Slowly but surely the truth about synthetic surfaces......

[robert99]

gm10,

However, I do predict that much of that excitement here in the U.S. might wane in time as it becomes more universally understood that any disadvantages the Euros feel they have when competing against our top runners on dirt pales in comparison to the disadvantages that many, probably not all but many, of our top dirt performers have when competing against the world's best turf stars over the Pro-Ride as we saw it last year. Respectfully, I disagree with the assertion that the Pro-Ride is a "level playing field" and I don't feel that this notion is as axiomatic as some may feel.



The biggest disadvantage Euro turf horses have in USA is the tightness of the USA tracks. The top Euro turf horses are long striding animals that perform far better on straight, level tracks or those with wide cambered bends and long finishing straights. They can be ridden to compensate for the lower traction on dirt.

[robert99]

Nature's polytrack.

Laytown (County Meath, Ireland) is a seven furlong straight track that is on a tidal beach. Racing takes place on just one day in September each year (races next Tuesday). The races are restricted to six and seven furlongs and every race is commenced via a flag start.

[andymays]

Nature's polytrack.

Laytown (County Meath, Ireland) is a seven furlong straight track that is on a tidal beach. Racing takes place on just one day in September each year (races next Tuesday). The races are restricted to six and seven furlongs and every race is commenced via a flag start.


That I like! :ThmbUp:

[gm10]

The European entrants might generate some interest in Europe but not as much in the US. The Europeans will still show up for the turf races.

I know, I was just reacting to the gentleman saying that he didn't need them. The BC does need international stars, I would even suggest that its international dimension is its raison d'etre. A BC with only American horses is nothing special, is it. Good luck finding tracks who will want to host that, it's hardly money-making as it is now.

[gm10]

gm10,

Granted, with the BC main track races contested over a Pro-Ride surface it would be reasonable to expect a higher number of Europeans participating. They would be crazy not to take advantage of this carte blanche opportunity. And I can also understand where this would excite many, on both sides of the Atlantic, with the prospect of seeing more of the world's top level horses meeting one another in the same event. However, I do predict that much of that excitement here in the U.S. might wane in time as it becomes more universally understood that any disadvantages the Euros feel they have when competing against our top runners on dirt pales in comparison to the disadvantages that many, probably not all but many, of our top dirt performers have when competing against the world's best turf stars over the Pro-Ride as we saw it last year. Respectfully, I disagree with the assertion that the Pro-Ride is a "level playing field" and I don't feel that this notion is as axiomatic as some may feel.

After last year's Breeders' Cup Andy Beyer of the Washington Post wrote a piece that I thought was pretty good. I especially liked the last paragraph. I wouldn't expect you to agree with some parts but in case you're interested I'll leave the link for your perusal.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/26/AR2008102601938.html

Yes I know that article. He probably had an unprofitable weekend.

I don't agree that the pro-ride is a carte blanche opportunity for euro's. They happened to have two very fit and talented horses in the Classic last year. Curlin was not the same animal that he was 1 year earlier, his numbers after the Dubai WC were far from special. He destroyed Wanderin Boy in the WC, but struggled to beat him in the JCGC, the last race Wanderin Boy finished before breaking down at Aqueduct. Henry and Ravens on the other hand were in peak form and Ravems Pass was actually still improving. Curlin had every opportunity but couldn't even hold off Tiago for third, he didn't have it.

And that's the only one of the traditional big races that the Euro's won on the polytrack. Stardom Bound, Zenyatta, Albertus Maximus, Midnite Lute, Midshipman ... they were all American.

Show me a good loser and I'll show you a loser. Show me a bad loser, and I'll tell him 'Andy, I like your books'.

[Bobzilla]

Nature's polytrack.

Laytown (County Meath, Ireland) is a seven furlong straight track that is on a tidal beach. Racing takes place on just one day in September each year (races next Tuesday). The races are restricted to six and seven furlongs and every race is commenced via a flag start.


Robert, thanks for sharing that. I wasn't aware such a one day event existed in Ireland. I hope that surface isn't what Saratoga's surface looks like tomorrow as tomorrow is Travers day. Looks like we might be getting some moisture from tropical storm Danny.

I've long admired the efforts of horses such as Swain and Giants Causeway in the BC Classic while being contested on dirt surfaces. Euros have certainly made their contribution to the rich history of the event. I understand that the tightness, or geometrics of our tracks is a disadvantage to them as well as experiencing the kick back for the first time, all the more reason to appreciate their efforts.

[gm10]

The biggest disadvantage Euro turf horses have in USA is the tightness of the USA tracks. The top Euro turf horses are long striding animals that perform far better on straight, level tracks or those with wide cambered bends and long finishing straights. They can be ridden to compensate for the lower traction on dirt.

Do you think that this is really such a big disadvantage? I used to think so too, but by now I suspect that these tighter bends put a higher value on being able to 'accelerate' in the stretch, which is obviously what the european horses do well.

[Bobzilla]

Yes I know that article. He probably had an unprofitable weekend.

I don't agree that the pro-ride is a carte blanche opportunity for euro's. They happened to have two very fit and talented horses in the Classic last year. Curlin was not the same animal that he was 1 year earlier, his numbers after the Dubai WC were far from special. He destroyed Wanderin Boy in the WC, but struggled to beat him in the JCGC, the last race Wanderin Boy finished before breaking down at Aqueduct. Henry and Ravens on the other hand were in peak form and Ravems Pass was actually still improving. Curlin had every opportunity but couldn't even hold off Tiago for third, he didn't have it.

And that's the only one of the traditional big races that the Euro's won on the polytrack. Stardom Bound, Zenyatta, Albertus Maximus, Midnite Lute, Midshipman ... they were all American.

Show me a good loser and I'll show you a loser. Show me a bad loser, and I'll tell him 'Andy, I like your books'.


Glad to see you're a reader of Beyer and that you knew the article. Maybe you know this article as well, the one in which Beyer gives out Ravens Pass and recommends not playing Curlin. Here's the link my friend:

http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=99357&subs=0&arc=0


One area where I disagree with Beyer in this article is his POV that Curlin was in declining form. You and he are in accord with that one. The other day board member CJ posted an opinion which I was happy to read, can't remember if it was in this thread or another, but he wrote about the pace dynamics of some of Curlin's races last year and how they were not conducive to yielding hign speed figures (i.e. too slow for too long as in the Foster or too fast too soon as in the Woodward). When handicappers create performance figures they factor these types of things into their numbers and often will see that a horse may not be in declining form at all, even though a cursory glance at a raw time speed figure might suggests otherwise. So no, I don't believe Curlin was in declining form at all although this urban legend will probably live on in the minds of many horseplayers for years to come.

As for the American winners on the Pro-Ride, I think if you really think about it you will have to agree that Curlin had the toughest assignment of all the American runners. As much as I love Zenyatta, agree with those who think she's underappreciated, and am impressed by her career, she didn't really have to face any top class European turf stars the likes of Ravens Pass and Henrythenavigator. Yes she beat a fairly solid group of American distaffers but it wasn't like Zarkava had made the trip over or Goldikova opted for the Ladies Classic in place of the Mile. The American winners that weekend had all run on AWSs previously and had demonstrated some degree of tolerance for it. Curlin had the toughest assignment of all the Americans, and I say that only because I have a world of respect for the winner Ravens Pass and the place horse as well. Of course a better timed move by Albarado might have helped a little but Curlin wasn't going to defeat top class grass stars like those guys on that surface any day, regardless of current form.

[andymays]

From May of 2006

CHRB Gives Final Nod to Artificial Track Mandate | BloodHorse.com

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/33738/chrb-gives-final-nod-to-artificial-track-mandate

Excerpt:

Polymer-based surfaces are considered safer for horses than traditional dirt tracks because of their consistent composition. Statistics from Turfway Park after its initial year with Polytrack showed a drastic decrease in on-track injuries and fatal breakdowns. Synthetic track has been in use in England for several years and Keeneland and Woodbine racetracks are planning to install artificial surfaces as well. California is the first state to mandate that its major Thoroughbred tracks convert. Cost for each new racing surface is estimated at between $6 million and $9 million. :lol:

Excerpt:

But Chairman Richard Shapiro said the board needed to deal with the unacceptable problem of racehorse deaths and injuries, and the mandate for synthetic surfaces is part of the solution :lol:

Excerpt:

Craig Fravel, executive vice president of the Del Mar Thoroughbred Club, referred to the Preakness Stakes (gr. I) and the injury to Barbaro.
"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," he said. "I think our actions in California will show the way for a lot of people around the country." :lol:

[Scanman]

Nature's polytrack.

Laytown (County Meath, Ireland) is a seven furlong straight track that is on a tidal beach. Racing takes place on just one day in September each year (races next Tuesday). The races are restricted to six and seven furlongs and every race is commenced via a flag start.
This is a fantastic day of racing. I was there in 2007 and had a great time. Katie Walsh bailed me out in the last race. Great place to take a horse who doesn't like the gate.

[Bruddah]

I, along with a few others (Andy Mays), have been an opponet of the rush to artificial surfaces from the beginning. I compared the entire plastic fiasco to football changing to artificial turf, in the name of "safety". Only to find out those surfaces were much more dangerous to the athlete.

Our resistance to these surfaces were based simply on common sense and the fact no worthwhile studies had been performed. Usually, the rush to change meets with disaster and unexpected outcomes. (common sense). Now that sound studies are being done, we find the sad same truth about AWs.

How long will it take for those in charge to admit they rushed in error? Time to get back to dirt. (JMHO)

[ddog]

But Arthur said that in 90% of racetrack fatalities, the horse had a pre-existing injury that led to the catstrophic breakdown.

"To think that this is only a racetrack problem, and that we will solve the problem by fixing the racetracks is terribly naive," Arthur said.


They roll the dice with horses that should not race.

As long as you race you will have breakdowns, but to pour gasoline on the fire and then say it's just part of the game is not honest.

Are the trainers that say you should work over plastic and race on dirt really saying what ???????????????????

[rwwupl]

concerning Bloodhorse article ref. earlier above;


In a further reply to rwwupl, Dr. Arthur has said:

(On consistency of synthetics) excerpt:

The latter issue is a major source of frustration among Trainers,probably more so than injuries. The article did not address a major discussion at the meeting on our efforts to develop a track performance/safety monitoring program

Del Mar VP Craig Fravel has said in the same article that he thought the synthetic track was consistent. I have sent him a note to advise many are in dis agreement with his view.

[gm10]

Glad to see you're a reader of Beyer and that you knew the article. Maybe you know this article as well, the one in which Beyer gives out Ravens Pass and recommends not playing Curlin. Here's the link my friend:

http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=99357&subs=0&arc=0


One area where I disagree with Beyer in this article is his POV that Curlin was in declining form. You and he are in accord with that one. The other day board member CJ posted an opinion which I was happy to read, can't remember if it was in this thread or another, but he wrote about the pace dynamics of some of Curlin's races last year and how they were not conducive to yielding hign speed figures (i.e. too slow for too long as in the Foster or too fast too soon as in the Woodward). When handicappers create performance figures they factor these types of things into their numbers and often will see that a horse may not be in declining form at all, even though a cursory glance at a raw time speed figure might suggests otherwise. So no, I don't believe Curlin was in declining form at all although this urban legend will probably live on in the minds of many horseplayers for years to come.

As for the American winners on the Pro-Ride, I think if you really think about it you will have to agree that Curlin had the toughest assignment of all the American runners. As much as I love Zenyatta, agree with those who think she's underappreciated, and am impressed by her career, she didn't really have to face any top class European turf stars the likes of Ravens Pass and Henrythenavigator. Yes she beat a fairly solid group of American distaffers but it wasn't like Zarkava had made the trip over or Goldikova opted for the Ladies Classic in place of the Mile. The American winners that weekend had all run on AWSs previously and had demonstrated some degree of tolerance for it. Curlin had the toughest assignment of all the Americans, and I say that only because I have a world of respect for the winner Ravens Pass and the place horse as well. Of course a better timed move by Albarado might have helped a little but Curlin wasn't going to defeat top class grass stars like those guys on that surface any day, regardless of current form.

I had actually read that Beyer article, but didn't remember he picked Ravens Pass. I stand corrected on that one.

As for Curlin, this is of course forever theoretical, but from my perspective, his battle with Wanderin Boy @ BEL set off alarm bells in my head, and the Classic was nothing but a confirmation of his declining form. Actually the number I have for his SA race is only 1 length slower than his JCGC race which was 2l slower than his SAR win.

Zenyatta ... no she didn't face the same calibre, I agree, but she did actually win her race!

[gm10]

But Arthur said that in 90% of racetrack fatalities, the horse had a pre-existing injury that led to the catstrophic breakdown.

"To think that this is only a racetrack problem, and that we will solve the problem by fixing the racetracks is terribly naive," Arthur said.


They roll the dice with horses that should not race.

As long as you race you will have breakdowns, but to pour gasoline on the fire and then say it's just part of the game is not honest.

Are the trainers that say you should work over plastic and race on dirt really saying what ???????????????????

Interesting point ... maybe it's not the racetrack that needs fixing most of all?? In a way, the polytrack has given everybody an excuse. Trainers can race their unsound horses and blame the surface when they break down, and unprofitable handicappers can blame their losses on it.

[robert99]

Do you think that this is really such a big disadvantage? I used to think so too, but by now I suspect that these tighter bends put a higher value on being able to 'accelerate' in the stretch, which is obviously what the european horses do well.

It is huge - crabbing around the final bend and losing position does not give chance of "acceleration" in a short straight. Acceleration on the turf is a myth in any case - top class horses just cruise for longer. For example, Dancing Brave 141 was the highest rated horse ever sent to the Breeders Cup - he lost position on the downhill bends at Epsom Derby UK and lost position in BC. On a large, galloping track he was unbeatable (2000g, Eclipse, King George, Arc).

[FenceBored]

But Arthur said that in 90% of racetrack fatalities, the horse had a pre-existing injury that led to the catstrophic breakdown.

"To think that this is only a racetrack problem, and that we will solve the problem by fixing the racetracks is terribly naive," Arthur said.


They roll the dice with horses that should not race.

As long as you race you will have breakdowns, but to pour gasoline on the fire and then say it's just part of the game is not honest.

Are the trainers that say you should work over plastic and race on dirt really saying what ???????????????????

One frustrating element of that 90% figure is that some of these preexisting injuries are only apparant during the necropsy, which is a little late to do any good. Not all of them are a case of the connections sending out a horse they know has problems. You know, there are micro-fractures that might have shown up on a nuclear scan, but there didn't appear to be any reason to do one.

I don't have the link handy, but there was an article a couple of months ago about research into blood markers which could possibly identify horses in danger of breaking a bone. The horse looks sound, the horse vets sound, but there are already weaknesses in the bone that with the stress of a race fracture. There's more work to be done before they can say for sure whether it will be a useful tool. We can only hope so.

[FenceBored]

And that's the only one [the Classic] of the traditional big races that the Euro's won on the polytrack. Stardom Bound, Zenyatta, Albertus Maximus, Midnite Lute, Midshipman ... they were all American.


Counting races in which no European horse ran is a little unfair. It's hard for a European horse to hit the board, if there aren't any in the race. Zenyatta didn't face any Europeans, nor did Midnite Lute. And the Dirt Mile (Albertus Maximus) was in its second running, so I'm not sure it warrants being included in the "traditional big races."

There were eight main track races with Euros in 5 of the 8. Of those 5 races they won 2, or 40%. There were a total of 9 Euros (I'm including Square Eddie, since he had his first 4 starts in Europe and only 1 start in the US). There were a total 57 horses who ran in those 5 races, so:

5 races with European starters

9/57 (16%) starters,
4/15 (26%) ITM finishers, and
2/05 (40% of the winners.

If you exclude the races added in 2007 or 2008 , there are 3 races with Euros, who accounted for:

6/37 (16%) starters,
3/09 (33%) ITM finishers,
1/03 (33%) winners.

By the way, the total number of Euros on the CD main track in 2006 was 3 (no winners, no ITM), and only 1 was entered on the main track at Monmouth in 2007. So, in answer to a question you asked awhile back, yes, the synthetic attracted more European horses to the BC main track than had come for at least a few years to run on dirt. In fact, 50% more Europeans competed at SA in races run at all three of the last BCs than ran in the previous two BCs combined.

[Bruddah]

I know, I was just reacting to the gentleman saying that he didn't need them. The BC does need international stars, I would even suggest that its international dimension is its raison d'etre. A BC with only American horses is nothing special, is it. Good luck finding tracks who will want to host that, it's hardly money-making as it is now.

The real truth from me and several of my friends is, we don't really give a crap about the new "Breeders Cup". At least since its' focus has been Globalization. You see, we were very happy being separated from the Euro's and the rest of the World. If the new BC is losing money, it just suits me fine. I hope they go broke.

Globalization, whether it be financial, business strategies, retailing, manufacturing, marketing or Thoroughbreds, will only bring down National Econonmies and lead to an attempt at a One World Government. It's not a matter of "IF" but a matter of "WHEN".

I am not a conspiratorist but a pragmatic realist.

[andymays]

The real truth from me and several of my friends is, we don't really give a crap about the new "Breeders Cup". At least since its' focus has been Globalization. You see, we were very happy being separated from the Euro's and the rest of the World. If the new BC is losing money, it just suits me fine. I hope they go broke.

Globalization, whether it be financial, business strategies, retailing, manufacturing, marketing or Thoroughbreds, will only bring down National Econonmies and lead to an attempt at a One World Government. It's not a matter of "IF" but a matter of "WHEN".

I am not a conspiratorist but a pragmatic realist.

Amen Bruddah! :ThmbUp:

[rwwupl]

Amen Bruddah! :ThmbUp:


sign me up too.

[fmolf]

sign me up too.
...The new breeders cup is strictly about making money....from nominating more european horses each year to getting more euros in the wagering pools... its always about the money.

[gm10]

The real truth from me and several of my friends is, we don't really give a crap about the new "Breeders Cup". At least since its' focus has been Globalization. You see, we were very happy being separated from the Euro's and the rest of the World. If the new BC is losing money, it just suits me fine. I hope they go broke.

Globalization, whether it be financial, business strategies, retailing, manufacturing, marketing or Thoroughbreds, will only bring down National Econonmies and lead to an attempt at a One World Government. It's not a matter of "IF" but a matter of "WHEN".

I am not a conspiratorist but a pragmatic realist.

Hey you and your friends should go and spend your weekend at the local county fair, then. The BC is the self-proclaimed World Championships of Thoroughbred Racing. Chances are there'll be international horses.
Good luck with an American-only late year championship. I think you and your friends won't have any trouble finding tickets.

[gm10]

It is huge - crabbing around the final bend and losing position does not give chance of "acceleration" in a short straight. Acceleration on the turf is a myth in any case - top class horses just cruise for longer. For example, Dancing Brave 141 was the highest rated horse ever sent to the Breeders Cup - he lost position on the downhill bends at Epsom Derby UK and lost position in BC. On a large, galloping track he was unbeatable (2000g, Eclipse, King George, Arc).

I agree that it's a myth on galloping tracks such as Ascot these days, but imo it does happen on the turf at tighter turf tracks like Santa Anita. Goldikova for example ran faster at the end of the race than at the start of her race (first 2 furlongs: 23''25, last 2 furlongs: 23''06). I've found many similar examples in the US.

[gm10]

Counting races in which no European horse ran is a little unfair. It's hard for a European horse to hit the board, if there aren't any in the race. Zenyatta didn't face any Europeans, nor did Midnite Lute. And the Dirt Mile (Albertus Maximus) was in its second running, so I'm not sure it warrants being included in the "traditional big races."

There were eight main track races with Euros in 5 of the 8. Of those 5 races they won 2, or 40%. There were a total of 9 Euros (I'm including Square Eddie, since he had his first 4 starts in Europe and only 1 start in the US). There were a total 57 horses who ran in those 5 races, so:

5 races with European starters

9/57 (16%) starters,
4/15 (26%) ITM finishers, and
2/05 (40% of the winners.

If you exclude the races added in 2007 or 2008 , there are 3 races with Euros, who accounted for:

6/37 (16%) starters,
3/09 (33%) ITM finishers,
1/03 (33%) winners.

By the way, the total number of Euros on the CD main track in 2006 was 3 (no winners, no ITM), and only 1 was entered on the main track at Monmouth in 2007. So, in answer to a question you asked awhile back, yes, the synthetic attracted more European horses to the BC main track than had come for at least a few years to run on dirt. In fact, 50% more Europeans competed at SA in races run at all three of the last BCs than ran in the previous two BCs combined.

Yes that's what I have been saying, too. The euro's see the poly as a level playing field. The dirt is a dirty surface for them. It's unsafe, unpredictable (especially given the late time of year) and nearly always has a pace bias. The fact that next year is on the dirt again may actually make them send even more horses this year. Which is great, the BC is about crowning world champions.

It's not my problem that there weren't any Euro's in those races. It's Andy Beyer's problem who claims that the BC is too euro-friendly because they won one grade 1 on the polytrack. Sorry, but he was being pathetic. And also, this article was not mentioned by me.

I think that Americans found it hard to swallow because they got trashed in many of the turf races as well as the Classic. If Henry and Ravens Pass hadn't shown up, the overall result would have been nearly as bad but I don't think Mr. Beyer would have written his article in the way that he did.

Anyway, back on the dirt next year. Hope for you guys that an American horse wins it, not an English or Argentinian horse.

[andymays]

Roger Stein Show archives at www.rogerstein.com

Usually up by 11:00 Am PST


If you don't like synthetic surfaces it's a must listen early in the show!

He goes after Del Mar management and the CHRB's Rick Arthur pretty good!

[kenwoodallpromos]

I recieved this email Friday- I'm sure Mr. Fravel will not mind me reprinting it here since he is correcting a misquote! (I expect to hear from Dr. Arthur soon) I like that some in the industry like Mr. Fravel are receptive to ideas to help recognize leg/foot problems early, regardless of if everyone agrees on all 15 signs or not. Most of these 15 were reviewed by Seabiscuit movie trainer Matt Chew and by Tom Schell, and most of the 15 on this list were distributed at the 1st Horse Welfare And Safety Conference:
_______
"Mr. Woodall-

Thanks very much for the thoughts. I will pass them along to our track vet and racing office. Just for clarification, that isn't really what I said. I simply stated that the academic inquiry into the forensics of breakdowns should include a review of prior races to determine if severe bumping or other incidents might have contributed to pre-existing injuries. In any case your input is quite helpful.

Craig Fravel



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ken woodall [mailto:kenwoodallpromos@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 10:15 PM
To: Craig Fravel; kenwoodallpromos@msn.com; Dr_Arthur@chrb.ca.gov
Subject: Ca breakdown report


"Craig Fravel, executive vice president for Del Mar Thoroughbred Club, said that many of the horses that died had been injured in prior race incidents.

Arthur also told the board that UC-Davis is working on developing consistent test data with which to measure the various synthetic track surfaces.

He said that such measurements are complicated by surface temperatures on synthetic tracks that are much higher than on traditional dirt surfaces.

But Arthur said that in 90% of racetrack fatalities, the horse had a pre-existing injury that led to the catstrophic breakdown.

"To think that this is only a racetrack problem, and that we will solve the problem by fixing the racetracks is terribly naive," Arthur said"

________________

DANGER SIGNS A RACEHORSE MAY HAVE A LEG/FOOT PROBLEM:

D eclining speed

N egative PP comments

F ront wraps

01) More than 3 months' layoff between races

02) 2 or more gaps in racing frequency of more than 6 weeks

03) 3 or more consecutive races with gaps of 2 weeks or less

04) 2 or more consecutive unusually slow workouts

05) Lugging, drifting, swerving more than once within 1 or 2 races, especially on turns

06) Awkwardness while trying to switch leads

07) excessive bobbing while running, (like a merry-go-round pony)

08) Any problems leaving the gate in a race

09) 5 or older stretching out or shipping to a slower pars track (wearing down)

10) Losing normal early speed

11) Lung infection (possible parallel sign of overwork)

12) New front wraps

13) 1 month of racing while showing no works.

14) Alteration of training or racing regimen

15) more than 19 1/2 furlongs of workouts and/or races within 30 days.

[kenwoodallpromos]

At the same meeting where Polymer was mandated, Ed Halper of CTTA said every trainer association director was in agreement with the change.

[andymays]

Anything that helps reduce injuries and breakdowns it good and any clear thinking person that I know agrees on that.

It's nice that Mr. Frave responded to your email but the truth is he is one of the handfull of Racing Executives that "sold" sythetic surfaces to the public and continue to spin the truth.

