the first turn, and subsequent humane destruction.

Horses are fragile. Drugging them up and racing them ragged for our greedy enjoyment is abhorrent in principal. But we all seem to still support this sport with our wagering because it simply isn't important enough to all involved to end the stressful treatment these animals receive.

Whose to say anything in this sport is "right" or "wrong"? The entire sport is derived by exploitation. Management exploits the local governments, the horses, and the players all the time in the name of the almighty dollar.

Synthetic surfaces are another chapter in this exploitation. The proprietors of these products have made buckets loads of money because they sold the idea, even though we will never be sure we even needed it.

Knowing all of this, are any of us going to stop wagering on horse racing now?

No. Why? Because no one collectively cares enough to do the right things with regards to all the problems the sport has.

And so, life goes on, and so will the injuries - regardless of surface.

This is an excellent post which goes direct to the heart of the problems facing an industry that is in total chaos.

____________
David

[so.cal.fan]

I agree. Horses would sustain injuries on cotton balls, it's just the nature of the game.
It's naive to think any surface is a miracle surface, going to stop most injuries, it won't happen.

[kenwoodallpromos]

2006, from Jockey club: 462,937 starts; (See below for breakdown rate) 1 (deaths) breakdown per 455 starts= 1,189 breakdowns? maybe 1 every 7 racedays per track. I think each horse produces $15,000.00 per year to the racing economy, not counting takeout from bets and overall increased handle from artificial tracks.
Ca claims 50% reduction in deaths, some claim leg injuries are being replaced by other types of injuries from too soft of surface.

Erie TImes paper on PI Downs- "Lake assessed the quality of horses as a factor in the breakdowns.

"Like Cantrel, you can see that the better horses extend themselves, and there's more chance for injury," Lake said. "The cheaper horses don't run as hard, or they don't have as much heart. But injuries can happen anytime, any surface, any condition. And 25 dates can't possibly show the big picture."

Todd Mostoller, executive director of the Pennsylvania Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association, said the average put-down rate is 2.2 horses per 1,000 nationally, but that PID's statistics don't tell the whole story.

"All of the statistics don't come into focus until a year or two, so 25 dates is very limited," Mostoller said. "What is encouraging with the Tapeta surface is that at all tracks, the vets examine all the horses after a race, and if they come back unfit, they're put on the vet's list and can't race until they are cleared. As of last count, only three horses here were put on the list, and that is unbelievable. It speaks volumes as to how forgiving the surface is."

[northerndancer]

All I can tell you is from my experiences as an owner that races his horses on synthetic surfaces as well as dirt surfaces.

1. My vet bills are considerably less with horses that race on synthetic surfaces;
2. I have found that you do not want to train exclusively on synthetic surfaces.... I prefer to have my horses train on a dirt or sand surface a majority of the mornings with the use of swimming, equisizer and open paddock time sprinkled in to break up the routine;
3. I have had less horses put down on synthetic tracks;
4. I have had more throat issues with my horses that race on synthetic tracks;
5. I have had lower rates of eye issues with horses racing on synthetic tracks (no rocks or clumps hitting the eyes.....though Woodbine's and Turfway's first winters we did see some nasty welts on the horses heads when the tempatures dipped below the freezing mark);
6. At first horses tended to develop soft tissue or tendon issues which I have attributed to over stretching during the training regiment...... the exercise riders had to develop a different approach to reduce these issues;
7. I use more magnetic blankets and less ice with horses at synthetic tracks;
8. The horses racing on synthetic surfaces pick their heads up sooner than when they raced on dirt surfaces;
9. I have had an increase in nasal and breathing issues from horses racing on synthetic surfaces..... though less bleeding from these horses;

The tracks I race at:

Synthetic: Woodbine, Del Mar, Santa Anita, Hollywood, Golden Gate, Keenland, Turfway, Presque Isle

Dirt Surfaces: Delaware, Monmouth, Meadowlands, Churchill Downs, Pimlico, Laurel, Bay Meadows, Mountaineer, Charles Town, Hoosier, Ellis Park, Indiana Downs, Philadelphia Park, Penn National, Fort Erie

[Kelso]

4. I have had more throat issues with my horses that race on synthetic tracks;
9. I have had an increase in nasal and breathing issues from horses racing on synthetic surfaces



ND,
Any thoughts, even tentative, about the helth effects on jockeys? Do you think they should wear masks during races/workouts?

Would some sort of masking/shielding arrangement help the horses? (Does such exist now?)

Thank you.

[Indulto]

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/national-news/2008/January/08/CHRB-clears-path-for-Hollywood-to-take-on-Santa-Anita-dates.aspx
CHRB clears path for Hollywood to take on Santa Anita dates
by Jeff Lowe… Meeting in a special session via teleconference, the board voted unanimously to amend Santa Anita's license to allow some or all of its dates to be conducted at Hollywood.

“What we are trying to do here today is simply to remove a regulatory impediment,” CHRB Chairman Richard Shapiro said. “It is not designed to dictate that racing should go to Hollywood Park—that is for the stakeholders to decide.”

Shapiro and Santa Anita President Ron Charles both indicated that Hollywood officials are willing to make the facility available for Santa Anita dates.

Charles said the amendment is a necessary step, even if the track appears to be in the clear, at least temporarily, after receiving more than seven inches of rain from Thursday night to Monday morning.

“Where we are now, it's up to us to address this problem that we've inherited from Cushion Track,” Charles said. “Today, rather than elaborate on the details and add to further speculation, we will be making that decision and [will] have an announcement within the next 48 hours that we believe will be well-received.”

Charles did say that Santa Anita has been in contact with Del Mar Thoroughbred Club officials and that Del Mar could be a training location while Santa Anita deals with the Cushion Track issues.