In the interest of full disclosure you may want to send him another email and ask in a polite way if...

Has Mr Fravel recieved any monies, stock options, free trips, or any other personal financial benefit from any manufacturer or agent of a manufacturer of synthetic surfaces and specifically polytrack?

This is not a tough question answer. It's a yes or no and it would explain a lot. Keenland has been very up front about their relationship with Polytrack!

His critcs will tell you (listen to today's Roger Stein show) that Mr Fravel knows very little about the industry at the most basic levels.

[andymays]

At the same meeting where Polymer was mandated, Ed Halper of CTTA said every trainer association director was in agreement with the change.


Why wouldn't any clear thinking person decide that maybe it should be tried at one track as a test for a couple of years before mandating that all three install it? This mandate was shoved down everyone's throat by the most powerful people in California Racing.

I can come up with quote after quote including one from Richard Shapiro himself who now says the synthetic mandate was a mistake. They should admit the mistake and move on instead of spinning the situation to the public!

[rwwupl]

I recieved this email Friday- I'm sure Mr. Fravel will not mind me reprinting it here since he is correcting a misquote! (I expect to hear from Dr. Arthur soon) I like that some in the industry like Mr. Fravel are receptive to ideas to help recognize leg/foot problems early, regardless of if everyone agrees on all 15 signs or not. Most of these 15 were reviewed by Seabiscuit movie trainer Matt Chew and by Tom Schell, and most of the 15 on this list were distributed at the 1st Horse Welfare And Safety Conference:
_______
"Mr. Woodall-

Thanks very much for the thoughts. I will pass them along to our track vet and racing office. Just for clarification, that isn't really what I said. I simply stated that the academic inquiry into the forensics of breakdowns should include a review of prior races to determine if severe bumping or other incidents might have contributed to pre-existing injuries. In any case your input is quite helpful.

Craig Fravel



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ken woodall [mailto:kenwoodallpromos@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 10:15 PM
To: Craig Fravel; kenwoodallpromos@msn.com; Dr_Arthur@chrb.ca.gov
Subject: Ca breakdown report


"Craig Fravel, executive vice president for Del Mar Thoroughbred Club, said that many of the horses that died had been injured in prior race incidents.

Arthur also told the board that UC-Davis is working on developing consistent test data with which to measure the various synthetic track surfaces.

He said that such measurements are complicated by surface temperatures on synthetic tracks that are much higher than on traditional dirt surfaces.

But Arthur said that in 90% of racetrack fatalities, the horse had a pre-existing injury that led to the catstrophic breakdown.

"To think that this is only a racetrack problem, and that we will solve the problem by fixing the racetracks is terribly naive," Arthur said"

________________

DANGER SIGNS A RACEHORSE MAY HAVE A LEG/FOOT PROBLEM:

D eclining speed

N egative PP comments

F ront wraps

01) More than 3 months' layoff between races

02) 2 or more gaps in racing frequency of more than 6 weeks

03) 3 or more consecutive races with gaps of 2 weeks or less

04) 2 or more consecutive unusually slow workouts

05) Lugging, drifting, swerving more than once within 1 or 2 races, especially on turns

06) Awkwardness while trying to switch leads

07) excessive bobbing while running, (like a merry-go-round pony)

08) Any problems leaving the gate in a race

09) 5 or older stretching out or shipping to a slower pars track (wearing down)

10) Losing normal early speed

11) Lung infection (possible parallel sign of overwork)

12) New front wraps

13) 1 month of racing while showing no works.

14) Alteration of training or racing regimen

15) more than 19 1/2 furlongs of workouts and/or races within 30 days.


Craig Fravel,VP of Del Mar,was an early pro synthetic supporter . Why did he not express these thoughts when Del Mar had a bad year on dirt? Where was DR. Arthur then?

Sounds hypocritical to give synthetics a pass and no pass for the dirt

[joanied]

"A UC Davis study of horse deaths at California tracks looks into the difference in injuries on dirt and synthetic surfaces."

article: http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-spw-horse-injuries28-2009aug28,0,4424394.story

[andymays]

Craig Fravel,VP of Del Mar,was an early pro synthetic supporter . Why did he not express these thoughts when Del Mar had a bad year on dirt? Where was DR. Arthur then?

Sounds hypocritical to give synthetics a pass and no pass for the dirt


We can probably get this thread to 20k views before the weekend is over with more quotes and articles about the hypocrisy involved in California Racing! Most of them have already been listed.

Here’s the pitch from the “pitchmen” in California (no offense to Billy Mays god rest his soul) who gave us the “business” on a daily basis.

“Synthetic surfaces would be less expensive to maintain”. Wrong! Synthetic Surfaces are more expensive to maintain. It’s not even a close call!

“Synthetic surfaces would have fewer biases than traditional dirt surfaces”. Wrong! In fact there are manmade and natural biases created on a daily basis!

“Synthetic surfaces would be much safer for the Horses who race and train on it”. This is the biggest and best lie of all.

“Synthetic surfaces would increase field size”. Wrong! Due to a large number of soft tissue injuries many Horses are in rehab and races can’t be filled!

[robert99]

I agree that it's a myth on galloping tracks such as Ascot these days, but imo it does happen on the turf at tighter turf tracks like Santa Anita. Goldikova for example ran faster at the end of the race than at the start of her race (first 2 furlongs: 23''25, last 2 furlongs: 23''06). I've found many similar examples in the US.

Running a touch faster at the end of a race than the start is not acceleration in the horse racing sense - it is almost even time. Of course it can happen if the early pace is a crawl but we are talking top class long striding turf horses here racing for a big prize. The huge variation in UK track layouts makes these effects far more easy to spot than USA tracks, say, which are very similar in layout.

[gm10]

Running a touch faster at the end of a race than the start is not acceleration in the horse racing sense - it is almost even time. Of course it can happen if the early pace is a crawl but we are talking top class long striding turf horses here racing for a big prize. The huge variation in UK track layouts makes these effects far more easy to spot than USA tracks, say, which are very similar in layout.

No it's not even time, Robert. Goldikova went 23''25, 23''54, 23''55, 23''06.
That's even time for 6F followed by an acceleration.
Conduit went 25''65 at the start and the last four furlongs went in 24''54 and finally 23.57''. That is also acceleration. Donativum went 23''89, 23''44, 23''94, 23''41. Again, the final quarter was the quickest of all. All three went at least half a second quicker in the last 2F than the second last 2F.

I can't comment on UK racing, because I don't have any sectional times for the races there :-(.

[gm10]

No it's not even time, Robert. Goldikova went 23''25, 23''54, 23''55, 23''06.
That's even time for 6F followed by an acceleration.
Conduit went 25''65 at the start and the last four furlongs went in 24''54 and finally 23.57''. That is also acceleration. Donativum went 23''89, 23''44, 23''94, 23''41. Again, the final quarter was the quickest of all. All three went at least half a second quicker in the last 2F than the second last 2F.

I can't comment on UK racing, because I don't have any sectional times for the races there :-(.

I just had a look at Raven's Pass, Zenyatta and Albertus Maximus. Their last 2F was NOT the fastest part of the race, they all went quicker in the 2F before that.

[robert99]

No it's not even time, Robert. Goldikova went 23''25, 23''54, 23''55, 23''06.
That's even time for 6F followed by an acceleration.
Conduit went 25''65 at the start and the last four furlongs went in 24''54 and finally 23.57''. That is also acceleration. Donativum went 23''89, 23''44, 23''94, 23''41. Again, the final quarter was the quickest of all. All three went at least half a second quicker in the last 2F than the second last 2F.

I can't comment on UK racing, because I don't have any sectional times for the races there :-(.

Allowing for the fact that the timings, unless Trakus, are done by someone up in the stands and have unknown inaccuracies then Goldikova ran even time throughout. It is irrelevant if the final quarter was slightly faster or slightly slower.
Acceleration to UK understanding is a noticeable shift in relative speed in a few strides from say 12 to 10.5 for a furlong to blitz past other horses. Or is might be a relative short burst to get up on the line. Goldikova changed from the figures you gave from an average speed of 53.78 feet/second to 56.00 feet/second over the last half mile - that is not acceleration in the accepted horse racing sense over here.

In UK, the race can be won at several "quarters" by superior cruising speed maintenance - often the penultimate quarter (or 3f to 1f) then hang on over the last. The first (standing start) and last furlongs are invariably the slowest.

[gm10]

Allowing for the fact that the timings, unless Trakus, are done by someone up in the stands and have unknown inaccuracies then Goldikova ran even time throughout. It is irrelevant if the final quarter was slightly faster or slightly slower.

Acceleration to UK understanding is a noticeable shift in relative speed in a few strides from say 12 to 10.5 for a furlong to blitz past other horses. Or is might be a relative short burst to get up on the line. Goldikova changed from the figures you gave from an average speed of 53.78 feet/second to 56.00 feet/second over the last half mile - that is not acceleration in the accepted horse racing sense over here.

In UK, the race can be won at several "quarters" by superior cruising speed maintenance - often the penultimate quarter (or 3f to 1f) then hang on over the last. The first (standing start) and last furlongs are invariably the slowest.

a) half a second isn't slightly faster, it's 3 lengths faster... also keep in mind we are (generally) not talking British distances here!
b) I agree with your view on UK racing, but in a way it also the point I was trying to make. The British 'final stretch' is usually longer, and the bends are not as tight. It's easier for galloping types in the UK than it is in the US. Galloping horses don't want come out of a turn and then have a short 1.5 or 2F to the wire with the closers building of sorts of momentum in the turn. They want a long and even finish that will make the come-from-behind horses get too tired to make a serious impact. Look at Royal Ascot for example. The only horse that could win with a late turn of foot was Vision d'Etat. The other group 1 races were won much further from home (as far as I remember anyway).

[kenwoodallpromos]

Craig Fravel,VP of Del Mar,was an early pro synthetic supporter . Why did he not express these thoughts when Del Mar had a bad year on dirt? Where was DR. Arthur then?

Sounds hypocritical to give synthetics a pass and no pass for the dirt
He was at the 1st safety conference where my original 11 signs were distributed.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Why wouldn't any clear thinking person decide that maybe it should be tried at one track as a test for a couple of years before mandating that all three install it? This mandate was shoved down everyone's throat by the most powerful people in California Racing.

I can come up with quote after quote including one from Richard Shapiro himself who now says the synthetic mandate was a mistake. They should admit the mistake and move on instead of spinning the situation to the public!
According to the record of the meeting where fake dirt was mandated, ProRide was not one mentioned, but IMO should have been. Keeneland's Plubber and Dickerson's training track were mentioned.

[andymays]

According to the record of the meeting where fake dirt was mandated, ProRide was not one mentioned, but IMO should have been. Keeneland's Plubber and Dickerson's training track were mentioned.


For the record I've always been against it but I was willing to give it a try because of the claims made by everyone advocating it. After about a year I became absolutely convinced that it's bad for racing everywhere except in places that get a lot of rain.

The thing that people don't understand when I go over this stuff is that I'm on top of all this on a daily basis out here.

The dishonesty on the part of the Track Executives and on the part of Dr Rick Arthur is stunning. The figures that they use in their analysis are not accurate because up until this year and maybe the end of last year they didn't keep accurate statistics and I believe Dr. Arthur mentioned that in his testimony before congress. So how can they come out and compare 2 or 3 years of synthetic racing to say 30 years of dirt racing? 2009 has been by far the worst for injuries and fatalities when compared to 2007 and 2008.

Just remember the story of Richard Shapiro who is primarily responsible for the mandate. This man was a manipulative egotistical pr**k. He just pled no contest to keying Jerry Jamgotchians car. He is partners with Craig Fravel in a company they started in California. These guys are not to be taken seriously in whatever they say or do in my opinion.

[Indulto]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/106813.html
Breeders' Cup agent of change
By Matt Hegarty8/29/2009… Considering the controversy surrounding artificial racetrack surfaces, is Breeders' Cup going to consider racetracks with artificial surfaces in the future?

I don't think it's been discussed, but my personal opinion is that I'm not a fan of synthetic racetracks. I'd rather have three or four major tracks - Woodbine, NYRA, Churchill, Oak Tree - where, candidly, you should have three types of tracks. If I had it my way, that's what I would like to see. You should have a traditional dirt track, you should have a turf track, and you should have a [synthetic track]. If the races get rained out on turf you should go to [the synthetic track]. Otherwise, you run on all three. The infrastructure is there at these tracks to do that.

Are you saying that each facility should have all three racing surfaces?

From the industry point of view, there's a lot of criticism of artificial surfaces, and I think it's deserved. We have almost 80 or 100 years of history on the dirt tracks, and we only have five years of history on the artificial surfaces. People talk about the history, and I can tell you from personal experience that the ligament injuries are way, way, way up on the [artificial surfaces]. So I don't think we have enough empirical data, and I don't think we have the support of what I would call the key customers, which are the . They hate handicapping horses on the synthetics and so on, and in hindsight, I think it was a bad decision in California [to mandate synthetic tracks].

[b]Why does the event rotate in the first place? Why doesn't Breeders' Cup just hold the event at the same track every year?

We've discussed that. That may happen in the future, frankly. There has been a lot of debate. The final recommendations were: Should we be a destination event, like golf, or should we be a rotation between the East Coast and West Coast, or should we be a rotation between East, Midwest, and West? That's what it was. Personal opinion again, if we could find a strategic partner where the track is in the right location, it has the right infrastructure, it's accepted by our key customers, the bettors and our fans and so on, and we could have forever a destination event, I'd vote for that. That's what we need. I wouldn't be surprised if that would happen. …

[rwwupl]

Indulto wrote:

Excerpt,

I can tell you from personal experience that the ligament injuries are way, way, way up on the [artificial surfaces]. So I don't think we have enough empirical data, and I don't think we have the support of what I would call the key customers, which are the [bettors]. They hate handicapping horses on the synthetics and so on, and in hindsight, I think it was a bad decision in California [to mandate synthetic tracks

Indulto,Thanks for this post. :ThmbUp:

[robert99]

a) half a second isn't slightly faster, it's 3 lengths faster... also keep in mind we are (generally) not talking British distances here!
b) I agree with your view on UK racing, but in a way it also the point I was trying to make. The British 'final stretch' is usually longer, and the bends are not as tight. It's easier for galloping types in the UK than it is in the US. Galloping horses don't want come out of a turn and then have a short 1.5 or 2F to the wire with the closers building of sorts of momentum in the turn. They want a long and even finish that will make the come-from-behind horses get too tired to make a serious impact. Look at Royal Ascot for example. The only horse that could win with a late turn of foot was Vision d'Etat. The other group 1 races were won much further from home (as far as I remember anyway).

(a) 3 lengths (25 feet) in 1320 feet is 1.89%. The errors in manual sectional times are of that order. Acceleration takes place over 5 strides, say, which is 120 feet. 120 feet is 9% of the Quarter - but where is that 9% - in the Quarter or the end of the last Quarter or where? You are maybe mistaking average speeds over 1320 feet as actual speeds or even worse related to accelerations. Sectionals alone do not give that information. British distances start at 5 furlongs, some around one bend, so we are talking of the same.

(b) You now agree with what I stated earlier that the USA track layout disadvantages long striding, high geared , Euro turf horses. It is not just the dirt surfaces. "It's easier for galloping types in the UK than it is in the US". So conversely, it is harder when those same UK horses run on USA tracks". The Euro horses lose ground on the USA turns, get kickback in the face or come out wide - as they are high geared it takes a distance to get back up to cruise speed again and by that time on the short USA straights the race is lost. On a straight track they would get up to cruise speed and keep going to the line.
How horses win on straight tracks at Ascot has no relevance to when they run on tight tracks in USA. It is nothing to do with tiredness - they just cannot perform to their optimum any more.

[gm10]

(a) 3 lengths (25 feet) in 1320 feet is 1.89%. The errors in manual sectional times are of that order. Acceleration takes place over 5 strides, say, which is 120 feet. 120 feet is 9% of the Quarter - but where is that 9% - in the Quarter or the end of the last Quarter or where? You are maybe mistaking average speeds over 1320 feet as actual speeds or even worse related to accelerations. Sectionals alone do not give that information. British distances start at 5 furlongs, some around one bend, so we are talking of the same.


Acceleration takes place when a horse goes quicker than it went before. I looked up the three main turf races on Saturday (I did not even consider the others), and they all gave the same result: they went 0.5 second quicker towards the end. Percentages don't matter, 3 lengths is signficant. Even with the timing errors that you refer you, you will almost never see this happen on the dirt. Anyway, this is just my opnion based on what I've seen for years now on the barrel tracks like SA.

Yes, British distances start at 5F, but the acceleration that you are refering to doesn't usually happen over 5F, or am I under the wrong impression here?



(b) You now agree with what I stated earlier that the USA track layout disadvantages long striding, high geared , Euro turf horses. It is not just the dirt surfaces. "It's easier for galloping types in the UK than it is in the US". So conversely, it is harder when those same UK horses run on USA tracks". The Euro horses lose ground on the USA turns, get kickback in the face or come out wide - as they are high geared it takes a distance to get back up to cruise speed again and by that time on the short USA straights the race is lost. On a straight track they would get up to cruise speed and keep going to the line.

I can't remember a time that I disagreed. But not all European horses are long striding high geared animals, are they. Ascot may favour this type, but a place like Epsom doesn't. And in the case of French horses, track layouts don't even matter, they are trained to produce a late burst of speed. I predict that the French will do well again at Santa A this year.


How horses win on straight tracks at Ascot has no relevance to when they run on tight tracks in USA. It is nothing to do with tiredness - they just cannot perform to their optimum any more.


I never said that it had any relevance, did I? I actually agree on that part.

[Indulto]

... Indulto,Thanks for this post. :ThmbUp:My pleasure, rw.

There's lots of other good stuff in that interview, so I hope all viewers got to read the whole thing.

[FenceBored]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/106813.html
Breeders' Cup agent of change
By Matt Hegarty8/29/2009

Sanan is starting to come off as a pushy sob IMO. Of course, the whole BC management has been rather dictatorial in the past few years. Sanan doesn't seem to think their dictating terms to tracks and breeders is wrong, just that they've been dictating the wrong things. Take that 'tracks that run the BC should have all three surfaces' line. Yeah, is the BC going to foot the bill for that? No? You just want a track management to spend a few million dollars for YOUR benefit. Ok, I can see that. Of course, who's got the space to do that, anyway. I suppose Belmont could convert one of the turf courses to synthetic. Woodbine could adjust their Standardbred track for use as a dirt track (if it can't already handle the duty). But what about the other tracks Sanan mentions, Keeneland, Churchill, Santa Anita (Oak Tree). Well, if my old American Racing Manual is to be believed, none of these tracks has room to put in another reasonable sized (at least 7f) track in their current plant. More reasonable for Kentucky (if you insist on all three surfaces) would be to split the races between Keeneland and Churchill, if you could get the children to play nice. California? Not a clue what you could do there.

Not the only example from that article, but just the one closest to the topic of this thread.

[robert99]

Acceleration takes place when a horse goes quicker than it went before. I looked up the three main turf races on Saturday (I did not even consider the others), and they all gave the same result: they went 0.5 second quicker towards the end. Percentages don't matter, 3 lengths is signficant. Even with the timing errors that you refer you, you will almost never see this happen on the dirt. Anyway, this is just my opnion based on what I've seen for years now on the barrel tracks like SA.

Yes, British distances start at 5F, but the acceleration that you are refering to doesn't usually happen over 5F, or am I under the wrong impression here?

I can't remember a time that I disagreed. But not all European horses are long striding high geared animals, are they. Ascot may favour this type, but a place like Epsom doesn't. And in the case of French horses, track layouts don't even matter, they are trained to produce a late burst of speed. I predict that the French will do well again at Santa A this year.

I never said that it had any relevance, did I? I actually agree on that part.

I have tried to explain things but you seem to have a mental block on this topic. Can't think of how it could be made more simple so I will give up. Again you miss the point by saying what you see USA horses doing on dirt. Top USA BC dirt horses have already excelled on USA dirt tracks. The topic is about how Euro horses in the BC deal with USA tracks on the dirt.

Acceleration happens when they start out of the gate. Relative acceleration, when one horse slows down less than another, happens towards the finish.
No all Euro horses are not long striding. Again the ones that go to the BC are the top ones and these will be. The top Gr1 horses that win at Epsom have balance, tactical pace and stamina - they can get around Tattenham corner which is downhill and fastest in the World. Top French horses are NOT trained for a late burst of speed. They win the Arc quite regularly and compete in fast run races in UK as well as France. In fact a horse has a top speed based on way it is built and cannot be trained to exceed it or reach it any quicker once fit.

Hope the penny drops one day, as we say.

[FenceBored]

Yes that's what I have been saying, too. The euro's see the poly as a level playing field. The dirt is a dirty surface for them. It's unsafe, unpredictable (especially given the late time of year) and nearly always has a pace bias. The fact that next year is on the dirt again may actually make them send even more horses this year. Which is great, the BC is about crowning world champions.

That's funny, it's not what you were saying at the beginning of August when you doubting that they did send more horses to the BC last year. Then dirt was not a reason not to send horses, in your view. Of course, then you were bashing Jess Jackson for not wanting to run on synthetics, i.e. being concerned that his horse might be at a disadvantage on an unfriendly surface.


It's not my problem that there weren't any Euro's in those races. It's Andy Beyer's problem who claims that the BC is too euro-friendly because they won one grade 1 on the polytrack. Sorry, but he was being pathetic. And also, this article was not mentioned by me.

That column wasn't brought up by me, either. I read it at the time it was originally published, but hadn't thought of it since. My point was simply that using races without European horses in them as proof that European horses weren't as competitive as Beyer said is specious. It's like saying that because Rachel Alexandra didn't win the Ky Derby, she must not be a good horse.


I think that Americans found it hard to swallow because they got trashed in many of the turf races as well as the Classic. If Henry and Ravens Pass hadn't shown up, the overall result would have been nearly as bad but I don't think Mr. Beyer would have written his article in the way that he did.

Anyway, back on the dirt next year. Hope for you guys that an American horse wins it, not an English or Argentinian horse.

Actually, I think most American racing fans view European shippers in the turf races as serious contenders, if not favorites. Europeans dominating the turf races is not happy making, but not unforseeable.

But Beyer is right to be suspicious of the main track numbers. If you divide the starters by surface they have more starts over (Dirt, Dirt/Synth, ALL, Synth, Synth/Turf, Turf) and combine the first three and the last three you get even numbers of starters (43). There weren't any dirt/turf horses, i.e. a horse that had equal numbers of dirt and turf starts, but fewer synthetic starts. Friday looks alright, at a glance, with 17 starters for each side and a division of 5-4 in terms of ITM finishes. But, Saturday, the higher profile day, was different. There were 26 starters from each of the two camps and a division of 2-13 for the 15 ITM spots (Midnight Lute and Tiago). 13% of the ITM finishers on the main track on Saturday were horses that could be viewed as dirt horses or horses who have an equal number of dirt and synthetic starts. That is a little too out of balance to just be coincidence.

For the two days, dirt and dirt/synth horses underperformed their equal numbers (29%-71%) ITM on the main track, but on Saturday they were absolutely demolished (13%-87%), and the surface was a factor.

Level playing field? In your dreams.

[46zilzal]

Acceleration happens when they start out of the gate. Relative acceleration, when one horse slows down less than another, happens towards the finish.
No all Euro horses are not long striding. Again the ones that go to the BC are the top ones and these will be. The top Gr1 horses that win at Epsom have balance, tactical pace and stamina - they can get around Tattenham corner which is downhill and fastest in the World. Top French horses are NOT trained for a late burst of speed. They win the Arc quite regularly and compete in fast run races in UK as well as France. In fact a horse has a top speed based on way it is built and cannot be trained to exceed it or reach it any quicker once fit.


MOST races, other than on the lawn, actually SLOW down tremendously through the race. From the 2nd call to the wire is when the majority of grass types pick it up but they need a long UNIMPEDED lane to do it in. Anita does not offer horses that option as would a Newmarket, Longchamp or Curragh

[Bobzilla]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/106813.html
Breeders' Cup agent of change
By Matt Hegarty8/29/2009


Indulto,

Thanks for providing this link. Within the last few years you were helpful to many of us who were interested in following the NY franchise proceedings. Would you happen to remember the dates of, A) Governor Spitzer awarding the stewardship of NY racing to the NYRA, part of which included the state helping the NYRA with their bankruptcy issues; and B) The Breeders' Cup announcing that SA would host the event, for the 2nd year in a row, in 2009? I think the former was in mid February 2008 and the latter was a few weeks before the traditional period of announcemet and a week before the NY/NYRA announcement. I recall there was some grumbling at the time as some suspected the BC's announcement was hastened as to be made public before the announcement of the NY franchise resolution. For that reason I'm not sure what to think when I read Sanan's explanation of the BC decision including, among other things, a sense of uncertainty regarding the future of New York racing. One does get the sense that there was a little more than just business disagreements with CD, concerns over NY racing's future, and "marketing synergies" unique to southern California, behind the decision to have SA host the event for two consecutive years.

[Indulto]

Indulto,

Thanks for providing this link. Within the last few years you were helpful to many of us who were interested in following the NY franchise proceedings. Would you happen to remember the dates of, A) Governor Spitzer awarding the stewardship of NY racing to the NYRA, part of which included the state helping the NYRA with their bankruptcy issues; and B) The Breeders' Cup announcing that SA would host the event, for the 2nd year in a row, in 2009? I think the former was in mid February 2008 and the latter was a few weeks before the traditional period of announcemet and a week before the NY/NYRA announcement. I recall there was some grumbling at the time as some suspected the BC's announcement was hastened as to be made public before the announcement of the NY franchise resolution. For that reason I'm not sure what to think when I read Sanan's explanation of the BC decision including, among other things, a sense of uncertainty regarding the future of New York racing. One does get the sense that there was a little more than just business disagreements with CD, concerns over NY racing's future, and "marketing synergies" unique to southern California, behind the decision to have SA host the event for two consecutive years.BZ,
Thanks for the kind words. I'm sorry I don't remember, but it's probably in that thread somewhere. It's pure speculation on my part, but I suspect that Land was really hot on getting his two-year deal and what was the point in bringing him on board and then not listening to him. Must be the california sunshine that stimulates misguided mandate madness. ;)

[gm10]

I have tried to explain things but you seem to have a mental block on this topic. Can't think of how it could be made more simple so I will give up. Again you miss the point by saying what you see USA horses doing on dirt. Top USA BC dirt horses have already excelled on USA dirt tracks. The topic is about how Euro horses in the BC deal with USA tracks on the dirt.

Since when is that the topic???? It's about why Euro's do well or don't do well on tight American turf tracks. I have not mentioned any European performers on the dirt. You do know that Goldikova, Conduit and Donativum won on the turf, right?

Acceleration happens when they start out of the gate. Relative acceleration, when one horse slows down less than another, happens towards the finish.
No all Euro horses are not long striding. Again the ones that go to the BC are the top ones and these will be. The top Gr1 horses that win at Epsom have balance, tactical pace and stamina - they can get around Tattenham corner which is downhill and fastest in the World. Top French horses are NOT trained for a late burst of speed. They win the Arc quite regularly and compete in fast run races in UK as well as France. In fact a horse has a top speed based on way it is built and cannot be trained to exceed it or reach it any quicker once fit.

Hope the penny drops one day, as we say.

Yes yes, you are not part of the Euro yet, somehow that's supposed to be good. I think it's rather silly, but anyway, it doesn't give your arguments more credibility. Acceleration, as they teach you in school, is when you increase your speed. If the three mentioned horses all increase their speed by half a second per 2 furlongs, why can't you just admit that they showed acceleration?

The top ones that go to the BC are long striding? No, that's not true. Goldikova is not long striding, Conduit isn't really either. Sea The Stars is exceptional, he is both long-striding, and in possession of a tremendous late kick.

French horses are trained for late speed. Only look at Zarkava, Goldikova, Vision d'Etat in the last 12 months. How do/did they win? I suggest you watch French racing a bit more, you will see what I mean. Go to Deuavillle, that is a really nice place. Clairefontaine, 10mins walk away, is the prettiest race course I've ever seen in my life.

[gm10]

That's funny, it's not what you were saying at the beginning of August when you doubting that they did send more horses to the BC last year. Then dirt was not a reason not to send horses, in your view. Of course, then you were bashing Jess Jackson for not wanting to run on synthetics, i.e. being concerned that his horse might be at a disadvantage on an unfriendly surface.


I don't understand your point. Yes, they may not send more this year than last, but they certainly will send less next year.


That column wasn't brought up by me, either. I read it at the time it was originally published, but hadn't thought of it since. My point was simply that using races without European horses in them as proof that European horses weren't as competitive as Beyer said is specious. It's like saying that because Rachel Alexandra didn't win the Ky Derby, she must not be a good horse.


I wasn't saying anything about their competitiveness, I was saying that Beyer was complaining about the polytrack for no reason. They won one race on the polytrack. Why does that make the BC too euro-friendly? As you were kind enough to point out, they didn't even bother to try in the other poly races. So what was Andy on about?


Actually, I think most American racing fans view European shippers in the turf races as serious contenders, if not favorites. Europeans dominating the turf races is not happy making, but not unforseeable.

But Beyer is right to be suspicious of the main track numbers. If you divide the starters by surface they have more starts over (Dirt, Dirt/Synth, ALL, Synth, Synth/Turf, Turf) and combine the first three and the last three you get even numbers of starters (43). There weren't any dirt/turf horses, i.e. a horse that had equal numbers of dirt and turf starts, but fewer synthetic starts. Friday looks alright, at a glance, with 17 starters for each side and a division of 5-4 in terms of ITM finishes. But, Saturday, the higher profile day, was different. There were 26 starters from each of the two camps and a division of 2-13 for the 15 ITM spots (Midnight Lute and Tiago). 13% of the ITM finishers on the main track on Saturday were horses that could be viewed as dirt horses or horses who have an equal number of dirt and synthetic starts. That is a little too out of balance to just be coincidence.

For the two days, dirt and dirt/synth horses underperformed their equal numbers (29%-71%) ITM on the main track, but on Saturday they were absolutely demolished (13%-87%), and the surface was a factor.

Level playing field? In your dreams.

Please explain this methodology to me. What do you mean by 'If you divide the starters by surface they have more starts over (Dirt, Dirt/Synth, ALL, Synth, Synth/Turf, Turf) and combine the first three and the last three you get even numbers of starters (43). '

Also, what I mentioned was a level playing field from European trainers' point of view. You are ignoring this, otherwise you would be looking at how turf horses did on the dirt before and now on the poly.

[gm10]

MOST races, other than on the lawn, actually SLOW down tremendously through the race. From the 2nd call to the wire is when the majority of grass types pick it up but they need a long UNIMPEDED lane to do it in. Anita does not offer horses that option as would a Newmarket, Longchamp or Curragh

I don't think this is completely true. Some grass types need a short stretch, they've got one burst of speed that puts them ahead of the field, but they would not be able to keep it up in a long stretch. Others, the long striding ones, reach their cruising speed 3-4F from home and then decelerate at a very slow rate. They would prefer the long unimpeded lane.

[FenceBored]

I don't understand your point. Yes, they may not send more this year than last, but they certainly will send less next year.


You position is not dependent upon facts, but on what advances your argument. Let's say your argument is that Americans are less sporting than Europeans. At the beginning of August (in slamming Jess Jackson's 'sportsmanship'), this meant that you denied that Europeans shipped more horses to the BC to run on the Pro-Ride than they had over the past few years on the dirt. Now (in slamming Beyer), you say, in effect, 'of course they sent more, why wouldn't they?' That's it, nothing spectacular.


I wasn't saying anything about their competitiveness, I was saying that Beyer was complaining about the polytrack for no reason. They won one race on the polytrack. Why does that make the BC too euro-friendly? As you were kind enough to point out, they didn't even bother to try in the other poly races. So what was Andy on about?


Actually, Beyer is mainly complaining that dirt horses were put at a disadvantage on the main track. More specifically, the best horse won if he liked running on a synthetic surface. If the Breeders' Cup proved anything, it demonstrated that synthetics are not another version of dirt. Racing over them is a different game that has more in common with turf racing that it does with dirt.
Since the majority of racing in the US is on the dirt, running US based championships on a non-turf main track surface that favors non-dirt specialists is a disservice to the majority of owners/trainers who focus on dirt racing. That this makes things more pro-European is a secondary consideration. Tiago is/was/will be no match for Curlin on a 'level playing field.' That Tiago got by Curlin demonstrates that the playing field was not level. QED.


Please explain this methodology to me. What do you mean by 'If you divide the starters by surface they have more starts over (Dirt, Dirt/Synth, ALL, Synth, Synth/Turf, Turf) and combine the first three and the last three you get even numbers of starters (43). '


Simple, take the following horses: (r - races, d-dirt, s-synth, t-turf)

Midnight Lute (12r, 9d, 3s, 0t) clearly is predominately a dirt D horse.
Tiago (16r, 8d, 8s, 0t) is clearly equally run on D & S, or D/S
In Summation (25s, 10d, 8s, 7t) is an ALL, or DST horse, because the number of starts dirt to synth and then synth to turf were close.
Tiz Elemental (11s, 2d, 7s, 2t) is predominantly a synthetic horse or S.
Mast Track (12s, 0d, 5s, 7t) is a synth and turf horse, or S/T
Go Between (26r, 1d, 6s, 19t) is predominately a T, or turf horse.

I'm not trying to catch all the nuances of a horses form, just the sense of which surface(s) the horse is more familar with.

Saturday's proportions come out like this:

Starters ITM
D__ 27% 06.67%
DS_ 15% 06.67%
DST 08% 00.00%
S__ 19% 40.00%
ST_ 12% 20.00%
T__ 19% 26.67%

D+DS+DST %
(27+15+08) = 50% (06.67 + 06.67 + 00.00) = 13.33%

S+ST+T %
(19+12+19) = 50% (40.00 + 20.00 + 26.67) = 86.67%

That looks to me like Dirt favoring horses underperformed while synthetic and turf favoring horses outperformed their numbers.


Also, what I mentioned was a level playing field from European trainers' point of view. You are ignoring this, otherwise you would be looking at how turf horses did on the dirt before and now on the poly.

And what I'm saying is that European trainers don't view it as a level playing field. They, like anyone who cares to look at the facts, view it as biased in their favor. If dirt is a 1 and turf is a 9 then synthetics are not a 5, which would be level, but at least a 6.5 or 7, shifting the playing field in favor of turf horses. Take Polytrack, developed by a company in the UK to provide an all-weather alternative for training in a turf horse centric culture. Why would any rational person think that it would be other than turf horse favoring? If it wasn't more amenable to turf horses it wouldn't have met the needs of the company's clients. The same with Pro-Ride developed for the turf-centric Australian market. Gee, you think it might be structured to be more friendly to turf rather than dirt favoring horses?

If you think the facts actually support your position, you do the leg work instead of just sitting there spouting unsupported theories. But, your way is easier and less time consuming, I'll give you that.

[gm10]

You position is not dependent upon facts, but on what advances your argument. Let's say your argument is that Americans are less sporting than Europeans. At the beginning of August (in slamming Jess Jackson's 'sportsmanship'), this meant that you denied that Europeans shipped more horses to the BC to run on the Pro-Ride than they had over the past few years on the dirt. Now (in slamming Beyer), you say, in effect, 'of course they sent more, why wouldn't they?' That's it, nothing spectacular.


Oh man you are something else. So now, to win the argument, you are going to put words in my mouth and interpret those words to your advantage?? I do not think that Europeans are more sporting, but I do have very little respect for Jackson's decision to skip the BC. Someone like Tim Ice, he's a proper horse man. Oh yeah, and I still think Beyer made great contributions to the sport, but on this occasion he was being petty.


Actually, Beyer is mainly complaining that dirt horses were put at a disadvantage on the main track. More specifically, the best horse won if he liked running on a synthetic surface. If the Breeders' Cup proved anything, it demonstrated that synthetics are not another version of dirt. Racing over them is a different game that has more in common with turf racing that it does with dirt.
Since the majority of racing in the US is on the dirt, running US based championships on a non-turf main track surface that favors non-dirt specialists is a disservice to the majority of owners/trainers who focus on dirt racing. That this makes things more pro-European is a secondary consideration. Tiago is/was/will be no match for Curlin on a 'level playing field.' That Tiago got by Curlin demonstrates that the playing field was not level. QED.



Simple, take the following horses: (r - races, d-dirt, s-synth, t-turf)

Midnight Lute (12r, 9d, 3s, 0t) clearly is predominately a dirt D horse.
Tiago (16r, 8d, 8s, 0t) is clearly equally run on D & S, or D/S
In Summation (25s, 10d, 8s, 7t) is an ALL, or DST horse, because the number of starts dirt to synth and then synth to turf were close.
Tiz Elemental (11s, 2d, 7s, 2t) is predominantly a synthetic horse or S.
Mast Track (12s, 0d, 5s, 7t) is a synth and turf horse, or S/T
Go Between (26r, 1d, 6s, 19t) is predominately a T, or turf horse.

I'm not trying to catch all the nuances of a horses form, just the sense of which surface(s) the horse is more familar with.

Saturday's proportions come out like this:

Starters ITM
D__ 27% 06.67%
DS_ 15% 06.67%
DST 08% 00.00%
S__ 19% 40.00%
ST_ 12% 20.00%
T__ 19% 26.67%

D+DS+DST %
(27+15+08) = 50% (06.67 + 06.67 + 00.00) = 13.33%

S+ST+T %
(19+12+19) = 50% (40.00 + 20.00 + 26.67) = 86.67%

That looks to me like Dirt favoring horses underperformed while synthetic and turf favoring horses outperformed their numbers.

OK I did the same exercise. I end up with 19 dirt OR mixed horses, and 24 synethic or turf horses. So already less dramatic.

I found this quite interesting, so I had a look at Friday's high-profile races as well. I saw 16 dirt or mixed, and 18 poly or turf. However, on Friday the bias seemed to have been dramatically different. 6 shows for the dirt, and 3 for others.

Let's add the two days together.
Dirt or mixed: 8/35 (23%)
Turf or poly: 13/42 (31%)

Is that a big bias? Maybe there is something there, but I certainly wouldn't try to persuade someone not to back a fit dirt animal on the poly. Ignore the Classic, and the proportions are almost equal.


And what I'm saying is that European trainers don't view it as a level playing field. They, like anyone who cares to look at the facts, view it as biased in their favor. If dirt is a 1 and turf is a 9 then synthetics are not a 5, which would be level, but at least a 6.5 or 7, shifting the playing field in favor of turf horses. Take Polytrack, developed by a company in the UK to provide an all-weather alternative for training in a turf horse centric culture. Why would any rational person think that it would be other than turf horse favoring? If it wasn't more amenable to turf horses it wouldn't have met the needs of the company's clients. The same with Pro-Ride developed for the turf-centric Australian market. Gee, you think it might be structured to be more friendly to turf rather than dirt favoring horses?

If you think the facts actually support your position, you do the leg work instead of just sitting there spouting unsupported theories. But, your way is easier and less time consuming, I'll give you that.

I'm sorry if this hurts but you do not know much about synthetic racing in the UK. I can see that you have strong opinions and preconceptions about it, but sadly they are not based on facts. Early speed is essential at Southwell. At Great Leighs, it was, too. At Lingfield, it depends on the time of year. When it cools down, the pace horses win their fair share. Wolverhampton and Kempton are probably better suited to closers but pace horses are not without a chance.

But in general, you cannot translate synthetic form to turf form. It just doesn't work. Also, the Racing Post speed ratings are too high for synthetic races. I would recommend that you substract 10 points if you see the horse run on the turf.

[FenceBored]

Oh man you are something else. So now, to win the argument, you are going to put words in my mouth and interpret those words to your advantage?? I do not think that Europeans are more sporting, but I do have very little respect for Jackson's decision to skip the BC. Someone like Tim Ice, he's a proper horse man. Oh yeah, and I still think Beyer made great contributions to the sport, but on this occasion he was being petty.

I didn't put words in your mouth. A qoute does not begin with "Let's say your argument is." That is a hypothetical. Really. :rolleyes: Today, I'm not going to even hazard a guess at your real argument. I'm weary of trying to understand your underlying underness. That you took one position regarding Euro shippers at the beginning of the month, and another at the end, though, that is just a fact.


OK I did the same exercise. I end up with 19 dirt OR mixed horses, and 24 synethic or turf horses. So already less dramatic.


What are you talking about? There were 86 horses on the main track between Friday (34) and Saturday (52). You have 19+24 = 43? Where are the other half of the horses? Did they fall off the map? Wander off to take a tour of the stars' homes?


I found this quite interesting, so I had a look at Friday's high-profile races as well. I saw 16 dirt or mixed, and 18 poly or turf. However, on Friday the bias seemed to have been dramatically different. 6 shows for the dirt, and 3 for others.


First of all, I already said that Friday was fairly even. Secondly, I'd like to know how you get 6 mixed out of Friday's ITM. Five are easy: Indian Blessing (10-9/1/0), Zaftig (5-5/0/0), Sky Diva (2-2/0/0), Cocoa Beach (10-9/0/1), and Music Note (7-7/0/0).

It suddenly occurs to me that you're trying to count Zenyatta (8-1/7/0) as a DIRT horse. There aren't any other girls who finished ITM who even had one start on dirt. Are you insane? One start on dirt, and that's a dirt mix to you? Please. Granted that two people doing this exercise are going to disagree on some calls, but a 1-7-0 horse as a dirt mix? That's just dishonest.


Let's add the two days together.
Dirt or mixed: 8/35 (23%)
Turf or poly: 13/42 (31%)

Is that a big bias? Maybe there is something there, but I certainly wouldn't try to persuade someone not to back a fit dirt animal on the poly. Ignore the Classic, and the proportions are almost equal.


By Phalaris' phallus, you're incredible. No, really, I mean it. Incredible, as in not credible. I have absolutely no idea what you think this proves. 8 races times 3 ITM finishers in each would be 24 ITM total. If I'm reading your fantasies correctly, you have 21. Or, did you preemptively ignore the Classic to fudge your data better? Aw, yes, that might be it, but there were 12 horses in the Classic and your secondary figures are low by only 9. Nope, you're just making it up. Too bad. Well, maybe next time.

And really, the percentages not adding up to 100%, that's just sloppy.


I'm sorry if this hurts but you do not know much about synthetic racing in the UK. ...

But in general, you cannot translate synthetic form to turf form. It just doesn't work. Also, the Racing Post speed ratings are too high for synthetic races. I would recommend that you substract 10 points if you see the horse run on the turf.

Doesn't hurt me a bit. I don't pretend to have great knowledge of the UK racing scene except what you tell me.
The euro's see the poly as a level playing field. The dirt is a dirty surface for them.
If a surface is 'dirty' to someone, why would he want to replicate that dirtiness in synthetic form. That makes no sense. He would want to 'improve' the surface by making it more akin to the surface he prefers, i.e. turf. I never said, and never will say that a synthetic surface is the same as turf. I'm saying it's closer to turf than it is to dirt. And in the US turf form has proven to be a better predictor of synthetic form in a greater number of horses than has dirt form. Period. Einstein is a good horse on dirt, but a better one on synth or turf. He has won G1s on synth and turf, but not on dirt. Parading won the Ben Ali (G3) on Keeneland's Polytrack, and followed it up with a win in the ungraded $150k Dixie Stakes on Pimlico's turf course. Then we have Adriano and Monba, turf horses who won Ky Derby Preps in 2008 on Polytrack, and stunk up the joint whenever they ran on dirt.

[andymays]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/106883.html
Excerpt:


DEL MAR, Calif. - As Colonel John and Richard's Kid were about to have their final workouts Tuesday morning for the Grade 1, $1 million Pacific Classic, the maiden filly Bell Canyon Road broke down on the Del Mar main track. Fifteen minutes later, after Bell Canyon Road was removed in a horse ambulance, both horses worked, and worked well. But the drama of the morning left Eoin Harty, the trainer of Colonel John, and Bob Baffert, who trains Richard's Kid, unnerved.

Bell Canyon Road broke down nearing the finish line, resulting in the delay. Baffert got on his walkie-talkie and ordered Richard's Kid to cool his heels at his barn, while Colonel John waited things out near the seven-furlong chute.

[andymays]

When we had a dirt surface I believe the turns were banked at about 6 degrees. With the synthetic surfaces I believe the turns are banked at 2 degrees.

Synthetic surfaces are designed to be deeper and slower than conventional dirt so if they are used to specifications the 2 degree bank might be fine.

When you speed up a synthetic surface so it plays more like dirt the 2 degree bank is not nearly enough and I believe one of the reasons for the huge number of hind end injuries and fatalities.

If they're gonna have synthetic surfaces they should use them to specifications in my opinion.

Anybody have an opinion?

[gm10]

I didn't put words in your mouth. A qoute does not begin with "Let's say your argument is." That is a hypothetical. Really. :rolleyes: Today, I'm not going to even hazard a guess at your real argument. I'm weary of trying to understand your underlying underness. That you took one position regarding Euro shippers at the beginning of the month, and another at the end, though, that is just a fact.

I think it would be more interesting to learn about your underlying reasons. Why do you keep quoting me on things that I didn't say ("euro trainers are more sporting", "dirt routes are boring")? Why do you keep trying to prove that the poly wasn't fair? First you tried with running style, which led to nothing. Now you're trying it again with a new strategy.

Did you take something that I said personally or is it just that you can't let go?



What are you talking about? There were 86 horses on the main track between Friday (34) and Saturday (52). You have 19+24 = 43? Where are the other half of the horses? Did they fall off the map? Wander off to take a tour of the stars' homes?


First of all, I already said that Friday was fairly even. Secondly, I'd like to know how you get 6 mixed out of Friday's ITM. Five are easy: Indian Blessing (10-9/1/0), Zaftig (5-5/0/0), Sky Diva (2-2/0/0), Cocoa Beach (10-9/0/1), and Music Note (7-7/0/0).

It suddenly occurs to me that you're trying to count Zenyatta (8-1/7/0) as a DIRT horse. There aren't any other girls who finished ITM who even had one start on dirt. Are you insane? One start on dirt, and that's a dirt mix to you? Please. Granted that two people doing this exercise are going to disagree on some calls, but a 1-7-0 horse as a dirt mix? That's just dishonest.


Chill, dude. I left out the marathon because a) I didn't see this a normal race, it's never been run on the dirt before and b) all animals in that race could reasonably be classified as mainly turf or poly horses.

Yes I used Zenyatta as dirt or poly. How could you not? She's made it very clear that she handles the dirt when she beat the champion older female who's won grade 1's on the dirt before and since.

I understand that this is crucial to your little theory, but calling Zenyatta a synthetic horse only is an insult to one of the greatest mares of the century so far.


By Phalaris' phallus, you're incredible. No, really, I mean it. Incredible, as in not credible. I have absolutely no idea what you think this proves. 8 races times 3 ITM finishers in each would be 24 ITM total. If I'm reading your fantasies correctly, you have 21. Or, did you preemptively ignore the Classic to fudge your data better? Aw, yes, that might be it, but there were 12 horses in the Classic and your secondary figures are low by only 9. Nope, you're just making it up. Too bad. Well, maybe next time.

And really, the percentages not adding up to 100%, that's just sloppy.

[quote]

Yes, I left out the marathon.
Of course the % do not add up to 100%. They're not supposed to be added. You are supposed to compare them. You don't add success rates of trainer A and trainer B either do you, you compare them.

[quote]



Doesn't hurt me a bit. I don't pretend to have great knowledge of the UK racing scene except what you tell me.


If a surface is 'dirty' to someone, why would he want to replicate that dirtiness in synthetic form. That makes no sense. He would want to 'improve' the surface by making it more akin to the surface he prefers, i.e. turf. I never said, and never will say that a synthetic surface is the same as turf. I'm saying it's closer to turf than it is to dirt.

Introducing all weather tracks about safety and allowing for flat racing during the winter. Whether they tried to make it like turf, or not like dirt, is something I couldn't comment on because on. I've noted your opinion, of course.



And in the US turf form has proven to be a better predictor of synthetic form in a greater number of horses than has dirt form. Period. Einstein is a good horse on dirt, but a better one on synth or turf. He has won G1s on synth and turf, but not on dirt. Parading won the Ben Ali (G3) on Keeneland's Polytrack, and followed it up with a win in the ungraded $150k Dixie Stakes on Pimlico's turf course. Then we have Adriano and Monba, turf horses who won Ky Derby Preps in 2008 on Polytrack, and stunk up the joint whenever they ran on dirt.
How about Summer Bird who was a synthetic horse before winning the Derby. How about Pioneer Of The Nile who finished second.