Shapiro also scheduled another special meeting for January 17 for board members to consider issuing a waiver to Santa Anita of the synthetic surface mandate, a procedural step Santa Anita would face if it were to decide to switch back to a dirt surface for the rest of the meet.

The board waived the requirement for Bay Meadows Race Course when the track threatened to shut down operations rather than pay for a synthetic surface.

[David-LV]

Is a switch back to a dirt surface in Santa Anita's future??

Shapiro also scheduled another special meeting for January 17 for board members to consider issuing a waiver to Santa Anita of the synthetic surface mandate, a procedural step Santa Anita would face if it were to decide to switch back to a dirt surface for the rest of the meet.

_________
David

[northerndancer]

ND,
Any thoughts, even tentative, about the helth effects on jockeys? Do you think they should wear masks during races/workouts?

Would some sort of masking/shielding arrangement help the horses? (Does such exist now?)

Thank you.

Kelso,
We have recommended to our exercise riders that they wear a mask as I do agree that in the long term there could be health related issues both for human as well as equine participants. Though with that being said there have been no studies that prove this to be the case in the UK where they have run on synthetic surfaces for some time now.

As far as a mask for the horse I think this may cause more harm during a race. The fact is I as an owner do not want anything that could obstruct the breathing of the horse. The goal will always be to keep that breathing passage as clear as possible.

I do not know of anyone using a mask for the horses at the current time.
ND

[Robert Fischer]

I don't know if they have improved the Woodbine or Turfway kickback situation lately, but a mask for the horse would have been a huge help, and allow them to actually save ground without eating dust.
Last couple meets, jockeys have actually fought to be 5 wide out of the gate.

[Indulto]

http://www.ocregister.com/sports/santa-anita-racing-1956012-track-meeting
CHRB authorizes Santa Anita to move races
Hollywood Park is now an option, but Arcadia officials say the races will remain there starting with Thursday's card.
By LARRY BORTSTEIN… "We're going to come forward with a contingency plan that will allow us to race safely, even in the rain," said Charles. He said that plan will be announced today or Thursday.

Charles also said that the British company that manufactures Cushion Track currently has no representatives at Santa Anita and that track management will leave the preparation of the racing surface to Santa Anita superintendent Richard Tedesco and his staff.

Trainer Bob Baffert, interviewed at his Santa Anita barn after the short CHRB meeting, said Tedesco is the right person to make decisions on the racing surface.

"The trainers trust his judgment," said Baffert, who in recent days has been training some of his horses on Hollywood Park's Cushion Track, which has held up well in the recent rain.

… Santa Anita plans to run its regularly scheduled stakes races this weekend, including the San Fernando Stakes for 4-year-olds and the San Rafael Stakes for 3-year-olds, both Saturday. The San Pasqual Handicap, a major prep for the $1 million Santa Anita Handicap on March 1, and the San Gorgonio Handicap on turf for older fillies and mares also are on this weekend's schedule after being victims of last weekend's cancellations.http://www.drf.com/news/article/91445.html
Charles promoted at Magna
By MATT HEGARTYRon Charles, the executive director of Magna Entertainment Corp.'s California operations, has been promoted to the position of chief operating officer, the company announced late Monday.

Under his new position, Charles will be responsible for all of Magna's business units, including its racetracks, bet-processing company, account-wagering operation, and television and simulcasting investments. Charles, a former chairman of the Thoroughbred Owners of California and a horse breeder and owner, joined Magna in 2004 with responsibility over the company's Santa Anita Park and Golden Gate Fields.…What message does this send coming on the heels of a disaster that occurred on his watch? Maybe the decision to promote was made before the drainage problem at SA manifested itself, or maybe that situation justified a prior opposition position he had taken, but the timing certainly seems odd.

[Indulto]

http://www.presstelegram.com/ci_7908069
Santa Anita looks at options
Rain has officials thinking of old surface, Hollypark.
By Art Wilson… Frank Stronach, founder and chairman of Magna Entertainment Corp., the parent company of Santa Anita, was reached on his cell phone Monday and would not confirm if Santa Anita is on the verge of going with a dirt track.

Stronach, who owns and breeds horses, has never been a proponent of artificial surfaces. He said he is leaving the major decisions concerning the Santa Anita dilemma in the hands of track officials.

"That's up to the management there, that's up to the horsemen," Stronach said about the possibility of Santa Anita going back to dirt until the end of the meet. "You know, I tried to be positive (about synthetic tracks), I tried to be supportive ... the people there on a daily basis, they know what they've got to do."

Stronach labeled the situation "unfortunate," saying Santa Anita chose Cushion Track because it seemed to be working at Hollywood.

"Sometimes you don't want to experiment with new things," he said. "The idea was to duplicate it, (and) I think the people installing deviated from that.

"We've just got to fix it."

Asked if Cushion Track was still a viable option for Santa Anita, Stronach said, "The horsemen will sit down with the race experts and they will make the right decision." …http://www.dailybulletin.com/ci_7917702
Santa Anita leaving track options open
By Art Wilson… Baffert said Tuesday he is hopeful Santa Anita will return to a dirt surface now that all Southland racing venues have had to fix the bases of their tracks in order to install artificial surfaces.

"It took something like this to really put the big money into the base, which they've already done," Baffert said. "So now (that) they've got good bases, they can put dirt on top.

"I would love to see, and I think a lot of trainers don't want to speak up, but if they found the right kind of dirt, do it right, leave it up to Richard Tedesco (track superintendent), and if he can find the right kind of soil or dirt to put on there, I think everybody would be happy."

Charles would not comment on whether Santa Anita has washed its hands of the company, even if the the racetrack decided to install a new synthetic surface when this meet ends.

"I think we're going to leave all options open," Charles said.