Here are the dirt-poly and turf-to-poly strike rates. Horses coming off the turf do better than horses coming off the dirt.

KEE dirt-poly 12.4% turf-poly 11.4%
AP dirt-poly 11.6% turf-poly 14.4%
WO dirt-poly 9.2% turf-poly 13.5%
TP dirt-poly 9.8% turf-poly 12.2%
SA dirt-poly 9.9% turf-poly 11.4%
HOL dirt-poly 10.8% turf-poly 11.2%
GG dirt-poly 11.2% turf-poly 13.6%
DMR dirt-poly 8% turf-poly 11.4%
PID dirt-poly 11.4% turf-poly 14.9%

Anyway, I do agree with you that (overall) turf horses have a slight edge, but your all-knowing, black-and-white way of thinking stops me from enjoying this conversation. Curlin was not beaten by Tiago because of some theoretical constraint put on him by the race surface. He was beaten because he was an animal with a declining form line. A fully fit Curlin would have carried his middle move much further.

[gm10]

I think it would be more interesting to learn about your underlying reasons. Why do you keep quoting me on things that I didn't say ("euro trainers are more sporting", "dirt routes are boring")? Why do you keep trying to prove that the poly wasn't fair? First you tried with running style, which led to nothing. Now you're trying it again with a new strategy.


Did you take something that I said personally or is it just that you can't let go?




Chill, dude. I left out the marathon because a) I didn't see this a normal race, it's never been run on the dirt before and b) all animals in that race could reasonably be classified as mainly turf or poly horses.

Yes I used Zenyatta as dirt or poly. How could you not? She's made it very clear that she handles the dirt when she beat the champion older female who's won grade 1's on the dirt before and since.

I understand that this is crucial to your little theory, but calling Zenyatta a synthetic horse only is an insult to one of the greatest mares of the century so far.


[quote]By Phalaris' phallus, you're incredible. No, really, I mean it. Incredible, as in not credible. I have absolutely no idea what you think this proves. 8 races times 3 ITM finishers in each would be 24 ITM total. If I'm reading your fantasies correctly, you have 21. Or, did you preemptively ignore the Classic to fudge your data better? Aw, yes, that might be it, but there were 12 horses in the Classic and your secondary figures are low by only 9. Nope, you're just making it up. Too bad. Well, maybe next time.
And really, the percentages not adding up to 100%, that's just sloppy.

[quote]

Yes, I left out the marathon.
Of course the % do not add up to 100%. They're not supposed to be added. You are supposed to compare them. You don't add success rates of trainer A and trainer B either do you, you compare them.



Introducing all weather tracks about safety and allowing for flat racing during the winter. Whether they tried to make it like turf, or not like dirt, is something I couldn't comment on because on. I've noted your opinion, of course.



How about Summer Bird who was a synthetic horse before winning the Derby. How about Pioneer Of The Nile who finished second.


Here are the dirt-poly and turf-to-poly strike rates. Horses coming off the turf do better than horses coming off the dirt.

KEE dirt-poly 12.4% turf-poly 11.4%
AP dirt-poly 11.6% turf-poly 14.4%
WO dirt-poly 9.2% turf-poly 13.5%
TP dirt-poly 9.8% turf-poly 12.2%
SA dirt-poly 9.9% turf-poly 11.4%
HOL dirt-poly 10.8% turf-poly 11.2%
GG dirt-poly 11.2% turf-poly 13.6%
DMR dirt-poly 8% turf-poly 11.4%
PID dirt-poly 11.4% turf-poly 14.9%

Anyway, I do agree with you that (overall) turf horses have a slight edge, but your all-knowing, black-and-white way of thinking stops me from enjoying this conversation. Curlin was not beaten by Tiago because of some theoretical constraint put on him by the race surface. He was beaten because he was an animal with a declining form line. A fully fit Curlin would have carried his middle move much further.
i meant Mind That Bird, not Summer Bird

[robert99]

When we had a dirt surface I believe the turns were banked at about 6 degrees. With the synthetic surfaces I believe the turns are banked at 2 degrees.

Synthetic surfaces are designed to be deeper and slower than conventional dirt so if they are used to specifications the 2 degree bank might be fine.

When you speed up a synthetic surface so it plays more like dirt the 2 degree bank is not nearly enough and I believe one of the reasons for the huge number of hind end injuries and fatalities.

If they're gonna have synthetic surfaces they should use them to specifications in my opinion.

Anybody have an opinion?

Camber should depend on the bend radius (135m minimum in UK) and the speed of the horse at that bend. In UK, the polytrack is designed to be as near as good-firm turf and is faster at "standard" going than average dirt. So the cambers are the same on polytrack as on turf, as the maximum racing speeds will be much the same. Polytrack cushion depth is to suit one horse imprint so they are not designed here to be "deeper". There are no huge number of injuries and fatalities on any racing surface anywhere in the world - you are blowing too hard here.

The UK approval specifications for polytrack material are at the link below. They include for toxicity testing, drainage rate and imprint depth. What specifications did USA tracks use?

http://www.britishhorseracing.com/resources/media/publications_and_reports/ArtificialApprovalProtocol.pdf

[andymays]

Camber should depend on the bend radius (135m minimum in UK) and the speed of the horse at that bend. In UK, the polytrack is designed to be as near as good-firm turf and is faster at "standard" going than average dirt. So the cambers are the same on polytrack as on turf, as the maximum racing speeds will be much the same. Polytrack cushion depth is to suit one horse imprint so they are not designed here to be "deeper". There are no huge number of injuries and fatalities on any racing surface anywhere in the world - you are blowing too hard here.

The UK approval specifications for polytrack material are at the link below. They include for toxicity testing, drainage rate and imprint depth. What specifications did USA tracks use?

http://www.britishhorseracing.com/resources/media/publications_and_reports/ArtificialApprovalProtocol.pdf


I'm not talking about anywhere else in the world except Southern California.

The dirt surfaces were banked at about 6 degrees. They have made the synthetic surfaces a little faster than they were orginially intended in my opinion. If the old dirt surfaces were banked at 2 degrees I think we would see the same hind end injuries and catasrophic breakdowns that we're seeing at Del Mar right now.

Are you saying the degree of banking on the turns makes no difference?

[gm10]

Camber should depend on the bend radius (135m minimum in UK) and the speed of the horse at that bend. In UK, the polytrack is designed to be as near as good-firm turf and is faster at "standard" going than average dirt. So the cambers are the same on polytrack as on turf, as the maximum racing speeds will be much the same. Polytrack cushion depth is to suit one horse imprint so they are not designed here to be "deeper". There are no huge number of injuries and fatalities on any racing surface anywhere in the world - you are blowing too hard here.

The UK approval specifications for polytrack material are at the link below. They include for toxicity testing, drainage rate and imprint depth. What specifications did USA tracks use?

http://www.britishhorseracing.com/resources/media/publications_and_reports/ArtificialApprovalProtocol.pdf

Very interesting post. I was actually reading on this yesterday.

From my experience (and I mean actually walking on the surface), I certainly agree that synthetic surfaces aren't deeper and slower than dirt. The only exception would be Great Leighs which was more like fresh snow than anything else. And the final times bear this out too. I looked at median times (6F, dry) on the synthetic tracks which used to have a dirt surface and compared with the current median times.

DMR: faster dirt
TP: unch
GG: unch
SA: faster poly
WO: faster poly
HOL: faster poly
AP: faster poly
KEE: faster poly (1.5 seconds!!)

I didn't react to Andy's post, but I was very surprised to learn that the dirt surface was banked at a steeper angle than the poly.

One of the advantages of the synthetic surface is that you can bank it at a steeper angle because the dirt tended to fall apart at steeper angles. And obviously, steeper angles mean lower centripetal forces on the horse. This would result in quicker race times (this seems to be true), is better for their bones, but I suspect it is also when one of the reasons why they result in tighter finishes.
(Although I have to add that the outside horses are subject to slightly higher centripetal forces because their bend radius is slightly bigger.)

Fascinating in this respect is Selangor Turf Club in Malaysia, where they banked the turns at up to 11 degrees in order to get tight finishes. It was not a by-product, it was by design!!! So obviously, there must have been research on this - if anyone has a link?

Another aspect that I started thinking about yesterday, is FRICTION. Maximum acceleration is proportional to the friction coefficient of the surface. And although I have never seen any formal measures of this, I am almost sure that dirt has a lower friction coefficient (which means that it is slower) than grass or poly, which would explain why you see that horses slow down less on those surfaces than on the dirt (and especially on the grass, they are actually able to quicken).

Robert, where did you get that max. radius from?

[FenceBored]

I think it would be more interesting to learn about your underlying reasons. Why do you keep quoting me on things that I didn't say ("euro trainers are more sporting", "dirt routes are boring")? Why do you keep trying to prove that the poly wasn't fair? First you tried with running style, which led to nothing. Now you're trying it again with a new strategy.

Did you take something that I said personally or is it just that you can't let go?


We already established that I did not "quote you" about 'euro trainers are more sporting,' that was a clearly hypothetical rationale presented when I didn't know and had no interest in trying to glean your actual one. The 'dirt routes are boring' is a reasonable interpretation of your actual statement:
Well dirt sprint racing especially imo as it seems to do little for the breed. And longer distances on the dirt ... I think we can agree that's a bit boring. #155 (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=720527&postcount=155)
If you don't think your own words accurately reflect your own sentiments, don't complain to me about it.


Chill, dude. I left out the marathon because a) I didn't see this a normal race, it's never been run on the dirt before and b) all animals in that race could reasonably be classified as mainly turf or poly horses.


Oh, so those were Saturday ONLY numbers? I didn't cotton on to that since their still off. Leaving aside the Marathon, 44 horses ran on the main on Saturday, not 43. (12 each in the Juv, DM, and Classic, 8 in the Sprint). Nine were entered in the Marathon, but Add Heat scratched leaving eight.

So, you're trying to leave data out from a sample that is overly small to begin with, because you think that helps your case? First of all Delightful Kiss (20-12/2/6) seems unavoidably a dirt or dirt mix horse and some of the others are arguably more ALL than synth/turf. However, if we just follow your Zenyatta example, there are 4 or 5 dirt mix horses, depending on how you play it, so you're being inconsistent. But hey, what else is new. Of course, if you maintained consistency, and included the Marathon, you could have created a stronger case, since two of the ITM runners from the Marathon would be classed as dirt/mixes, thus adjusting the percentages in dirt's favor. In fact, counting all horses who ever made a start on dirt prior to the 2008 BC as dirt or dirt mix horses would have resulted in a figure of 54% of ITM finishers for both days being dirt or dirt/mix horses. The Saturday figures change to 47% dirt vs. 53% synth/turf. See how easy that would have been.


Yes I used Zenyatta as dirt or poly. How could you not? She's made it very clear that she handles the dirt when she beat the champion older female who's won grade 1's on the dirt before and since.

I understand that this is crucial to your little theory, but calling Zenyatta a synthetic horse only is an insult to one of the greatest mares of the century so far.
[/qoute]

How would calling Zenyatta a predominately synthetic campaigned horse be an insult? That's just accurate, given her race career. Now, calling her a 'pampered plastic princess' would be an insult, but no one has done that.

The question is what surface have they predominately run on. That's the only question we can answer with even the slightest degree of agreement. And seemingly we can't even agree on that.

My friend Harry thinks Goldikova would be even more impressive on dirt, so he says she's really a dirt horse beating those "grassers" at their own game. That seem reasonable to you? No, I shouldn't think so, doesn't to me either.


Anyway, I do agree with you that (overall) turf horses have a slight edge, but your all-knowing, black-and-white way of thinking stops me from enjoying this conversation. Curlin was not beaten by Tiago because of some theoretical constraint put on him by the race surface. He was beaten because he was an animal with a declining form line. A fully fit Curlin would have carried his middle move much further.

I don't see how any person could look at the following phrase from my last post and imagine that I'm presenting a black-and-white way of thinking.

[quote=fencebored]And in the US turf form has proven to be a better predictor of synthetic form in a greater number of horses than has dirt form.

Could I have qualified that statement much more? Does that quote indicate I think that all turf horses will run well on synthetics? No. Does that quote indicate that I think no dirt horses will run well on synthetics? No. Does that quote indicate that I think that all turf horses who adapt well to synthetics will run better than dirt horses of a similar class who adapt well to synthetics, or vice versa? No. It simply means that the universe of US horses well adapted to running on turf will, as a group, handle running on synthetic surfaces better than dirt horses with no affinity for the turf will, as a group. Individual results may vary. No warranty for actual performance implied. As with all speculative ventures wagering on horseracing carries a risk of losses.

As to Curlin, the JCGC, and the myth of declining form we'll handle that in a separate post.

[gm10]

We already established that I did not "quote you" about 'euro trainers are more sporting,' that was a clearly hypothetical rationale presented when I didn't know and had no interest in trying to glean your actual one. The 'dirt routes are boring' is a reasonable interpretation of your actual statement:#155 (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=720527&postcount=155)


If you don't think your own words accurately reflect your own sentiments, don't complain to me about it.




Oh, so those were Saturday ONLY numbers? I didn't cotton on to that since their still off. Leaving aside the Marathon, 44 horses ran on the main on Saturday, not 43. (12 each in the Juv, DM, and Classic, 8 in the Sprint). Nine were entered in the Marathon, but Add Heat scratched leaving eight.

So, you're trying to leave data out from a sample that is overly small to begin with, because you think that helps your case? First of all Delightful Kiss (20-12/2/6) seems unavoidably a dirt or dirt mix horse and some of the others are arguably more ALL than synth/turf. However, if we just follow your Zenyatta example, there are 4 or 5 dirt mix horses, depending on how you play it, so you're being inconsistent. But hey, what else is new. Of course, if you maintained consistency, and included the Marathon, you could have created a stronger case, since two of the ITM runners from the Marathon would be classed as dirt/mixes, thus adjusting the percentages in dirt's favor. In fact, counting all horses who ever made a start on dirt prior to the 2008 BC as dirt or dirt mix horses would have resulted in a figure of 54% of ITM finishers for both days being dirt or dirt/mix horses. The Saturday figures change to 47% dirt vs. 53% synth/turf. See how easy that would have been.


Yes I used Zenyatta as dirt or poly. How could you not? She's made it very clear that she handles the dirt when she beat the champion older female who's won grade 1's on the dirt before and since.

I understand that this is crucial to your little theory, but calling Zenyatta a synthetic horse only is an insult to one of the greatest mares of the century so far.


How would calling Zenyatta a predominately synthetic campaigned horse be an insult? That's just accurate, given her race career. Now, calling her a 'pampered plastic princess' would be an insult, but no one has done that.

The question is what surface have they predominately run on. That's the only question we can answer with even the slightest degree of agreement. And seemingly we can't even agree on that.

My friend Harry thinks Goldikova would be even more impressive on dirt, so he says she's really a dirt horse beating those "grassers" at their own game. That seem reasonable to you? No, I shouldn't think so, doesn't to me either.



I don't see how any person could look at the following phrase from my last post and imagine that I'm presenting a black-and-white way of thinking.






Could I have qualified that statement much more? Does that quote indicate I think that all turf horses will run well on synthetics? No. Does that quote indicate that I think no dirt horses will run well on synthetics? No. Does that quote indicate that I think that all turf horses who adapt well to synthetics will run better than dirt horses of a similar class who adapt well to synthetics, or vice versa? No. It simply means that the universe of US horses well adapted to running on turf will, as a group, handle running on synthetic surfaces better than dirt horses with no affinity for the turf will, as a group. Individual results may vary. No warranty for actual performance implied. As with all speculative ventures wagering on horseracing carries a risk of losses.


As to Curlin, the JCGC, and the myth of declining form we'll handle that in a separate post.

First post got lost because you misspelled [quote]!!!

Anyway, doesn't matter. I'm letting this one go, as we are not contributing anything anymore. Thx for your second way of looking at surface preference. It's far from conclusive in this case, but the thinking behind it is creditable.

[46zilzal]

As to Curlin, the JCGC, and the myth of declining form we'll handle that in a separate post.
I spoke to TWO DRF columnists about this and they both agreed that Curlin was never the same after returning from Dubai.Seems they write for a living and BOTH noticed it.

[gm10]

I spoke to TWO DRF columnists about this and they both agreed that Curlin was never the same after returning from Dubai.Seems they write for a living and BOTH noticed it.

Fully agree. The one fast race he ran after the Dubai WC was in the Woodward. His last race before the BC was nothing special, the rating I got for him there was grade 2 level.

I have nothing agst Dubai but imo many top horses don't come back at the same level. Indian Blessing is another prime example.

[FenceBored]

I spoke to TWO DRF columnists about this and they both agreed that Curlin was never the same after returning from Dubai.Seems they write for a living and BOTH noticed it.

A lot of people say that no horse is as good after the Dubai trip as they were before. My question, to them or to you if you're willing, is where does that show up in Curlin's figures?

I don't have the Beyers for his 2008 races, but I've got the Bris pps for the 2008 Breeder's Cup pulled up right now. Curlin's Bris Speed Figures for the two races before the BC in 2007 were 107 for his 3rd place finish in the Haskell and 117 for the JCGC. The Bris Speed Figures for the two races leading up to the 2008 BC were 107 for the Woodward and 117 for the JCGC. Margin of victory in the 2007 JCGC was a neck, 3/4 in 2008. Both years he was in a stretch duel with one of the pacesetters.

Intermediate fractions in 2007 were 47.4 1:11.3 1:36.1 2:01.1 track fst.
Intermediate fractions in 2008 were 48.3 1:13.0 1:36.3 2:01.4 track sly.

With a slower pace in 2008, Wanderin Boy had a bit more left in the tank, and that's why he's able to hang around better than one might think. But, the major difference in Curlin's effort level comes from looking at the races.

dOtkuPda-ik

Notice that Robbie has his right hand off the reins in the stretch, showing Curlin the whip and hitting him a couple of times. Now compare that to 2008.

bZHq4clb_rA

Robbie's hands stay on the reins, which he shakes vigourously at him a few times, but no showing of the whip, no hits. In short, he didn't urge him to the same effort as in 2007.

That just doesn't look like a horse who had lost a step from the 2007 edition to me.

Now, since I've started this I'll finish it with the BC Classics from 2007 and 2008. Someone in a comment at the Bloodhorse pointed this out, and looking at the tapes it seems like there might be something to it. In 2007, Curlin and Street Sense run pretty much side by side down the backstretch and into the turn. They move at the same time and are accelerating together. Then Street Sense flattens out, while Curlin keeps pressing. Street Sense's flattening out in 2007 is exactly like Curlin's flattening out in 2008. In 2007 the consensus seemed to be that Street Sense just didn't handle the sloppy track well enough to maintain acceleration, i.e. the track tired him. Why is it so hard to think that the same thing happened with Curlin in 2008? That he wasn't handling the track well enough to have sufficient energy to continue driving through the stretch. Pay close attention to Smooth Air (6), who finishes 7th, during the stretch. He neither gains nor loses ground to Curlin during the last furlong. Together they don't seem to be backing up per se, they're just standing still.

Sensei CJ will probably beat me with a shinai for this, but it looks like Curlin's raw time for the two Classics is roughly the same as well. 2007 was 2:00.2, 2008 was 1:59.2 w/ Curlin back about 5 lengths with slower opening fractions. The difference is that Tiago, who had lost ground in the stretch to Curlin in the Belmont and 2007 Classic passed him this time. Clearly, in my view, Tiago was handling the Pro-Ride better than Curlin.


XsLOcQYi9ys


Pn2bnTeeIZk

[joanied]

fencebored...video clips:ThmbUp: and everything...great post and you make great points...

I see what you are saying...and agree...Curlin wasn't handeling the surface and it wasn't his actually loosing his usual power run, he was simply 'standing still', not going anywhere, while the horses in front of him, loving the surface, kept accelerating...in other words, had the BCC been on dirt, despite his campaign & trip to Dubia...he woulda won....so, if that is what you are saying (and showing with the video)...I agree:) and said as much in a post somewhere...if the BCC was on dirt...he wins!!

[gm10]

In 2007, Curlin and Street Sense run pretty much side by side down the backstretch and into the turn. They move at the same time and are accelerating together. Then Street Sense flattens out, while Curlin keeps pressing. Street Sense's flattening out in 2007 is exactly like Curlin's flattening out in 2008. In 2007 the consensus seemed to be that Street Sense just didn't handle the sloppy track well enough to maintain acceleration, i.e. the track tired him. Why is it so hard to think that the same thing happened with Curlin in 2008?



Because Curlin's form line was declining. I got an 86 for him in the JCGC. To get a sense of what that means, Bullsbay got a 87 in the Whitney this year. Rachel Alexandra got a 94 in the Haskell.

Apart from the very slowly run Belmont Stakes, 86 was the lowest I ever gave to Curlin before the BC 08 where he ran 83.

Anyway, I've never seen a BC Classic winner who came off a less than 89 prep.

2008: Ravens Pass last prep 90
2007: Curlin last prep 89
2006: Invasor last prep 94
2005: Saint Liam last prep 94
2004: Ghostzapper last prep 95

In my view, it is very simple, Curlin was not the same beast as he was 12 months before, and he was not going to beat the sharp horses in a very good field.

[FenceBored]

fencebored...video clips:ThmbUp: and everything...great post and you make great points...

I see what you are saying...and agree...Curlin wasn't handeling the surface and it wasn't his actually loosing his usual power run, he was simply 'standing still', not going anywhere, while the horses in front of him, loving the surface, kept accelerating...in other words, had the BCC been on dirt, despite his campaign & trip to Dubia...he woulda won....so, if that is what you are saying (and showing with the video)...I agree:) and said as much in a post somewhere...if the BCC was on dirt...he wins!!

I wouldn't say Curlin would have definitely won on dirt. That depends on how Raven's Pass and HenrytheNavigator handle dirt, which is a complete unknown. Then there's the question of Duke of Marmalade. What happened with him? I had put a line through his Arc (7th by 4 lengths) with the idea that the soft course had given him trouble, but maybe that did indicate he needed a rest.

[gm10]

I wouldn't say Curlin would have definitely won on dirt. That depends on how Raven's Pass and HenrytheNavigator handle dirt, which is a complete unknown. Then there's the question of Duke of Marmalade. What happened with him? I had put a line through his Arc (7th by 4 lengths) with the idea that the soft course had given him trouble, but maybe that did indicate he needed a rest.

Hey, we agree. The Duke was a bit of a disppointment in both races. I think he was in the same situation as Curlin, a long campaign was catching up on him.

[robert99]

I'm not talking about anywhere else in the world except Southern California.

The dirt surfaces were banked at about 6 degrees. They have made the synthetic surfaces a little faster than they were orginially intended in my opinion. If the old dirt surfaces were banked at 2 degrees I think we would see the same hind end injuries and catasrophic breakdowns that we're seeing at Del Mar right now.

Are you saying the degree of banking on the turns makes no difference?

The physics of cambered bends are the same anywhere.
To enable a horse to keep its galloping stride the centripetal force is provided by the correct camber angle which must be proportional to the horse speed squared/ bend radius. The surface material is not relevant.
What were the specifications used for S California polytrack types?
The early tracks suffered from sand migrating to the inside rails if the camber was "high" but that has been designed out on modern polytracks.

If the camber is too small, then the horse must lean towards the rail and bring its legs under its body. Doing that it can slip sideways or clip heels. So those would be the more common injuries.

If the track at Del Mar is being harrowed too deep and the surface crust rolled too light, then the horse feet could break through the crust and slide or get trapped in the soft undersurface sufficient to twist / break limbs. Information on where on the track the damage occurs would avoid any speculation. As far as I know, we do not get any such injuries on UK polytrack which is why the top trainers have polytrack on their home training gallops.

[andymays]

The physics of cambered bends are the same anywhere.
To enable a horse to keep its galloping stride the centripetal force is provided by the correct camber angle which must be proportional to the horse speed squared/ bend radius. The surface material is not relevant.
What were the specifications used for S California polytrack types?
The early tracks suffered from sand migrating to the inside rails if the camber was "high" but that has been designed out on modern polytracks.

If the camber is too small, then the horse must lean towards the rail and bring its legs under its body. Doing that it can slip sideways or clip heels. So those would be the more common injuries.

If the track at Del Mar is being harrowed too deep and the surface crust rolled too light, then the horse feet could break through the crust and slide or get trapped in the soft undersurface sufficient to twist / break limbs. Information on where on the track the damage occurs would avoid any speculation. As far as I know, we do not get any such injuries on UK polytrack which is why the top trainers have polytrack on their home training gallops.


I guess I'm not explaining myself too well. If two degrees of bank is OK now why wasn't it Ok when they had a dirt surface. Why didn't the dirt surface have a 2 degree bank on the turns instead of a 6 degree bank?

When the synthetic surface plays real slow people complain and so do Trainers so they speed it up to play like dirt. If they're gonna do that they need a 6 degree bank on the turns. It is my understanding that there are maintenance problems with grooming a synthetic surface with a 6 degree bank but I don't really know if that is valid!

I believe the 2 degree banking at Del Mar is part of the reason for the injuries and breakdowns.

[andymays]

Raw data not the whole synthetic story
By Jay Hovdey


http://www.drf.com/news/article/106916.html

Excerpt:

The most damaging byproduct of the synthetic-surface debate is the fact that the subject of surfaces crowds out rational consideration of all the other factors that contribute to breakdowns and fatalities. The racetracks and racing board backed themselves into this corner, though, by allowing synthetic surfaces to be advertised as safer than dirt. This was asking for trouble. Fatalities raise red flags, and now practically every fatality would be somehow connected to racing surface, no matter what the mitigating circumstances.

Excerpt:

"You might as well be talking about abortion or gun control when you're talking about synthetic surfaces," Arthur added. "There is no way you can get intelligent, disinterested conversation. People have staked their ground, and it's become an emotional issue."



Hovdey is one of the best the DRF has and I value his opinion and he makes some great points. He says the recent report that came out was misleading.

Anyway it's an interesting and controversial article depending on which side of the debate you're on.

None of the Reporters are willing to ask Dr Rick Arthur or Joe Harper or Craig Fravel if they have in the past or expect in the future to receive financial benefits like stock options from their advocacy of synthetic surfaces.

I have submitted the question to the CHRB but they haven't yet responded. :eek:

[gm10]

I guess I'm not explaining myself too well. If two degrees of bank is OK now why wasn't it Ok when they had a dirt surface. Why didn't the dirt surface have a 2 degree bank on the turns instead of a 6 degree bank?

When the synthetic surface plays real slow people complain and so do Trainers so they speed it up to play like dirt. If they're gonna do that they need a 6 degree bank on the turns. It is my understanding that there are maintenance problems with grooming a synthetic surface with a 6 degree bank but I don't really know if that is valid!

I believe the 2 degree banking at Del Mar is part of the reason for the injuries and breakdowns.

If there really is a 2 degree bank vs 6 degree in the past, then you are absolutely right that this would cause more injuries. Can I ask you where you got these numbers from?
One of the advantages of synthetic surfaces is that they can be banked at bigger angles.

[robert99]

I guess I'm not explaining myself too well. If two degrees of bank is OK now why wasn't it Ok when they had a dirt surface. Why didn't the dirt surface have a 2 degree bank on the turns instead of a 6 degree bank?

When the synthetic surface plays real slow people complain and so do Trainers so they speed it up to play like dirt. If they're gonna do that they need a 6 degree bank on the turns. It is my understanding that there are maintenance problems with grooming a synthetic surface with a 6 degree bank but I don't really know if that is valid!

I believe the 2 degree banking at Del Mar is part of the reason for the injuries and breakdowns.

As the horse speeds are much the same on both surfaces and the bend radius is presumably the same then the banking should be same angle on both surfaces. I have not got the bend radius data to hand.
The cambers should be designed for the fastest speed that horses will run - the optimum angle does not change much for slower speed tracks.
Modern polytracks are designed from the sub-base up. The drainage sub-base is laid to a correct and fixed camber and a uniform depth of polytrack material sits on that. If the track has not done that (ie put in a cheap design as at S Anita) and is harrowing too deep, the sand just falls down the slope and you get a slow rail bias. Track crew have to blade the deep sand back up the camber - which can end up anywhere. (Whether they cheated further to avoid this problem and laid the camber at 2 degrees I don't know, as you have not told me the specification used).

There are about a dozen different factors which can cause injuries and it needs scientific data to be produced with factual information.

[Bruddah]

As the horse speeds are much the same on both surfaces and the bend radius is presumably the same then the banking should be same angle on both surfaces. I have not got the bend radius data to hand.
The cambers should be designed for the fastest speed that horses will run - the optimum angle does not change much for slower speed tracks.
Modern polytracks are designed from the sub-base up. The drainage sub-base is laid to a correct and fixed camber and a uniform depth of polytrack material sits on that. If the track has not done that (ie put in a cheap design as at S Anita) and is harrowing too deep, the sand just falls down the slope and you get a slow rail bias. Track crew have to blade the deep sand back up the camber - which can end up anywhere. (Whether they cheated further to avoid this problem and laid the camber at 2 degrees I don't know, as you have not told me the specification used).

There are about a dozen different factors which can cause injuries and it needs scientific data to be produced with factual information.

You gotta just love it when a "plan" to simplify and reduce track maintenance comes together. Not to mention the cost savings and the reduction of track related equine deaths.

There was no need for scientific data or factual information then, just rush to install and make out those Cashier checks. Don't need no stinkin science to back up our claims. :bang: :lol: :lol:

There were some of us on to this Polycrap scheme from the beginning. But, according to several on this board we were the "unwashed and uninformed". You gotta love it when VINDICATION happens in the real world. :ThmbDown:

[gm10]

As the horse speeds are much the same on both surfaces and the bend radius is presumably the same then the banking should be same angle on both surfaces. I have not got the bend radius data to hand.
The cambers should be designed for the fastest speed that horses will run - the optimum angle does not change much for slower speed tracks.
Modern polytracks are designed from the sub-base up. The drainage sub-base is laid to a correct and fixed camber and a uniform depth of polytrack material sits on that. If the track has not done that (ie put in a cheap design as at S Anita) and is harrowing too deep, the sand just falls down the slope and you get a slow rail bias. Track crew have to blade the deep sand back up the camber - which can end up anywhere. (Whether they cheated further to avoid this problem and laid the camber at 2 degrees I don't know, as you have not told me the specification used).

There are about a dozen different factors which can cause injuries and it needs scientific data to be produced with factual information.

Very interesting, again. Certainly learning a lot about synthetic surfaces.

A few remarks ... the speed is not the same on dirt and polytrack at Del Mar (see my post a few days ago).
But even if they were, you couldn't conclude that the banking angle is the same because that would be ignoring the 'slippage' of the surface. On sandy dirt tracks, the hoof slides forward on impact, and the horse loses part of its ability to control the position of its feet, which would make it go slower.

[andymays]

The Polytrack company did not do the base at Del Mar so they don't know for sure but they think the bank is 3 degrees. The representative said to check with Del Mar or whoever did the base.

I know the dirt surface at Del Mar has fluctuated over the years between 5 and 7 degrees. Whether or not 2 degrees of difference can make any difference between the old suface and the new I don't know. Just a theory that's shared by more people than only myself.

[andymays]

[/B]

You gotta just love it when a "plan" to simplify and reduce track maintenance comes together. Not to mention the cost savings and the reduction of track related equine deaths.

There was no need for scientific data or factual information then, just rush to install and make out those Cashier checks. Don't need no stinkin science to back up our claims. :bang: :lol: :lol:

There were some of us on to this Polycrap scheme from the beginning. But, according to several on this board we were the "unwashed and uninformed". You gotta love it when VINDICATION happens in the real world. :ThmbDown:



:ThmbUp:

[andymays]

There is no question that this is a super hot issue and like it says in the article from the DRF that is posted above.

Excerpt:

"You might as well be talking about abortion or gun control when you're talking about synthetic surfaces," Arthur added. "There is no way you can get intelligent, disinterested conversation. People have staked their ground, and it's become an emotional issue."

[46zilzal]

Excerpt:

"You might as well be talking about abortion or gun control when you're talking about synthetic surfaces," Arthur added. "There is no way you can get intelligent, disinterested conversation. People have staked their ground, and it's become an emotional issue."
Emotional? I love Woodbine and play THAT surface all the time. I don't play KEENELAND or any California tracks since my results tell me to go elsewhere. Simple LOGIC that's all.

[robert99]

Very interesting, again. Certainly learning a lot about synthetic surfaces.

A few remarks ... the speed is not the same on dirt and polytrack at Del Mar (see my post a few days ago).
But even if they were, you couldn't conclude that the banking angle is the same because that would be ignoring the 'slippage' of the surface. On sandy dirt tracks, the hoof slides forward on impact, and the horse loses part of its ability to control the position of its feet, which would make it go slower.

Said "much" the same - the camber has to be worked for the maximum likely speed on the particular track. That actual racing speed will vary with the track variant and the class of horses. That variation is greater than that between general dirt and polytrack. Tracks are designed by practical people - not accountants. The calculation is not that sensitive and you work to nearest whole degree, not minutes and seconds. I also posted that polytrack is generally faster than dirt - polytrack also has elastic fibres which rebound energy for aiding the horse's locomotion. The slippage you are talking about is in the direction of travel - the centripetal force "slippage" is at 90 degrees to the direction of horse travel. If the camber is perfect then there is no 90 degree slippage at hoof contact - so the surface has no relevance.

Incidentally, I understand Woodbine camber is 3 degrees and some want to increase it as some horses not getting round easily.

[andymays]

Said "much" the same - the camber has to be worked for the maximum likely speed on the particular track. That actual racing speed will vary with the track variant and the class of horses. That variation is greater than that between general dirt and polytrack. Tracks are designed by practical people - not accountants. The calculation is not that sensitive and you work to nearest whole degree, not minutes and seconds. I also posted that polytrack is generally faster than dirt - polytrack also has elastic fibres which rebound energy for aiding the horse's locomotion. The slippage you are talking about is in the direction of travel - the centripetal force "slippage" is at 90 degrees to the direction of horse travel. If the camber is perfect then there is no 90 degree slippage at hoof contact - so the surface has no relevance.

Incidentally, I understand Woodbine camber is 3 degrees and some want to increase it as some horses not getting round easily.


The polytrack at Del Mar doesn't have all the specified ingredients because of environmental concerns.

When it's all said and done they are going to have to go to 5 or 6 degrees on the turns if they want it done correctly.

[cj]

I spoke to TWO DRF columnists about this and they both agreed that Curlin was never the same after returning from Dubai.Seems they write for a living and BOTH noticed it.

Thanks, I needed the laugh today.

[classhandicapper]

It seems I'm the only handicapper in America that thinks Curlin ran as well on the synthetic track at SA in the BC Classic as he was running all year on dirt.

This is my thinking.

1. The speed figures earned on dirt and synthetic tracks do not transfer well. Even Beyer has since upgraded all the high level synthetic figures (IMO not by enough at the very very top). So go back to hiss PPs and make that adjustment (or a little more) and then re-evaluate the performance.

2. Early sharp moves are generally not successful on any of the synthetic surfaces, but that seems to be especially true on SA's Pro Ride. That track plays more like a turf course and requires most horses to be ridden differently.

3. IMO, Curlin's huge wide sweeping move to take the lead turning for home before weakening was very premature (and pretty impressive actually). IMO, he would have run a lot better if he was ridden properly and not like it was a dirt race. He may have even threatened the top two.

All in all, I think that was a very solid performance against a couple of world class turfers that were suited to the surface and that were ridden properly.

[andymays]

It seems I'm the only handicapper in America that thinks Curlin ran as well on the synthetic track at SA in the BC Classic as he was running all year on dirt.

This is my thinking.

1. The speed figures earned on dirt and synthetic tracks do not transfer well. Even Beyer has since upgraded all the high level synthetic figures (IMO not by enough at the very very top). So go back to hiss PPs and make that adjustment (or a little more) and then re-evaluate the performance.

2. Early sharp moves are generally not successful on any of the synthetic surfaces, but that seems to be especially true on SA's Pro Ride. That track plays more like a turf course and requires most horses to be ridden differently.

3. IMO, Curlin's huge wide sweeping move to take the lead turning for home before weakening was very premature (and pretty impressive actually). IMO, he would have run a lot better if he was ridden properly and not like it was a dirt race. He may have even threatened the top two.

All in all, I think that was a very solid performance against a couple of world class turfers that were suited to the surface and that were ridden properly.


If the Breeders Cup were run on Dirt Curlin would have most likely run 1st or 2nd and the Europeans who ran 1-2 most likely would have been near the back of the field. I bet the winning exacta last year. Pro Ride is closer to turf than any other synthetic surface in the United States.

[Bobzilla]

If the Breeders Cup were run on Dirt Curlin would have most likely run 1st or 2nd and the Europeans who ran 1-2 most likely would have been near the back of the field. I bet the winning exacta last year. Pro Ride is closer to turf than any other synthetic surface in the United States.


I certainly agree that Curlin would have had a better chance to win if the race had been contested over dirt. At the very least he would have had a fighting chance as opposed to his chances on the SA Pro-Ride where I think his chances were slim to less than none against that kind of European talent. I only disagree inasmuch that I suspect RP and HTN would have had a chance on dirt as in the past we've seen some extremely gifted athletes from Europe perform very well on dirt such as Swain and Giants Causeway. At the top end I've always felt that turf to dirt was more likely to be successfull than dirt to turf. When one considers what Robert99 said about the Euros being more accustomed to track layouts where they can build to a high cruise it makes some of these Euro performances in the BC all the more impressive. I don't sense, however, that this disadvantage is as daunting an obstacle as what is faced by an American dirt performer when trying to transfer his form over to the Pro-Ride for the first time against world class turf horses of comparable talent.

[gm10]

The slippage you are talking about is in the direction of travel - the centripetal force "slippage" is at 90 degrees to the direction of horse travel. If the camber is perfect then there is no 90 degree slippage at hoof contact - so the surface has no relevance.



No I think there is some misunderstanding here. The ground reaction force has two components, as you correctly state. You mention centripetal force 'slippage' wrt the vertical one, which, agreed, is largely (although not completely) neutralized when the track is properly banked.

But I am refering to the horizontal slippage. When the hoof impacts the ground, it needs to slow down, the speed of the hoof needs to adjust to the speed of the track (which is obviously 0). Obviously this decelaration will happen at different rates, depending on the materials used in the surface. So the surface will have an impact here, even if the camber is 'perfect'.

Also I don't understand what you mean by this. I'm not a physics expert but the track will never "rebound energy".


I also posted that polytrack is generally faster than dirt - polytrack also has elastic fibres which rebound energy for aiding the horse's locomotion.

[robert99]

No I think there is some misunderstanding here. The ground reaction force has two components, as you correctly state. You mention centripetal force 'slippage' wrt the vertical one, which, agreed, is largely (although not completely) neutralized when the track is properly banked.

But I am refering to the horizontal slippage. When the hoof impacts the ground, it needs to slow down, the speed of the hoof needs to adjust to the speed of the track (which is obviously 0). Obviously this decelaration will happen at different rates, depending on the materials used in the surface. So the surface will have an impact here, even if the camber is 'perfect'.

Also I don't understand what you mean by this. I'm not a physics expert but the track will never "rebound energy".

The misunderstanding is because you have not read what I said.
"The slippage you are talking about is in the direction of travel" .

I realise some people here do not know too much about physics so I try to express things simply in terms that have meaning to them. You say you are not a physics expert but then make a fundamental racing error in stating a "track will never rebound energy". Why do you think a horse runs at different speeds on different track variants? Why do you think rubber is added to polytrack?
Just because you don't know or understand about something does not mean others who do must be wrong.

[Bobzilla]

I'm sure some are already familiar with Dr. Mick Peterson's robotic hoof device but if not I thought I would provide a link in case some might be interested.

http://www.boston.com/sports/other_sports/horse_racing/articles/2009/04/29/for_horses_safety_he_thinks_outside_the_hocks/



This device is designed to hammer into the track surface at the same angle and force as a thoroughbred's hoof would during a race. I believe it also replicates the different phases of hoof contact from deceleration through max load to propelling. This device has been around for a few years now and has been used on all types of surfaces, it even found a potential problem with the base layer at the Fairplex some years ago and the problem was corrected. With this device Peterson aims to improve the safety of existing surfaces while at the same time collecting meaningful data that might yield more definitive conclusions in regard to appropriate surface types in the future.

[gm10]

The misunderstanding is because you have not read what I said.
"The slippage you are talking about is in the direction of travel" .

I realise some people here do not know too much about physics so I try to express things simply in terms that have meaning to them. You say you are not a physics expert but then make a fundamental racing error in stating a "track will never rebound energy". Why do you think a horse runs at different speeds on different track variants? Why do you think rubber is added to polytrack?
Just because you don't know or understand about something does not mean others who do must be wrong.

Yes, OK, that is true, I did not know what you meant before.

However, I 'd like to point out that your orginal statement "As the horse speeds are much the same on both surfaces and the bend radius is presumably the same then the banking should be same angle on both surfaces" is in contradiction to what you are saying now. You can't presume anything about the banking because there are more factors that could influence the speed, such as the that one you described - EVEN IF THE SPEEDS WERE THE SAME YOU CAN'T CONCLUDE ANYTHING ABOUT THE BANKING.
I now realize that you contradicted this statement yourself in your previous post which is why it was hard to interpret.

Furthermore, the speeds are not "much the same" at all. Not reading posts properly is contagious, it appears. As I told you before, Del Mar is slower now. Here are some median time differences:

5.5F: 0.44 sec slower on the poly
6F: 0.82 sec slower on the poly
6.5F: 1 sec slower on the poly
7F: 0.83 slower on the poly
8F: 1.31 slower on the poly
8.5F: 1.56 slower on the poly

The speeds are not 'much the same' in my view. Of course they are in a theoretical sense, and feel free to fall back on this, but in a horse racing context, they are, quite frankly, very much not the same.

[andymays]

ART WILSON: Synthetics could be on fast track to ancient history

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/sports/ci_13264064?source=rss

Excerpt:

There were two major factors that led to the CHRB's mandate of synthetics - 18 fatalities at Del Mar during the 2006 meet that caused a major uproar and Barbaro's eventual fatal breakdown in the 2006 Preakness Stakes.

What we are left with is three totally different artificial tracks in Southern California.

Santa Anita's Pro-Ride surface plays more like a turf course, hence the Europeans' success at the 2008 Breeders' Cup.

The Cushion Track at Hollywood Park is more like a conventional dirt track than the other two, prompting one racing official to comment, "Dennis Moore (Hollywood Park track superintendent) is turning Hollywood Park into a dirt track."

Then there's Del Mar's Polytrack, which plays to front-runners one day and is a closer's paradise the next.

Excerpt:

One thing virtually is certain. The New York tracks, most notably Belmont Park and Saratoga, never in 100 years will install a synthetic surface. Neither will Churchill Downs, which protects its tradition like a mother hen. Mint juleps, yes. Plastic, no way.

It's my opinion that synthetics will be a thing of the past within five years in Southern California. This period will be judged in history as the "synthetics era," much like baseball had its "dead-ball era" and soon will be tainted by its "steroids era."

[gm10]

ART WILSON: Synthetics could be on fast track to ancient history

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/sports/ci_13264064?source=rss

Excerpt:

There were two major factors that led to the CHRB's mandate of synthetics - 18 fatalities at Del Mar during the 2006 meet that caused a major uproar and Barbaro's eventual fatal breakdown in the 2006 Preakness Stakes.

What we are left with is three totally different artificial tracks in Southern California.

Santa Anita's Pro-Ride surface plays more like a turf course, hence the Europeans' success at the 2008 Breeders' Cup.

The Cushion Track at Hollywood Park is more like a conventional dirt track than the other two, prompting one racing official to comment, "Dennis Moore (Hollywood Park track superintendent) is turning Hollywood Park into a dirt track."

Then there's Del Mar's Polytrack, which plays to front-runners one day and is a closer's paradise the next.

Excerpt:

One thing virtually is certain. The New York tracks, most notably Belmont Park and Saratoga, never in 100 years will install a synthetic surface. Neither will Churchill Downs, which protects its tradition like a mother hen. Mint juleps, yes. Plastic, no way.

It's my opinion that synthetics will be a thing of the past within five years in Southern California. This period will be judged in history as the "synthetics era," much like baseball had its "dead-ball era" and soon will be tainted by its "steroids era."

On the other hand, all-sources handle at Del MAr is steady this year. This bucks the national trend, and is also better than the nation's premier dirt/turf meeting.

http://www.drf.com/news/article/106957.html

[andymays]

On the other hand you never get a straight answer from Del Mar.

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/sep/03/col-john-gets-nod-choice-classic/?sports/horseracing&zIndex=159673

Excerpt:

On Track attendance and handle figures are up 2.7 percent and 1.4 percent, respectively, from 2008 when comparing 30 days (minus Mondays) last year and the counterpart 30 days this year, according to Del Mar Thoroughbred Club figures released yesterday.

[rwwupl]

On the other hand, all-sources handle at Del MAr is steady this year. This bucks the national trend, and is also better than the nation's premier dirt/turf meeting.

http://www.drf.com/news/article/106957.html


It is hard to find anything positive about horse racing in the article you point to.

[rwwupl]

On the other hand you never get a straight answer from Del Mar.

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/sep/03/col-john-gets-nod-choice-classic/?sports/horseracing&zIndex=159673

Excerpt:

On Track attendance and handle figures are up 2.7 percent and 1.4 percent, respectively, from 2008 when comparing 30 days (minus Mondays) last year and the counterpart 30 days this year, according to Del Mar Thoroughbred Club figures released yesterday.


The data released is selective from Del Mar and other So.Ca. racetracks. The credibility is suspect because of the selective nature of the information.What happened to complete transparency? The DRF article cited above said the all sources handle was "steady" what ever that means.

Did you notice that nothing was said about all sources handle?

[andymays]

The data released is selective from Del Mar and other So.Ca. racetracks. The credibility is suspect because of the selective nature of the information.What happened to complete transparency?

Did you notice that nothing was said about all sources handle?


I already sent an email to the author of the article and called the DRF directly. For whatever reason the pro synthetic people on the board refuse to acknowledge the fact that Del Mar is misleading the public on a regular basis. You and I are on the ground over here and know what's going on.

Saratoga doesn't spin the truth but Del Mar does on a regular basis. In California it's all about having a carryover. Since so many on the Board seem to love researching facts how about one one of them going back to the last two years of dirt surfaces in California and tell us how many carryovers we had! The go over the last two years of synthetic surfaces and tell us how many carryovers we've had. I'll wager at least double. That's what they love!

[robert99]

Yes, OK, that is true, I did not know what you meant before.

However, I 'd like to point out that your orginal statement "As the horse speeds are much the same on both surfaces and the bend radius is presumably the same then the banking should be same angle on both surfaces" is in contradiction to what you are saying now. You can't presume anything about the banking because there are more factors that could influence the speed, such as the that one you described - EVEN IF THE SPEEDS WERE THE SAME YOU CAN'T CONCLUDE ANYTHING ABOUT THE BANKING.
I now realize that you contradicted this statement yourself in your previous post which is why it was hard to interpret.

Furthermore, the speeds are not "much the same" at all. Not reading posts properly is contagious, it appears. As I told you before, Del Mar is slower now. Here are some median time differences:

5.5F: 0.44 sec slower on the poly
6F: 0.82 sec slower on the poly
6.5F: 1 sec slower on the poly
7F: 0.83 slower on the poly
8F: 1.31 slower on the poly
8.5F: 1.56 slower on the poly

The speeds are not 'much the same' in my view. Of course they are in a theoretical sense, and feel free to fall back on this, but in a horse racing context, they are, quite frankly, very much not the same.

Re-read what I said.
There is no contradiction.
Please do not quote median race times when what we are talking about is speed at and around the bend.
I have explained to you that the banking is designed for the fastest horse at the bend. Some horses will be slower, sometimes the going will be slower but you cannot and do not need to change the camber angle to suit every race.
If a fast horse can go 55ft/s (12 second time) around a bend and the perfect camber is 6 degrees, then they only need 5 degrees at 13 second time, or 3 degrees at 14 second time. If they all run around 6 degree cambers they are all quite OK running with that. They have been running bends for hundreds of years with zero cambers and can still get around.

[robert99]

I'm sure some are already familiar with Dr. Mick Peterson's robotic hoof device but if not I thought I would provide a link in case some might be interested.

http://www.boston.com/sports/other_sports/horse_racing/articles/2009/04/29/for_horses_safety_he_thinks_outside_the_hocks/



This device is designed to hammer into the track surface at the same angle and force as a thoroughbred's hoof would during a race. I believe it also replicates the different phases of hoof contact from deceleration through max load to propelling. This device has been around for a few years now and has been used on all types of surfaces, it even found a potential problem with the base layer at the Fairplex some years ago and the problem was corrected. With this device Peterson aims to improve the safety of existing surfaces while at the same time collecting meaningful data that might yield more definitive conclusions in regard to appropriate surface types in the future.

Thanks for the link.
Ironically, Del Mar had the Professor test their track (robot hoof plus ground radar) in August 2005.

I like the bit in the article:

"Peterson's query yielded blank stares. Despite centuries of competition, there was no scientific data on the uniformity of dirt horse tracks. Their basic composition - a subsurface base that provides stability and drainage, covered by a cushion of loam, sand, and clay - had never undergone any rigorous study, and the notion of what was considered "safe" was highly subjective and purely anecdotal."

Should have come to PA. ;)

[andymays]

On the other hand, all-sources handle at Del MAr is steady this year. This bucks the national trend, and is also better than the nation's premier dirt/turf meeting.

http://www.drf.com/news/article/106957.html


If anyone cares the corrected article by Matt Hegarty now appears after I had him correct the mistake. Even after the correction it doesn't make total sense! It never ends does it?


http://www.drf.com/news/article/106957.html

Excerpt:

At Del Mar, all-sources average handle has been steady through mid-August, but the cancellation of Monday race days likely removed a significant amount of handle from the total for this August. Average handle last year at Del Mar was $13 million, though the Monday handle was far short of that figure.


For the millionth time (a little exageration) anything from Del Mar and California needs to be met with skepticism. I hope this example proves my point but I doubt some people will care.

[FenceBored]

Thanks for the link.
Ironically, Del Mar had the Professor test their track (robot hoof plus ground radar) in August 2005.

I like the bit in the article:

"Peterson's query yielded blank stares. Despite centuries of competition, there was no scientific data on the uniformity of dirt horse tracks. Their basic composition - a subsurface base that provides stability and drainage, covered by a cushion of loam, sand, and clay - had never undergone any rigorous study, and the notion of what was considered "safe" was highly subjective and purely anecdotal."

Should have come to PA. ;)

The complete lack of solid collected data on a wide variety of racetrack and breeding topics is an everlasting spring of wonder and awe. You would think that a 100 year old track would have 100 years of detailed information on the performance of the track under various conditions and its effects on the horses. And you'd be wrong. :bang:

[andymays]

More Poly Misery at Del Mar!

http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/09/its-now-a-dirty-dozen-over-pol.html

Excerpt:

Madame Kiawah, running in a $12,500 claiming event, broke her right front leg around the far turn, making it 13 fatalities at Del Mar this summer, including 12 over its synthetic Polytrack surface. Eight of the breakdowns have occurred in the mornings and four during afternoon racing.

[joanied]

What's going on at Del Mar is pathetic...I read about that, andy...shit, do you think the trainers are getting a little parinoid about running their best horses...geeze, I hope we don't see a breakdown tomorrow...:mad: :mad: :mad: ...when are they gonna do something...I just cannot beleive this.

[andymays]

What's going on at Del Mar is pathetic...I read about that, andy...shit, do you think the trainers are getting a little parinoid about running their best horses...geeze, I hope we don't see a breakdown tomorrow...:mad: :mad: :mad: ...when are they gonna do something...I just cannot beleive this.


The only thing I can think of given all that's happened and all the people who don't like it. The people in charge had to have invested personally in these surfaces and if they took them out they would lose a lot of personal money.

I actually called the Polytrack headquarters on Tuesday and the Secretary told me her Boss was backed up with calls and probably couldn't get to me for a couple of hours. I don't think he was taking orders for more Poly Misery and he didn't sound too happy when I talked to him!

[andymays]

http://www.dmtc.com/handicapping/bruno/index.php?f=/handicapping/bruno/090905.html

Excerpt:

4.) Steve Wood and his crew for Employee of the meet at Del Mar. The much maligned Track sup did right for the reeling's state economical situation creating havoc and mayhem with the main track starting on Wednesday, July 29. His track maintenance schedule was the lament of many horsemen and horseplayers, despite all the efforts the carryovers were scarce at the beginning of the meet and there was quite a few single tickets. Del Mar is the capital of the racing world in single ticket being hit. Hmmmmm~ loose lips sink ships! Wood did manage an already volatile racetrack surface. For example, adding water changed the track almost instantaneously.

Case and point, Wednesday, Sep. 2, for example, no note on the maintenance log of water being dispensed on the track after the start of the races, but yet, water was dispensed after the second leg of the pick six and the next four main track events were won by three speed horses inside, and a late runner up the rail in the last. There was only one ticket for $729,000 in the pick six. Thursday, no water, rail dead. Therefore, it is hands down, Steve Wood gets the award. If we may choose a theme song for his presentation it would also be a slam dunk: 'Wanted Dead Or Alive' by Bon Jovi, mixaphorically speaking.

[gm10]

Re-read what I said.
There is no contradiction.
Please do not quote median race times when what we are talking about is speed at and around the bend.
I have explained to you that the banking is designed for the fastest horse at the bend. Some horses will be slower, sometimes the going will be slower but you cannot and do not need to change the camber angle to suit every race.
If a fast horse can go 55ft/s (12 second time) around a bend and the perfect camber is 6 degrees, then they only need 5 degrees at 13 second time, or 3 degrees at 14 second time. If they all run around 6 degree cambers they are all quite OK running with that. They have been running bends for hundreds of years with zero cambers and can still get around.


I have re-read it many times and it is clear that you were not taking other factors into account at that point.

Anyway, I don't think it's wrong to look at median time differences, but since you insist, here are the median time difference fort the second last 2 furlongs, which would effectively be the median turn time differences.

5.5F: 0.42 sec slower on the poly
6F: 0.52 sec slower on the poly
6.5F: 0.54 sec slower on the poly
7F: 0.45 sec slower on the poly
8F: 0.84 sec slower on the poly
8.5F: 1.12 sec slower on the poly

[robert99]

I have re-read it many times and it is clear that you were not taking other factors into account at that point.

Anyway, I don't think it's wrong to look at median time differences, but since you insist, here are the median time difference fort the second last 2 furlongs, which would effectively be the median turn time differences.

5.5F: 0.42 sec slower on the poly
6F: 0.52 sec slower on the poly
6.5F: 0.54 sec slower on the poly
7F: 0.45 sec slower on the poly
8F: 0.84 sec slower on the poly
8.5F: 1.12 sec slower on the poly

If you still do not know what the difference is between median time and fastest time around a bend, then give up.

[rwwupl]

http://www.dmtc.com/handicapping/bruno/index.php?f=/handicapping/bruno/090905.html

Excerpt:

4.) Steve Wood and his crew for Employee of the meet at Del Mar. The much maligned Track sup did right for the reeling's state economical situation creating havoc and mayhem with the main track starting on Wednesday, July 29. His track maintenance schedule was the lament of many horsemen and horseplayers, despite all the efforts the carryovers were scarce at the beginning of the meet and there was quite a few single tickets. Del Mar is the capital of the racing world in single ticket being hit. Hmmmmm~ loose lips sink ships! Wood did manage an already volatile racetrack surface. For example, adding water changed the track almost instantaneously.

Case and point, Wednesday, Sep. 2, for example, no note on the maintenance log of water being dispensed on the track after the start of the races, but yet, water was dispensed after the second leg of the pick six and the next four main track events were won by three speed horses inside, and a late runner up the rail in the last. There was only one ticket for $729,000 in the pick six. Thursday, no water, rail dead. Therefore, it is hands down, Steve Wood gets the award. If we may choose a theme song for his presentation it would also be a slam dunk: 'Wanted Dead Or Alive' by Bon Jovi, mixaphorically speaking.


Del Mar track super Steve Wood says he does "everything for the safety of the horses" . He may believe that in his heart but his work history reveals that where ever he goes "Inconsistency" of the track surface follows. He tends to overwork the surface and swings of track bias and inconsistencies appear,confusing Horsemen, Horses and Bettors.
The worst part of this,beyond injuries and breakdowns of horses, is the public perception that the inconsistencies are man made and condoned by management because of the carryover factor and profit.

Integrity is the most important word in horse racing, and these events do nothing to help public perception of our game

[andymays]

Del Mar track super Steve Wood says he does "everything for the safety of the horses" . He may believe that in his heart but his work history reveals that where ever he goes "Inconsistency" of the track surface follows. He tends to overwork the surface and swings of track bias and inconsistencies appear,confusing Horsemen, Horses and Bettors.
The worst part of this,beyond injuries and breakdowns of horses, is the public perception that the inconsistencies are man made and condoned by management because of the carryover factor and profit.

Integrity is the most important word in horse racing, and these events do nothing to help public perception of our game


As Bruno implies in his article above it's all about the carryover. We are seeing more of them the last couple of weeks and it helps the handle big time. In my opinion they are pushing for carryovers every day now so act and bet accordingly!

Without the carryover California Racing would be null and void.

In my opinion integrity in California among some Racing Officials and Executives is sorely lacking to say the least!

[senortout]

I very nearly barfed when I reached the end of this thread(I hope its the end of thread)

Dirt tracks, DIRT TRACKS, are the mostly manipulated, dug up over harrowed dragged surfaces. And the fact that horses break down is to be lamented, however, (Barbaro), (Go For Wand), (Ruffian) were all pretty fine horses were they not?....none broke down on synthetics.....I now challenge you to name me a comparative list of top drawer runners who have broken down on the synthetics....


senortout, who grants that the time frame is significantly in his favor here

[andymays]

I very nearly barfed when I reached the end of this thread(I hope its the end of thread)

Dirt tracks, DIRT TRACKS, are the mostly manipulated, dug up over harrowed dragged surfaces. And the fact that horses break down is to be lamented, however, (Barbaro), (Go For Wand), (Ruffian) were all pretty fine horses were they not?....none broke down on synthetics.....I now challenge you to name me a comparative list of top drawer runners who have broken down on the synthetics....


senortout, who grants that the time frame is significantly in his favor here

My memory isn't that good anymore but If I remember right synthetic surfaces have only been around a few years.

Lets talk in 60 years. I'm sure the Board will still be here! ;)

As far as barfing there is a lot of evidence from people on the ground in California on this thread. You can choose to believe the propaganda of the pro synthetic forces or not.


“Synthetic surfaces would be less expensive to maintain”. Wrong! Synthetic Surfaces are more expensive to maintain. It’s not even a close call!

“Synthetic surfaces would have fewer biases than traditional dirt surfaces”. Wrong! In fact there are manmade and natural biases created on a daily basis! See Post #609

“Synthetic surfaces would be much safer for the Horses who race and train on it”.

“Synthetic surfaces would increase field size”. Wrong! Due to a large number of soft tissue injuries many Horses are in rehab and races can’t be filled!



Have any of the claims made by the people who sold these surfaces to California proven to be true?


The thread is still up because there are events almost every day in the form of articles and opinion that pertain to synthetic surfaces.

[gm10]

My memory isn't that good anymore but If I remember right synthetic surfaces have only been around a few years.

Lets talk in 60 years. I'm sure the Board will still be here! ;)

As far as barfing there is a lot of evidence from people on the ground in California on this thread. You can choose to believe the propaganda of the pro synthetic forces or not.


“Synthetic surfaces would be less expensive to maintain”. Wrong! Synthetic Surfaces are more expensive to maintain. It’s not even a close call!

“Synthetic surfaces would have fewer biases than traditional dirt surfaces”. Wrong! In fact there are manmade and natural biases created on a daily basis! See Post #609

“Synthetic surfaces would be much safer for the Horses who race and train on it”.

“Synthetic surfaces would increase field size”. Wrong! Due to a large number of soft tissue injuries many Horses are in rehab and races can’t be filled!



Have any of the claims made by the people who sold these surfaces to California proven to be true?


The thread is still up because there are events almost every day in the form of articles and opinion that pertain to synthetic surfaces.

Andy, you've got to admit that it's mainly Del Mar who's causing the bad headlines. Places like Turfway, Woodbine, Golden Gate ... they are doing very well.

[andymays]

Breakdowns at Turfway stir alarm
8 FATALITIES REPORTED IN 1-MONTH PERIOD

I can find headlines from earlier in the year at Golden Gate.

Del Mar is the most scrutinized meet in the Country and everyone is paying attention because of the misleading claims that are made on a daily basis. Now that everyone is counting the numbers don't look so good. I'm sure if the other tracks were scrutinized as much similar sorts of things would come out!


What's the point?

[FenceBored]

Breakdowns at Turfway stir alarm
8 FATALITIES REPORTED IN 1-MONTH PERIOD

I can find headlines from earlier in the year at Golden Gate.

Del Mar is the most scrutinized meet in the Country and everyone is paying attention because of the misleading claims that are made on a daily basis. Now that everyone is counting the numbers don't look so good. I'm sure if the other tracks were scrutinized as much similar sorts of things would come out!


What's the point?

CHRB numbers on Golden Gate Fatalities 1996-2008

07/01/96-06/30/97 -- 34
07/01/97-06/30/98 -- 37
07/01/98-10/31/98 -- __ (no racing during period)
11/01/98-11/14/99 -- 46
11/15/99-11/12/00 -- 29
11/13/00-11/05/01 -- 33
11/06/01-11/05/02 -- 37
11/06/02-11/09/03 -- 28
11/11/03-11/02/04 -- 38
11/03/04-11/06/05 -- 37
11/07/05-11/09/06 -- 62
11/10/06-11/16/07 -- 33*
07/01/07-06/30/08 -- 43*

Clearly the 05-06 period was an aberation. Otherwise Tapeta doesn't seem to be making a bit of difference.

*Note: The data for 11/10/06-11/16/07 is broken out by race meets allowing me to determine that only 1 death happened between 7/1/07 and 11/16/07. I am reporting the data as the CHRB gives it, so there is a one horse double count between the last two reporting periods.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Breakdowns at Turfway stir alarm
8 FATALITIES REPORTED IN 1-MONTH PERIOD

I can find headlines from earlier in the year at Golden Gate.

Del Mar is the most scrutinized meet in the Country and everyone is paying attention because of the misleading claims that are made on a daily basis. Now that everyone is counting the numbers don't look so good. I'm sure if the other tracks were scrutinized as much similar sorts of things would come out!


What's the point?
"http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=del%20mar%20breakdowns"
IMO some in SoCal and many in racing are paying attention. I have not heard on the national media about protests outside Del Mar or articles in the animal rights webs ALF or PETA nemtioning it much.
I doubt public pressure or horseplayer pressure will matter- it is as usual the big shot horsemen thinking for themselves and talking to a captive audience. If your agenda is going back to dirt, your problem is the same as racing's- not enough people paying attention to make a difference.

[andymays]

"http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=del%20mar%20breakdowns"
IMO some in SoCal and many in racing are paying attention. I have not heard on the national media about protests outside Del Mar or articles in the animal rights webs ALF or PETA nemtioning it much.
I doubt public pressure or horseplayer pressure will matter- it is as usual the big shot horsemen thinking for themselves and talking to a captive audience. If your agenda is going back to dirt, your problem is the same as racing's- not enough people paying attention to make a difference.


There are not enough members of the Racing Media asking tough questions.

A couple of weeks ago I sent an email to Kirk Breed and Mike Marten of the CHRB and asked a couple of questions about Dr. Rick Arthur (they have always answered my questions in the past). As of today the questions have not been answered. The questions were:

Has Dr. Arthur received gifts, monies, free trips, meals, or stock options from any manufacturer of synthetic surfaces?

Has Dr. Arthur received gifts, monies, free trips, meals, or stock options from any Race Track or Racing Executive in California to promote synthetic surfaces?


Maybe I don't have a right to know this stuff but a least I asked and at least they know someone is watching!

The same questions should be asked of Racing Executives in California. Keenland is very up front about their relationship with Polytrack.

Woudn't you think a couple Reporters would ask? Some of these guys don't want to piss people off that they need access to. They like rubbing elbows in the press box.

The personal financial angle is the only explanation left that makes sense in my opinion! This is the reason that I doubt they will change anytime soon.

A very high profile guy out here told me that people were nuts to play synthetic surfaces and especially the ones in California! I'll leave it at that.

Count the number of carryovers in the last 24 months and compare them to the last 24 months of dirt surfaces in California. That says it all!

It's about Carryovers and personal investments in California in my informed opinion!

[gm10]

If you still do not know what the difference is between median time and fastest time around a bend, then give up.

You say that 'speeds are much the same'. I show you that median speeds are clearly not the same. You say that comparing the median is not good for this. Why not? If median times have become slower, average speed has become lower. So it looks like the surface has become slower. Which means the fastest horse in the race today would travel at lower speeds than if the race had been on the dirt instead.

From the numbers that I showed you, that would be half a second per 2 furlongs. I did some quick calculations and the difference in banking angle doesn't seem neglible to me. I found about 1 degree difference for banking angles when you want to provide a full centrepital force.

So the surface made a difference of 1 degree banking.

Unless you can show me otherwise, I will have to reject your statement that the surface is not relevant in terms of both raw speed and optimal banking.

[Indulto]

There are not enough members of the Racing Media asking tough questions.

A couple of weeks ago I sent an email to Kirk Breed and Mike Marten of the CHRB and asked a couple of questions about Dr. Rick Arthur (they have always answered my questions in the past). As of today the questions have not been answered. The questions were:

Has Dr. Arthur received gifts, monies, free trips, meals, or stock options from any manufacturer of synthetic surfaces?

Has Dr. Arthur received gifts, monies, free trips, meals, or stock options from any Race Track or Racing Executive in California to promote synthetic surfaces?


Maybe I don't have a right to know this stuff but a least I asked and at least they know someone is watching!Or stalking.The same questions should be asked of Racing Executives in California. Keenland is very up front about their relationship with Polytrack.

Woudn't you think a couple Reporters would ask? Some of these guys don't want to piss people off that they need access to. They like rubbing elbows in the press box.

The personal financial angle is the only explanation left that makes sense in my opinion! This is the reason that I doubt they will change anytime soon.I'd be very surprised if Mr. Arthur's position was purchased, but not that you'd be able to convince people it was. Are you an aspiring Jerry Jamgotchian, Jr.? ;)A very high profile guy out here told me that people were nuts to play synthetic surfaces and especially the ones in California! I'll leave it at that.Was that person recently quoted from the dmtc website?Count the number of carryovers in the last 24 months and compare them to the last 24 months of dirt surfaces in California. That says it all!

It's about Carryovers and personal investments in California in my informed opinion!I'm considering actually playing (in addition to handicapping) DMR for the first time, tommorrow. I guess if there's another carryover, I won't be able to avoid it. :D

[andymays]

Or stalking.I'd be very surprised if Mr. Arthur's position was purchased, but not that you'd be able to convince people it was. Are you an aspiring Jerry Jamgotchian, Jr.? ;)Was that person recently quoted from the dmtc website?I'm considering actually playing (in addition to handicapping) DMR for the first time, tommorrow. I guess if there's another carryover, I won't be able to avoid it. :D


So I'm a stalker and my real desire in life is to be Jerry Jamgotchian. :D



If you think the Racing Media is doing it's job by not asking the tough questions in California then you deserve the product you get from California.

If you want to get personal with the B.S. labels we can do that but it doesn't serve anyone well.

[Indulto]

So I'm a stalker and my real desire in life is to be Jerry Jamgotchian. :D

If you think the Racing Media is doing it's job by not asking the tough questions in California then you deserve the product you get from California.How do you know somebody isn't already on the story looking for hard evidence?If you want to get personal with the B.S. labels we can do that but it doesn't serve anyone well.AM,
Steady there, big fella! If you're goining to skewer someone on one hand, you've got to at least be willing to take some good-natured kidding on the other. As far as I'm concerned, the CHRB is nothing to write home about because their collective results speak for themselves, but has anyone else lined up alongside of JJ against Arthur like they did against Fermin?

I admire your coming down hard on this issue, but I thought you enjoyed sparring occasionally as well. I guess you must have found one of those round indicator chicks and are keeping her for yourself. ;)

[andymays]

How do you know somebody isn't already on the story looking for hard evidence?AM,
Steady there, big fella! If you're goining to skewer someone on one hand, you've got to at least be willing to take some good-natured kidding on the other. As far as I'm concerned, the CHRB is nothing to write home about because their collective results speak for themselves, but has anyone else lined up alongside of JJ against Arthur like they did against Fermin?

I admire your coming down hard on this issue, but I thought you enjoyed sparring occasionally as well. I guess you must have found one of those round indicator chicks and are keeping her for yourself. ;)


You got me!

JJ is after Shapiro. Here is an email I got from him this morning. I will delete his personal email address.

Sent: 9/5/2009 10:56:27 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time
Subj: SHAPIRO LICENSE REVOCATION HEARING UPDATE



JOHN HARRIS, DAVID ISRAEL AND OTHER CHRB BOARDMEMBERS ARE WORKING CLOSELY WITH SHAPIRO'S ATTORNEY STEVE SCHWARTZ TO ALLOW RICHARD SHAPIRO TO RETAIN HIS CHRB LICENSE, EVEN THOUGH SHAPIRO IS ON THREE (3) YEARS PROBATION FOR VANDALIZING PROPERTY.

THE CHRB HAS POSTPONED SHAPIRO'S 9/11/09 LICENSE REVOCATION HEARING AT FAIRPLEX, HAVE NOT YET SUSPENDED SHAPIRO'S CHRB LICENSE (EVEN AFTER HE WAS FOUND GUILTY IN LA SUPERIOR COURT) AND ARE SEEKING WAYS TO "GIVE SHAPIRO SPECIAL TREATMENT", WHICH NO OTHER CHRB LICENSEE HAS EVER RECEIVED.

THE QUESTION IS WHY? WHY SHOULD THIS CONVICTED CRIMINAL/CHRB LICENSEE BE AFFORDED SUCH PROTECTION AND CONSIDERATION FROM HARRIS AND ISRAEL? HOW IS SHAPIRO ANY DIFFERENT FROM ANY OTHER CHRB LICENSEE WHO HAS VIOLATED CHRB RULES?

WHEN YOU SEE HARRIS OR ISRAEL, ASK THEM WHY THEY ARE PROTECTING SHAPIRO AND THEN TELL THEM, THAT THEIR "SHAPIRO PROTECTION SCHEME" WILL NOT WORK!!!!


JERRY JAMGOTCHIAN



How can these guys in California still protect Shapiro after all the crap he has put California Racing through. I think it's about ego and money. They could care less about what's best for Racing in California. Jamgotchian has turned out to be right on most every issue he has addressed over the last several years. I hope he wins this battle as well!

Do you have any theories or thoughts on the matter?

[Indulto]

You got me!

... How can these guys in California still protect Shapiro after all the crap he has put California Racing through. I think it's about ego and money. They could care less about what's best for Racing in California. Jamgotchian has turned out to be right on most every issue he has addressed over the last several years. I hope he wins this battle as well!

Do you have any theories or thoughts on the matter?Shapiro probably has the most individual responsibility for the mandate, but he is hardly the only one, That said, his psychic break in keying JJ's car can't be overlooked or dismissed.

If it had been only Shapiro that wanted synthetics prematurely, then why didn't Stronach take SA back to dirt rather than install pro-ride when he had the chance and apparent inclination? I think there was a lot of pro-synthetic influence both locally and nationally brought to bear.

[andymays]

Shapiro probably has the most individual responsibility for the mandate, but he is hardly the only one, That said, his psychic break in keying JJ's car can't be overlooked or dismissed.

If it had been only Shapiro that wanted synthetics prematurely, then why didn't Stronach take SA back to dirt rather than install pro-ride when he had the chance and apparent inclination? I think there was a lot of pro-synthetic influence both locally and nationally brought to bear.


Stronach let Ron Charles make the final decision from what I've heard. You're right though, all these guys got together on the deal. That's most likely why they protect Shapiro now. As long as they have the power this junk will stay in place.

If I'm a Racing Executive looking at the big picture I'm thinking...

Synthetics surfaces make races more exciting because of the bunched up fields and close finishes. That might attract more people to the game.

The downside is that it's more dangerous in the stretch run in my opinion. The other thing nobody brings up is that having close finishes all the time aggravates people that are on the wrong end of the photo's! Too many close bad beats make Horseplayers go nuts. Yep, I'm one of them.

The biggest reason to keep them is more carryovers. They love that and without carryovers the handle in California would be down huge. If anyone has the time it would be interesting to see how many carryovers we had in the last two years of dirt versus the last two years of synthetic.

[Tom]

The Washington Park stake just went 3/4 in 119.1 at Arlington!
Is this jumper racing or what????

[andymays]

The Washington Park stake just went 3/4 in 119.1 at Arlington!
Is this jumper racing or what????


disturbing! ;)

[PaceAdvantage]

I very nearly barfed when I reached the end of this thread(I hope its the end of thread)

Dirt tracks, DIRT TRACKS, are the mostly manipulated, dug up over harrowed dragged surfaces. And the fact that horses break down is to be lamented, however, (Barbaro), (Go For Wand), (Ruffian) were all pretty fine horses were they not?....none broke down on synthetics.....I now challenge you to name me a comparative list of top drawer runners who have broken down on the synthetics....


senortout, who grants that the time frame is significantly in his favor hereCome on now senor. You can't be serious.

All weather surfaces have only been here a handful of years. HOW MANY YEARS have they been running the Triple Crown/Breeders' Cup/ALL THOSE GRADE 1's IN NEW YORK over dirt?

When you have a comparable number of Grade 1s run over AWS, then you call me and we'll compare notes....it should take you about 100 years given the short list of major circuits running on the rubber stuff.

You can stop nearly barfing now...it was all for naught.

[illinoisbred]

The Washington Park stake just went 3/4 in 119.1 at Arlington!
Is this jumper racing or what????
According to Marcus Hirsch[drf] the 3/4 was so slow that the Equibase Data-Collector System refused to allow it .We do have many timer malfunctions here in Illinois,particularily in turf and route races,but this time seemed legit.Just another slow,pedestrian-like pace that has become symbolic of racing[if you can call it racing-it's more like cantering] at Arlington Park.

[andymays]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/52460/ap-report-racetrack-deaths-down-slightly


Excerpt:

California, which hosts by far the most races due to its numerous tracks and ideal climate for the sport, again recorded more than twice as many fatalities as any other state. The AP counted 251 racing and training-related deaths there in 2008, up from 240 the year before.



I'm sure the CHRB is going to go ape s**t over this article. It doesn't come close to jiving with their numbers.

I sent it to them just in case they might have missed it!

[gm10]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/52460/ap-report-racetrack-deaths-down-slightly


Excerpt:

California, which hosts by far the most races due to its numerous tracks and ideal climate for the sport, again recorded more than twice as many fatalities as any other state. The AP counted 251 racing and training-related deaths there in 2008, up from 240 the year before.



I'm sure the CHRB is going to go ape s**t over this article. It doesn't come close to jiving with their numbers.

I sent it to them just in case they might have missed it!

That's really not very significant, especially since you don't have the total number of starters.

Anyway, if you want to judge the role of the synthetic surfaces, you have to compare with 2006 or earlier, when they weren't installed yet.

The sad outcome in any case is that too many horses are dying, and installing new surfaces doesn't provide a shortcut to fixing that.

[rwwupl]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/52460/ap-report-racetrack-deaths-down-slightly


Excerpt:

California, which hosts by far the most races due to its numerous tracks and ideal climate for the sport, again recorded more than twice as many fatalities as any other state. The AP counted 251 racing and training-related deaths there in 2008, up from 240 the year before.



I'm sure the CHRB is going to go ape s**t over this article. It doesn't come close to jiving with their numbers.

I sent it to them just in case they might have missed it!

-----------------------------------------------------------------

The CHRB numbers are reconstructed by Dr. Arthur to show the best possible progress for synthetics. The CHRB has been informed.
The Dirt numbers have been revised upward from data that was suspect or did not exist from Jan.1st 2004 to the installation of synthetics in 2006. There were no records kept of fatalities per 1000 starts in those years.
Too many decisions to make on which tracks to include(the Fair circuit,Quarters were not under mandate) how many starters in each race would be a very daunting project for one man who has a pro-synthetic position.
Dr. Arthur has said the data he worked from was seriously flawed, so he has created a new system of data collection. His new system holds promise but it has not matured enough to publish. His numbers for the dirt years do not agree with previous data in the annual report or reports from other sources at the time
Dr. Arthur is an honorable man, but his methods concerning the creation and reconstruction of stats that did not exist is not credible under these circumstances, and for a single person to do this work with all of his other duties invites wonder.
When DR. Arthur publishes his methods and results and has it signed off by a CHRB senior auditor, it will have additional credibility.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

Have now had a long enough look at synthetics to form an opinion

Synthetics are great, much better than dirt. California racing with its mixture of synthetic and turf racing is now the leader in USA racing. Hopefully the major Californian tracks all stay synthetic

[andymays]

Have now had a long enough look at synthetics to form an opinion

Synthetics are great, much better than dirt. California racing with its mixture of synthetic and turf racing is now the leader in USA racing. Hopefully the major Californian tracks all stay synthetic


http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-del-mar10-2009sep10,0,4165379.column

Excerpt:

"Now that we've had three years of them, I think we all feel that they're not what they were supposed to be," trainer Mike Mitchell said.

[Valuist]

C'mon Andy......you don't enjoy bland, paceless racing in which every race is run the same way?

[robert99]

Some information on how polytrack is refreshed.
Lingfield has had the current material laid for 8 years. It is now being remixed.

http://www.racingpost.com/news/horse-racing/lingfield-a-w-lingfield-all-weather-track-undergoing-refurbishment/631725/latest/

[rwwupl]

Have now had a long enough look at synthetics to form an opinion

Synthetics are great, much better than dirt. California racing with its mixture of synthetic and turf racing is now the leader in USA racing. Hopefully the major Californian tracks all stay synthetic
-------------------------------------------------------------

Ha Ha Ha, I get it. Do you have any more jokes? :D

[andymays]

Ex-horseman criticizes synthetic tracks

http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/09/ex-horseman-criticizes-synthet.html

Excerpt:


A former trainer who wished to remain anonymous because of the sensitivity of the subject told me recently that, while the proponents of synthetics had only good intentions, the artificial tracks have turned into a disaster. "The synthetics are terrible," he said. "I can tell you, they suck, and if I was (still) training horses, I would not know my (butt) from first base." Asked if he felt synthetics will still be a part of California racing in five years, he didn't hesitate. "I don't see how," he said. "The only thing is the dollars that have gone into them, but maybe after going through this they'll figure out another way to keep improving them. I really think we were sold a bill of goods. All the stuff they were supposed to do, they didn't do any of that stuff. Will they still be here in five years? No, I don't think so."


Add this former trainer to a growing list of horsemen who maybe at the beginning of synthetics were pro-artificial tracks, but they've since adopted a new attitude after seeing how they perform.

"There have been more injuries that you can't bring horses back from than the regular dirt track," the ex-trainer said. "I think the overall horse population has suffered more with synthetics than dirt."

[andymays]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-cal-cup4-2009oct04,0,4219428.column

Excerpt:

Grazen's owner-breeder, Nick Alexander, said of Santa Anita's Pro-Ride surface, "Go out and look at that [expletive] plowed track."

[illinoisbred]

I'm glad you resurfaced your thread.In the one I started regarding myths in racing,I sort of more in jest mentioned calling in the EPA to conduct an environmental study as to the ecological safety/issues a synthetic surface puts at risk.Wildlife,mostly birds must surely land and ingest some material,and drainage could be an issue too. Water leaches through the surface is collected then discharged somewhere. How safe is that discharge? Could it represent a hazard? If any rubber from tires is involved in the composition, that could be an issue. I install playgrounds for a living and chopped-up tires was a common safety surface. In the last two years many state EPAS have outlawed and forced removal of such surfaces. My understanding is it can potentially be cancer-causing. I sincerely hope you don't think I'm totally off the wall here, its just something to think about.

[andymays]

http://www.courier-journal.com/blogs/trackside/2009/10/pletcher-not-keen-on-returning-to-bc-at.html

Excerpt:

"You don't know how they're going to handle it until they run on it. Training doesn't seem to help."

Excerpt:

Pletcher has had a string of horses stabled in California for the winter since synthetic surfaces were mandated there.

"I think there was a time when a lot of people were enthusiastic about the synthetic tracks and felt like it was going to make a difference in soundness and those kinds of things," he said. "I think that enthusiasm level has decreased significantly."

Asked if he would be a big presence at Keeneland, whose fall meet opens Friday, Pletcher said, "We will be a presence. Not a big presence."

[bisket]

there's one horse of pletchers that would be a grade 1 winner on poly. if ready's echo ever shows up at santa anita bet the house on him. you'll only get one chance at good odds. :ThmbUp:

[FenceBored]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-cal-cup4-2009oct04,0,4219428.column

Excerpt:

Grazen's owner-breeder, Nick Alexander, said of Santa Anita's Pro-Ride surface, "Go out and look at that [expletive] plowed track."

Andy,

Any reports on the injury figures for the Fairplex meet?

[andymays]

Andy,

Any reports on the injury figures for the Fairplex meet?


I heard one fatality but I really have no idea.


Roger Stein will probably address the situation on his radio show this morning. On at 8:00 am PST! (10-4)

http://www.am830klaa.com/index.htm

Archived Show up at 10:30 am PST (10-4)

http://www.rogerstein.com/radio/archive2.asp

[Cadillakin]

Industry News
DRF Weekend: Myths and realities of injury data
By Matt Hegarty

http://www.drf.com/news/article/107748.html

<snipped>

Dr. Rick Arthur, the equine medical director of the California Horse Racing Board, pointed to the misunderstanding as an example of how the debate over artificial surfaces has become increasingly partisan. And it's not the only example, Arthur said. He pointed to recent comments in the media and blogosphere that characterized the Del Mar artificial surface this year as a "death track" even though the number of fatalities over the main track this year - 12 (four during racing, eight during training) - was a marked decline from the 19 over the track's last meet with a dirt main track, in 2006.

"People get pretty upset when they're told that's not the case," Arthur said. "They don't want to believe it. It's become this emotional issue, and it's become very difficult to have a dispassionate, disinterested discussion about the data. People have staked out their ground, and they will not listen to any other viewpoints."

<snipped>

[andymays]

He's measuring the worst year on dirt vs. the best year on synthetics. If you read through the thread you will find that Rick Arthur cannot be believed. The numbers from 2007 and 2008 are misleading at best.

If you've been watching Southern California racing on a daily basis since the beginning of the year you should know the numbers don't add up.

[cj]

He's measuring it against the worst year on dirt vs. the best year on synthetics. If you read through the thread you will find that Rick Arthur cannot be believed. The numbers from 2007 and 2008 are misleading at best.

If you've been watching Southern California racing on a daily basis since the beginning of the year you should know the numbers don't add up.

Yep, comparing a completely brand new synthetic track to an old, worn out dirt track, that is fair.

If they had spent the same money fixing the base of the dirt tracks in SoCal they would have been much better off.

[andymays]

Yep, comparing a completely brand new synthetic track to an old, worn out dirt track, that is fair.

If they had spent the same money fixing the base of the dirt tracks in SoCal they would have been much better off.


Absolutely. :ThmbUp:

I can't figure out why people are reluctant to admit they were sold a bill of goods. And an expensive one at that!

[so.cal.fan]

The feature race at Santa Anita yesterday pretty much proves CJ and other critics of synthetics are correct.
It was an unfortunate mistake and it looks as though it cost horseracing some fans, not to mention horsemen.
The very best I can say about the synthetics as of now is that they are "maybe" as good as the worst dirt tracks and far inferior to the best ones.

[so.cal.fan]

Andy?
"I can't figure out why people are reluctant to admit they were sold a bill of goods. And an expensive one at that"!

Are you speaking of the sythetic tracks or the last election?

I agree with your comment on either. LOL

[andymays]

Andy?
"I can't figure out why people are reluctant to admit they were sold a bill of goods. And an expensive one at that"!

Are you speaking of the sythetic tracks or the last election?

I agree with your comment on either. LOL

:ThmbUp:

[rwwupl]

Andy?
"I can't figure out why people are reluctant to admit they were sold a bill of goods. And an expensive one at that"!

Are you speaking of the sythetic tracks or the last election?

I agree with your comment on either. LOL


:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[andymays]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-cal-cup4-2009oct04,0,4219428.column

Excerpt:

Grazen's owner-breeder, Nick Alexander, said of Santa Anita's Pro-Ride surface, "Go out and look at that [expletive] plowed track."


http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/10/grazen-will-start-career-as-a.html

Excerpt:

"He's walking great and he's putting a lot of pressure on it as he walks," Mitchell said. "He doesn't look as though he favors his leg at all. He is retired, though, and thank God we didn't have to put him down. Hopefully, there's be a spot for him as a stallion in California. That'll be nice.

"From here, he'll go to Alamo Pintado (Equine Medical Center in Solvang) to help him recover. Then, probably Nick (owner and breeder Nick Alexander) will go to work on finding a place that will stand him."

[gm10]

Anyone playing the Belmont track must have wished that they had a synthetic surface this weekend. The rain decimated the fields. I was very disappointed.

[Imriledup]

http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/10/grazen-will-start-career-as-a.html

Excerpt:

"He's walking great and he's putting a lot of pressure on it as he walks," Mitchell said. "He doesn't look as though he favors his leg at all. He is retired, though, and thank God we didn't have to put him down. Hopefully, there's be a spot for him as a stallion in California. That'll be nice.

"From here, he'll go to Alamo Pintado (Equine Medical Center in Solvang) to help him recover. Then, probably Nick (owner and breeder Nick Alexander) will go to work on finding a place that will stand him."

That's a heartbreaking defeat to lose a race and a horse's racing career in that fashion. If i owned that horse, i would get out of the game the following day, no way my heart would be able to take something like that more than once.

[Java Gold@TFT]

They may have gotten somewhat lucky as far bad publicity of the two breakdowns. I read that Cal Cup attendence was the lowest in the history of the event.

[cj]

Anyone playing the Belmont track must have wished that they had a synthetic surface this weekend. The rain decimated the fields. I was very disappointed.

The fields weren't that big to start with to be honest. I imagine most would rather they stick to dirt and deal with rain every now and then.

[illinoisbred]

Anyone playing the Belmont track must have wished that they had a synthetic surface this weekend. The rain decimated the fields. I was very disappointed.
I'd rather prepare for rain,slop/mud,sealed tracks,and frozen tracks than having to play a guessing game on whether the tiller has been used and how deep did they go with it. Arlington just finished their 1st season with this device and never had the surface been more inconsistent.

[andymays]

Trainer Bill Morey: I'm a dirt man

http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/

Excerpt:

Morey, who is based in Northern California and starts horses all the time on Golden Gate's Tapeta synthetic track, is another who gives the artificial surfaces less than a ringing endorsement.

"There are pros and cons," he said in the Santa Anita winner's circle Saturday. "We have horses that just don't like it, and we seem to have the horses that do like it and they rattle off some wins. I still believe we might have moved too quick on this stuff. I think it was all designed to make it easier for the handicappers, as well as safety of the track, so we'd go from one track to the other, they'd all be the same, and the handicappers wouldn't have that track variance.

"Well, that didn't turn out. Every track's got a different synthetic. Hindsight is 20-20, but they might have moved a little early. I'm a dirt man; I'd just as soon run on dirt. Although, let me say one thing -- when it rains up north, I'm happy to have this stuff because it can get miserable up there."

One horseman who recently returned from two weeks in Lexington for the Keeneland September yearling sale told me that Kentucky horsemen want no part of shipping their horses west to run on synthetic tracks.

[Bruddah]

Andy?
"I can't figure out why people are reluctant to admit they were sold a bill of goods. And an expensive one at that"!

Are you speaking of the sythetic tracks or the last election?

I agree with your comment on either. LOL

My lady friend, you get a Big Amen Sista!! Hope all is well in So Call.

[so.cal.fan]

Thanks, J.W.
Not much is well in So. Cal. these days, but I'm doin' okay and am at Santa Anita everyday, so what else really counts? LOL
Hope all is well down your way.

[andymays]

http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/10/another-major-trainer-knocks-s.html


Excerpt:

Bottom line, folks, is that these synthetics were supposed to end the fatal breakdowns, and they aren't doing it overall. Plus, sometimes the tracks are dangerous because they are uneven and they cause injuries that never used to crop up before.

More than $40 million later, nobody from outside the state of California wants to run on our race tracks. And there are plenty of trainers here who don't want to but must continue racing because it's their livelihood.

[fmolf]

Thanks, J.W.
Not much is well in So. Cal. these days, but I'm doin' okay and am at Santa Anita everyday, so what else really counts? LOL
Hope all is well down your way.
First of all my heart goes out to all so.cal racing fans and handicappers who long for the old days.In the old days i would have been geared up for the breeders cup hoping to make a nice score like everyone else.I would also have been playing so cal on all their big signature race days as well as when i have had good days at my home circuit belmont/aqueduct.Why do the racing people in power in so cal have such a hard time admitting they made a mistake in the face of dwindling handle, dwindling fields,reluctance of other big trainers to ship to so.cal. and more breakdowns than most conventional dirt tracks.I guess they're not hearing what the horsepalyers and horseman and owners are telling them.I hope it will not be too late when they do realize the error of their ways.Good luck to all who continue to play at their home tracks in so.cal.

[illinoisbred]

Whether its due to polytrack or not,the facts are here at arlington the meet ended with 2 men that may never walk again. That never happened in the almost 30 years Ive followed Illinois racing!

[andymays]

Pair suffer fractures in Norfolk

http://www.drf.com/news/article/107843.html

Excerpt:

ARCADIA, Calif. - While the Grade 1 Norfolk Stakes on Sunday at Santa Anita established Lookin at Lucky as the Breeders' Cup Juvenile favorite, two other colts suffered injuries in the main-track race and are off the trail.
Jung Man Scott and John Scott finished in a dead heat for fourth; both sustained condylar fractures. They are sidelined until at least next year.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Owners and Trainers are out of their minds to send any horse to this years Breeders' Cup. Just read the last 15 posts in this thread!

[Show Me the Wire]

Jung Man Scott was making a big move and then I saw him quickly flatten out. I wondered what happened.

[fmolf]

Whether its due to polytrack or not,the facts are here at arlington the meet ended with 2 men that may never walk again. That never happened in the almost 30 years Ive followed Illinois racing!
Illinois ...Are there any statistics comparing hawthornes safety record to arlingtons after the poly was installed?I am just curious and a bit lazy to look it up myself....I will occasionally make plays at hawthorne when at my simulcast center .....

[illinoisbred]

Illinois ...Are there any statistics comparing hawthornes safety record to arlingtons after the poly was installed?I am just curious and a bit lazy to look it up myself....I will occasionally make plays at hawthorne when at my simulcast center .....
I honestly don't know. I think I recently heard that there were 14 fatalities at AP this year, but I don't think that number included training/workout hrs.I can't say I've ever seen numbers put out at Hawthorne.

[Show Me the Wire]

Hawthorne's dirt track in the beginning of the meet, as long as the weather stays temperate, is like a freshly very deep plowed field. The times are slow. As the weather turns colder and the ground freezes, the dirt track turnd into a paved highway. Lots of injuries on the hard frozen dirt.

[WinterTriangle]

Pair suffer fractures in Norfolk

http://www.drf.com/news/article/107843.html

Excerpt:

ARCADIA, Calif. - While the Grade 1 Norfolk Stakes on Sunday at Santa Anita established Lookin at Lucky as the Breeders' Cup Juvenile favorite, two other colts suffered injuries in the main-track race and are off the trail.
Jung Man Scott and John Scott finished in a dead heat for fourth; both sustained condylar fractures. They are sidelined until at least next year.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Owners and Trainers are out of their minds to send any horse to this years Breeders' Cup. Just read the last 15 posts in this thread!

I was reserving judgement and then read about John Scott and Jung Man Scott and now, I gotta say, it's not like they were nags. These are horses in good form.

Very sad.

[ralph_the_cat]

Yup we should base every synthetic surface off of Californias, especially Santa Anita... where they tried to add more dirt into the surface so fans and horsemen would think its "more like dirt"...

Synthetic surfaces everywhere else were a success when it comes to injuries... PID last year had 4 from 5,677 starters(2 of them were TDN shippers from Sipp who had come off several dirt races)... none during training hours... 6 months and only 4 deaths,amazing, find someone dogging that surface, I dare you... but somehow that gets put aside to Santa Anita losing 2 horses in one race... Penns 14 horses killed in 22 days last year were put aside as well... nope, its all about California baby!... gimme a break

theres an article out there floating around from a month or 2 ago that has 60 deaths on dirt in California this year...

[andymays]

You probably should read the thread. There's a lot more!

[ralph_the_cat]

You probably should read the thread. There's a lot more!

you must have to point me to it... because all I keep reading about is CA

[andymays]

you must have to point me to it... because all I keep reading about is CA


That's where I am so I stay on top of it. As far as the other places that have synthetic I don't have much of an opinion. I know that in California they were not counting injuries and fatalities accurately in 2007 and most of 2008.

[ralph_the_cat]

That's where I am so I stay on top of it. As far as the other places that have synthetic I don't have much of an opinion. I know that in California they were not counting injuries and fatalities accurately in 2007 and most of 2008.

But you think they were in 2006, 1996, 1986, 1976, 1966?

[andymays]

But you think they were in 2006, 1996, 1986, 1976, 1966?


When I say 2007 and 2008 were not accurate I mean there were many instances in those years where horses were vanned off the track and euthanized later but not counted as racing fatalities because they did not die on the track.

As far as other years go the safety issue was brought up by proponents of synthetic surfaces. Some said (this is from a real article) that if you didn't like synthetic surfaces you hated horses and didn't care about traumatizing little children who went to the track and saw a horse put down.

I don't like them as a handicapper but I was willing to give them a shot if the claims made by the infomercials that sold them were accurate. Nearly all of the claims made about synthetic surfaces turned out to be false.

They are more expensive to maintain because they wear out with weather, usage, and maintenance.

They have as many or more biases than dirt.

It is now debateable whether they are safer at all.

In recent polls a majority of Horseplayers don't like them. In one poll nearly 3 out of 4 want them removed immediately in areas with good weather like Southern California.

[11cashcall]

I dont want to get caught injecting my horse(s)(past & present) with
synthetic joint fluid,corticosteroids,hyaluronic acid and Vetalog.So lets blame the tracks for installing these surfaces.Opps they passed rules so now my horses run without them & whats happens?

There is a consensus among equine researchers and surgeons that legal medications and cortisone shots, over time, leave a horse vulnerable to a catastrophic breakdown and is passed on via breeding.

[andymays]

I dont want to get caught injecting my horse(s)(past & present) with
synthetic joint fluid,corticosteroids,hyaluronic acid and Vetalog.So lets blame the tracks for installing these surfaces.Opps they passed rules so now my horses run without them & whats happens?

There is a consensus among equine researchers and surgeons that legal medications and cortisone shots, over time, leave a horse vulnerable to a catastrophic breakdown and is passed on via breeding.


Bottom line given the events over the past 10 months and especially the last 6 days would you bring a horse you owned that could be worth 20-40 million dollars like Sea The Stars and run him in the Classic over the Pro Ride?

[andymays]

Bottom line given the events over the past 10 months and especially the last 6 days would you bring a horse you owned that could be worth 20-40 million dollars like Sea The Stars and run him in the Classic over the Pro Ride?

Sheikh Mohammed keen on buying champ

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/racing/article6862302.ece

Excerpt:

So attached to the horse are members of the Tsui family, themselves immeasurably wealthy, that they are unwilling sellers. Sea The Stars's most recent triumph will prompt the sheikh to redouble his efforts to discover whether the Tsuis have their price. A bid of $100 million (about £63m) would certainly test their resolve - particularly in the enduring financial climate.

[Grits]

Andy, we posted the same link. Deleted mine.

[andymays]

Andy, we posted the same link. Deleted mine.


Sorry if I made the error. I'm sure your link was better than mine! :)

[11cashcall]

Bottom line given the events over the past 10 months and especially the last 6 days would you bring a horse you owned that could be worth 20-40 million dollars like Sea The Stars and run him in the Classic over the Pro Ride?

Interesting thing is the euro broke down in the Classic at Mth, while
the top 2 from last yr. on syn. came out in good order.

Given his Ske. structure and cycle loading,yes.Connections hav'ent voiced anything neg. about the surface.Euros will out 2-fold this yr. at SA given the surface.Also their horse imho are much more stronger phsyically overall,given that thier horses are not exposed to the Drugs as our breed is.

All i am saying is given the number of published data etc. drugs in T racing plays a large role in break downs.Not just on Syn. It just happens that pro-ride is in the jurd. of so-cal.

[andymays]

Interesting thing is the euro broke down in the Classic at Mth, while
the top 2 from last yr. on syn. came out in good order.

Given his Ske. structure and cycle loading,yes.Connections hav'ent voiced anything neg. about the surface.Euros will out 2-fold this yr. at SA given the surface.Also their horse imho are much more stronger phsyically overall,given that thier horses are not exposed to the Drugs as our breed is.


When I watched George Washington in that race I blame the Jockey. The Jock never let him settle into stride and he was urging the hell out of him into the backstretch. At least that's the way I remember it.

[11cashcall]

When I watched George Washington in that race I blame the Jockey. The Jock never let him settle into stride and he was urging the hell out of him into the backstretch. At least that's the way I remember it.

I remember that,near the turn i believe.Real shame too.Too find out he had no future in the B-shed & then that breakdown.Horrible.

[andymays]

Horses start kicking good Hawthorne dirt :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Horse racing

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/horseracing/1802257,CST-SPT-haw02.article

Excerpt:

If management at Hawthorne Race Course needs an earthy catch phrase for its 2009 fall thoroughbred meet, the Carey family could borrow a Frank Zappa classic:

''Plastic, folks, you know it won't happen here.''

After five quietly rough and tragic months on the synthetic Polytrack surface at Arlington Park, live daytime racing in the Chicago region shifted to the reliable old dirt at Hawthorne on Thursday.

[Robert Fischer]

the irony is that with their (limited)base of racing talent and their nice 1,320 foot stretch, Hawthorne would have an improved product going synthetic.

[westny]

the irony is that with their (limited)base of racing talent and their nice 1,320 foot stretch, Hawthorne would have an improved product going synthetic.


Your OPINION...not supported by FACTS.

Obviously YOU did NOT READ the article:

"Of longer vision, Duch and assistant general manager Jim Miller already have close to 2,000 horses on the grounds. The Hawthorne dirt has been available for training for close to a month and prompted a number of early departures from Arlington.
''We've gotten an awful lot of horses in earlier than usual,'' the veteran Duch said. ''That greatly helps us fill fields. There is no question that having a real dirt track has been a positive for us at Hawthorne. As long as the weather cooperates, we should have a great meet.''

[ralph_the_cat]

Horses start kicking good Hawthorne dirt :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Horse racing

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/horseracing/1802257,CST-SPT-haw02.article

Excerpt:

If management at Hawthorne Race Course needs an earthy catch phrase for its 2009 fall thoroughbred meet, the Carey family could borrow a Frank Zappa classic:

''Plastic, folks, you know it won't happen here.''

After five quietly rough and tragic months on the synthetic Polytrack surface at Arlington Park, live daytime racing in the Chicago region shifted to the reliable old dirt at Hawthorne on Thursday.

Rough and tragic doesnt mean there were more breakdowns, we know how Rene got hurt, and it wasnt because of a horse breaking down...

Arlingtons breakdowns over dirt before they installed synthetic were disgustingly high... It got to the point they were writing articles every couple weeks mentioning the number of horses killed... but I imagine the two jockey injuries over AP's synthetic would create those comments above, rightfully so, but lets not forget the past, AP and breakdowns go hand and hand, regardless of surface.... CA is the same way... Although they have had slightly lower breakdowns over synthetics, the breakdown rate wasnt "greatly" improved in CA and AP,but most other tracks showed a significant improvement, and still showing 2 years into it...

[ralph_the_cat]

When I say 2007 and 2008 were not accurate I mean there were many instances in those years where horses were vanned off the track and euthanized later but not counted as racing fatalities because they did not die on the track.


I understand that... but you cant deny the fact that in 2006 and earlier that horses were vanned off and euthanized later as well....

[andymays]

I understand that... but you cant deny the fact that in 2006 and earlier that horses were vanned off and euthanized later as well....


I guess what I'm saying is that when they installed synthetic surfaces in Southern California it was done with incredible fanfare. These surfaces were supposed to be perfect in every way. Because of the outrageous claims and the investment made in synthetic surfaces by the Tracks that installed them, they had an incentive to fudge the injury and fatality figures in my opinion. The CHRB mandated them and they were heralded by Racing Officials as a cure all for California racing. I believe and it is my opinion that many of the people involved in the mandate received kickbacks, commissions, stock options, gifts, and whatever else to install them and promote them.

Bottom line is that they should have installed it on the Training Track at Santa Anita first for a couple of years or just one of the three major tracks in Southern California first.

[castaway01]

I guess what I'm saying is that when they installed synthetic surfaces in Southern California it was done with incredible fanfare. These surfaces were supposed to be perfect in every way. Because of the outrageous claims and the investment made in synthetic surfaces by the Tracks that installed them, they had an incentive to fudge the injury and fatality figures in my opinion. The CHRB mandated them and they were heralded by Racing Officials as a cure all for California racing. I believe and it is my opinion that many of the people involved in the mandate received kickbacks, commissions, stock options, gifts, and whatever else to install them and promote them.

Bottom line is that they should have installed it on the Training Track at Santa Anita first for a couple of years or just one of the three major tracks in Southern California first.

2008:
Breakdown rate on dirt: 2.0 per 1000 horses
Breakdown rate on synth: 1.5 per 1000 horses

I mean, I don't bet California and I know AndyMays will send me 1000 hostile messages because it doesn't suit his agenda, but those are the actual numbers.

[andymays]

2008:
Breakdown rate on dirt: 2.0 per 1000 horses
Breakdown rate on synth: 1.5 per 1000 horses

I mean, I don't bet California and I know AndyMays will send me 1000 hostile messages because it doesn't suit his agenda, but those are the actual numbers.


If the numbers used are wrong to begin with what happens to the final numbers?

Do me a favor and don't mislead people on the board by saying I send you hostile messages.

[castaway01]

If the numbers used are wrong to begin with what happens to the final numbers?

Do me a favor and don't mislead people on the board saying I send you hostile messages.

I'm saying you'll post endlessly saying the numbers are wrong, but more horses are breaking down on dirt than synthetics---it's per 1000, how are the numbers "wrong".

And I'll say whatever I want you about you troll---just because you post 1000 times a day doesn't give you any more right to lie than anyone else.

[andymays]

I'm saying you'll post endlessly saying the numbers are wrong, but more horses are breaking down on dirt than synthetics---it's per 1000, how are the numbers "wrong".

And I'll say whatever I want you about you troll---just because you post 1000 times a day doesn't give you any more right to lie than anyone else.


It's about 12 times a day. More misleading stuff! :rolleyes:

[castaway01]

It's about 12 times a day. More misleading stuff! :rolleyes:

Ho ho, haha, what a funny troll. So how do you explain the numbers troll?

[andymays]

Ho ho, haha, what a funny troll. So how do you explain the numbers troll?


Knock off the name calling castaway.

[Robert Fischer]

Your OPINION...not supported by FACTS.

Obviously YOU did NOT READ the article...

Yeah. My OPINION is that these mid-lower level tracks may as well go synthetic. In general the synthetic offers a lot more interesting handicapping.

Hawthorne also has the long stretch(fact), which is what other tracks of any surface should shooting for(opinion).
The DRF, horseracingillinois.com list Hawthorne as having 271 more feet of stretch, which hardly makes sense considering Arlington is a 9Furlong Main Track, while Hawthorne is a Mile Main Track. Apparently finish line placement goes a long way.

[RXB]

It's not just finish-line placement. Hawthorne has very tight turns, only about 1.5 furlongs. Fair Grounds is similar.

[andymays]

Another thing about statistics or numbers created by people. News flash! They aren't always accurate and they can be misleading.

Earlier in the year Quality Road was given a time that was faster than it really was. Race Times are not always accurate.

Earlier in the year in a thread about run ups we caused two tracks to change the run ups they had on record for several years and change them. One was Churchill Downs who had the 6F run up at 80ft. The truth was that is was 100ft. Emerald Downs also changed their run ups after we contacted them.

I could go on and on about innacurate or misleading information in Racing. I believe the numbers on injuries and fatalities on synthetic surfaces are misleading. For one they are not counted accurately (especially in 2007 and 2008), and they also have new bases. How can you compare a surface with a new base to one that is decades old? You can't!

[Robert Fischer]

It's not just finish-line placement. Hawthorne has very tight turns, only about 1.5 furlongs. Fair Grounds is similar.

Thanks -That is interesting, and it makes some sense regarding that mystery.

[RXB]

It's not just finish-line placement. Hawthorne has very tight turns, only about 1.5 furlongs. Fair Grounds is similar.

Having thought about it, I decided they can't be quite that tight, so I watched a couple of replays. Haw and FG dirt turns are about 1.7 furlongs. Churchill also has tighter turns-- looks like about 1.8f on the main track.

[tucker6]

Having thought about it, I decided they can't be quite that tight, so I watched a couple of replays. Haw and FG dirt turns are about 1.7 furlongs. Churchill also has tighter turns-- looks like about 1.8f on the main track.
If Churchill is 1.8F, what is Pimlico's track?? I've always been told it is tighter than Churchill.

[andymays]

I'd be curious to know how many degrees the turns are banked at all the A list tracks.

[bisket]

If Churchill is 1.8F, what is Pimlico's track?? I've always been told it is tighter than Churchill.
this is false. pimlico's turns are no different than churhills. this idea of pimlico having tighter turns was started back in the 1930's when there was a hill in the middle of the track. it made the turns appear much tighter. alfred vandy had the hill removed because fans couldn't watch the horses run through the backstretch during races because the hill obstructed their view. the dirt surface at both tracks are almost identical also. incidentally for all the tracks that have derby preps all spring the track that has the surface that resembles churchill and pimlico is gulfstream. so you can almost take it to the bank that if a horse runs well at gulfstream they will at churchill also

[Robert Fischer]

Having thought about it, I decided they can't be quite that tight, so I watched a couple of replays. Haw and FG dirt turns are about 1.7 furlongs. Churchill also has tighter turns-- looks like about 1.8f on the main track.
Fair grounds - is a Nice dirt track (in my opinion). Probably my favorite dirt track of the ones that aren't the Major meets like NYRA or Churchill and Gulfstream. Fairgrounds also happens to have a long length of stretch distance. FG can be counter-intuitive at times because their route distances often use a (shorter stretch)alternate finish line, while 6Furlong sprints use the long stretch...

[bisket]

Fair grounds - is a Nice dirt track (in my opinion). Probably my favorite dirt track of the ones that aren't the Major meets like NYRA or Churchill and Gulfstream. Fairgrounds also happens to have a long turn-to-stretch distance. FG can be counter-intuitive at times because their route distances often use a (shorter stretch)alternate finish line, while 6Furlong sprints use the long stretch...
i've found that fairgrounds track is a little weird, and usually give horses coming from their a mark against for the derby. i can't remember when a horse came from there and ran well in the derby.

[illinoisbred]

Fair grounds - is a Nice dirt track (in my opinion). Probably my favorite dirt track of the ones that aren't the Major meets like NYRA or Churchill and Gulfstream. Fairgrounds also happens to have a long length of stretch distance. FG can be counter-intuitive at times because their route distances often use a (shorter stretch)alternate finish line, while 6Furlong sprints use the long stretch...
Fair Grounds won't be using the alternate finish line this year.

[Robert Fischer]

Fair Grounds won't be using the alternate finish line this year.

wow:eek: good to know. So now it is just the "long" stretch? Do you know of any articles on this? I will run it through google...

[illinoisbred]

No,Jessica Pecheco announced that on closing day at Arlington. She's the pre-race analyst there too.

[tucker6]

this is false. pimlico's turns are no different than churhills. this idea of pimlico having tighter turns was started back in the 1930's when there was a hill in the middle of the track. it made the turns appear much tighter. alfred vandy had the hill removed because fans couldn't watch the horses run through the backstretch during races because the hill obstructed their view. the dirt surface at both tracks are almost identical also. incidentally for all the tracks that have derby preps all spring the track that has the surface that resembles churchill and pimlico is gulfstream. so you can almost take it to the bank that if a horse runs well at gulfstream they will at churchill also
Thanks Bisket. Interesting tidbit.

[andymays]

http://horseracing.bloginky.com/2009/10/06/shirreffs-running-on-synthetics-like-running-on-velcro/

Excerpt:

California-based trainer John Shirreffs, who conditions undefeated champion Zenyatta, has long been a vocal opponent of synthetic tracks and, during a national teleconference today, he detailed why he feels the surface does more harm than good in developing young prospects.


“I personally hate synthetics,” Shirreffs said. “I’m more into developing young horses and I find that young horses really don’t like training on synthetics. I don’t know if you can imagine training on Velcro. When the foot lands, it doesn’t slide, it sticks to the ground. Depending on how synthetic the surface is, the horse can’t rotate the foot into the track and push off.


“Imagine running around flat-footed all the time without getting up on your toes and pushing off,” Shirreffs continued. “That’s probably how it would feel to a human.”

[RXB]

Fair grounds - is a Nice dirt track (in my opinion). Probably my favorite dirt track of the ones that aren't the Major meets like NYRA or Churchill and Gulfstream. Fairgrounds also happens to have a long length of stretch distance. FG can be counter-intuitive at times because their route distances often use a (shorter stretch)alternate finish line, while 6Furlong sprints use the long stretch...

FG is one of my two best tracks in terms of long-term ROI, so of course I love the place. It has a very fair dirt surface that also seems kinder on the horses' legs. I love betting FG shippers when they go north in the spring.

The 1/16th pole finish was used for the one-mile races only, same as Oaklawn. The other routes have always used the standard finish line.

[illinoisbred]

FG is one of my two best tracks in terms of long-term ROI, so of course I love the place. It has a very fair dirt surface that also seems kinder on the horses' legs. I love betting FG shippers when they go north in the spring.

The 1/16th pole finish was used for the one-mile races only, same as Oaklawn. The other routes have always used the standard finish line.
I've heard a lot of Kentucky/Illinois based trainers say the Fair Grounds is one of the best surfaces to train/race on. Many horses leave there fitter than when they arrived there. Lately hearing the same thing about Tampa Bay. Well maintained "real" dirt-still the way to go!

[andymays]

Anxiety High as Industry Awaits Monitor s Study of Safety Alliance

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog.php/John-Pricci/comments/10022009-anxiety-high-as-industry-awaits-monitors-study-of-safety-alliance/

Excerpt:

But instead of focusing on the horses in these races and how the results might impact the championship round, the synthetic surface issue once again is beginning to dominate the storylines.

Sadly, it seems impossible to open a major race meet in California without considering concerns for early-meet breakdowns at racetracks in a state that has mandated the use of artificial surfaces.

If the results of this synthetic experiment has not yet sounded the death knell for the continuation of top class California racing as we know it, the surfaces have, at the least, given the industry a black eye it hopes is only temporary.

As a prelude to Breeders’ Cup 2008, the Los Angeles Times reported, if memory serves, seven catastrophic injuries in the run-up to Breeders’ Cup’s first ever two-day event.

[andymays]

East's best won't meet out West

http://www.drf.com/news/article/107863.html

Excerpt:

Both camps cited the fact the Breeders' Cup will be run over the Pro-Ride surface at Santa Anita for a second consecutive year as a basis for their decisions.

"He got beat six lengths over the Pro-Ride in the Sprint last year," said Beattie, referring to Fabulous Strike's fifth-place finish in the 2008 Sprint. "He gave an honest effort, but he's just not quite as good on synthetics as he is on dirt. Anywhere but Santa Anita and we'd have been there."

[46zilzal]

I've heard a lot of Kentucky/Illinois based trainers say the Fair Grounds is one of the best surfaces to train/race on. Many horses leave there fitter than when they arrived there. Lately hearing the same thing about Tampa Bay. Well maintained "real" dirt-still the way to go!
Many used to tout Calder for the same reasons

[Seabiscuit@AR]

Today's BC meeting at SA completed the case in favour of synthetics and against dirt tracks

Watching Zenyatta pass most of the field in the stretch was exciting to watch. This is something you will rarely see on dirt instead the winner romps home after being close up on the home turn

Most of the BC races on the AW were closely fought contests and it really adds to the racing

BC next year should be at Turfway

[gm10]

Today's BC meeting at SA completed the case in favour of synthetics and against dirt tracks

Watching Zenyatta pass most of the field in the stretch was exciting to watch. This is something you will rarely see on dirt instead the winner romps home after being close up on the home turn

Most of the BC races on the AW were closely fought contests and it really adds to the racing

BC next year should be at Turfway

Completely agree (apart from the TP bit :)).
It was one of the most uplifting moments in racing history. Watching a horse get out in front and grind it out, is just not as much fun.

And no breakdowns either this year.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Yeah.Punishing the horses whose virtues keep them from traffic trouble and ground loss in favor of plodders is the solution.

[Java Gold@TFT]

Yeah.Punishing the horses whose virtues keep them from traffic trouble and ground loss in favor of plodders is the solution.
:ThmbUp: Yep, give an advantage to the plodders. MTB is a plodder and somehow he won on the dirt at Chuchill but was nowhere to be found yesterday. Not all plodders face the same track. All anyone asks is that the track plays fair. In MTB's case, it did play fair - he had no chance and showed it. If you don't think a speed favoring dirt track fits your handicapping then stay away. (And Cincy, even if it didn't come across, I agree with you.)

[andymays]

Other than the Classic (a great performance) I thought the main track racing was garbage. I honestly don't know how anyone can play that surface with any confidence and once again I don't personally know any regular players that came away with any real money (and again I don't mean spreading and having something for 10 cents or a dollar). I think the Classic was the only main track (Pro Ride) race I cashed in on having the trifecta. I was hoping Gio Ponti or Twice Over would win and I bet Twice Over to win and place. Zenyattas' performance was one for the ages. Even though she broke bad she had the pace to run at and I still don't think she maxed out!

The turf racing was fine with hard work and sound hancapping principles paying off.

As far as breakdowns and injuries go there were none to my knowledge and that's more to do with the 3 vet inspections a day for each horse and not the surface in my opinion.

The debate will continue I guess and I'm hoping the new owners put in a quality dirt surface. I hope John Shireffs will lead the charge because he has been quoted many times basically saying "synthetics suck"!

Anyway it's been one hell of a thread with a lot of good information and some good fights in between! ;) :cool:

[Indulto]

Completely agree (apart from the TP bit :)).
It was one of the most uplifting moments in racing history. Watching a horse get out in front and grind it out, is just not as much fun.

And no breakdowns either this year.I thought seeing Presious Passion almost hold on against Conduit was pretty exciting. The most exciting race this year IMO was Rachel holding on against Macho again in the Woodward. That said, Zenyatta's victory was more impressive given her competition and her dominance over them; closing strongly into moderate fractional times.

Considering the value of the horses involved, tighter medication policy, and more extensive vet checks -- why should an absence of breakdowns be surprising on any surface? Still, it should be interesting to track how soon, if ever, the BC Pro-ride contestants make their next starts.

Until Beyer and others' figures more satisfactorily relate performances between surfaces, and synthetic pace analyis is better understood by more players, then payoffs on synthetics will continue to be as exciting as the finishes.

[PaceAdvantage]

And no breakdowns either this year.Lillie Langtry fractured her knee during the Juvenile Turf....perhaps we should next replace the California turf courses with the artificial stuff as a remedy?

[gm10]

Lillie Langtry fractured her knee during the Juvenile Turf....perhaps we should next replace the California turf courses with the artificial stuff as a remedy?

that's hardly a breakdown
she'll be back in the spring

[PaceAdvantage]

that's hardly a breakdownBroken bone requiring screw to be inserted does not equal breakdown...

Duly noted and recorded for the record books.

[rokitman]

Other than the Classic (a great performance) I thought the main track racing was garbage. I honestly don't know how anyone can play that surface with any confidence and once again I don't personally know any regular players that came away with any real money (and again I don't mean spreading and having something for 10 cents or a dollar). I think the Classic was the only main track (Pro Ride) race I cashed in on having the trifecta. I was hoping Gio Ponti or Twice Over would win and I bet Twice Over to win and place. Zenyattas' performance was one for the ages. Even though she broke bad she had the pace to run at and I still don't think she maxed out!

The turf racing was fine with hard work and sound hancapping principles paying off.

As far as breakdowns and injuries go there were none to my knowledge and that's more to do with the 3 vet inspections a day for each horse and not the surface in my opinion.

The debate will continue I guess and I'm hoping the new owners put in a quality dirt surface. I hope John Shireffs will lead the charge because he has been quoted many times basically saying "synthetics suck"!

Anyway it's been one hell of a thread with a lot of good information and some good fights in between! ;) :cool:
You adapt. A...D...A...P...T :eek:

[tzipi]

that's hardly a breakdown
she'll be back in the spring

And things like that are why racing has a bad name. "That's hardly a breakdown" :bang:

[westny]

You adapt. A...D...A...P...T :eek:

Absolutely. Keep fake track horses racing on :bang: plastic, dirt horses on dirt :bang: and turf horses can race on both. :D

[andymays]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/109686.html

Excerpt:

Promoting a new stallion such as Dixie Chatter to mare owners will present some challenges for the team at River Edge Farm in Buellton, Calif., in coming months. The same goes for the way that Tommy Town Thoroughbreds in Santa Ynez will market the multiple stakes winner Whatsthescript.
The horses were successful on the track, but both specialized in an aspect of racing that has not typically been sought by California breeders. They were best on turf.

Now that synthetic surfaces have replaced traditional dirt on California's main tracks, it could be the right time to invest in turf sires. Horses that run well on turf have frequently shown an affinity for the synthetic surfaces - Pro-Ride at Santa Anita, Cushion Track at Hollywood Park, Polytrack at Del Mar, and Tapeta at Golden Gate Fields.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do you mean to tell me turf horses do better on synthetic surfaces? :eek:

Who woulda thunk it? :D

I had to bring the monster thread back on more time before the end of the year! :ThmbUp: ;)

[andymays]

Just announced on HRTV that Santa Anita will go back to dirt.

Now everyone is gonna hear the truth from the Racing Executives, Racing Officials, and HRTV and TVG.

They've been Bee essing everyone for almost 3 years now but............................................... ............................................ slowly but surely the truth came out!

[W2G]

Steve Byk is talking about it right now. Back to dirt!

Some pretty good racing news these past few days.

[illinoisbred]

Hopefully this change of thinking can begin progressing eastward!

[andymays]

Steve Byk is talking about it right now. Back to dirt!

Some pretty good racing news these past few days.


This battle has gone on for more than a year and it finally paid off with a little help from the weather gods.

Congrats to everyone who helped get this godforsaken crap outa here.

[Backstretch Pirate]

Just announced on HRTV that Santa Anita will go back to dirt.

Now everyone is gonna hear the truth from the Racing Executives, Racing Officials, and HRTV and TVG.

They've been Bee essing everyone for almost 3 years now but............................................... ............................................ slowly but surely the truth came out!

That's great news. Now, if we could only get rid of this crap everywhere else.

[46zilzal]

That's great news. Now, if we could only get rid of this crap everywhere else.
As much as I do not like the stuff, it really helps in cold weather at venues like Turfway and especially Woodbine.

[illinoisbred]

Do trainers still have to spray Pam on the belly and private areas of horses running in the winter at Turfway? I understand the polycrap was sticking and quite difficult to remove without spraying beforehand.

[PhantomOnTour]

I thought they said an announcement was coming soon. The LATC guy on HRTV didnt say they were switching back. He did if you read btw the lines but he did not out n out say they're switching.

Couldnt they find a better time to do that interview than during post parades for Aqu and GP and live racing at FG? Like, say, 10 minutes later!

The interview was to talk about the cancellation of SA today. Do we need to talk to some track guy for that? How's this: it rained REALLY hard! Racing cancels all the time because of weather, but wait...racing was cancelled in almighty CALIFORNIA!?...everyone stop what you're doing...oh my goodness!

he kept saying, "we just couldnt get the track to drain" :lol:
kitty litter clumps when it gets wet.

[andymays]

I thought they said an announcement was coming soon. The LATC guy on HRTV didnt say they were switching back. He did if you read btw the lines but he did not out n out say they're switching.

Couldnt they find a better time to do that interview than during post parades for Aqu and GP and live racing at FG? Like, say, 10 minutes later!

The interview was to talk about the cancellation of SA today. Do we need to talk to some track guy for that? How's this: it rained REALLY hard! Racing cancels all the time because of weather, but wait...racing was cancelled in almighty CALIFORNIA!?...everyone stop what you're doing...oh my goodness!

he kept saying, "we just couldnt get the track to drain" :lol:
kitty litter clumps when it gets wet.


It's up on the Paulick Report and says developing.

[Backstretch Pirate]

As much as I do not like the stuff, it really helps in cold weather at venues like Turfway and especially Woodbine.

Maybe Turfway, but Woodbine does not need this stuff.
The climate in Toronto is not that bad for the majority of their meet.

[PhantomOnTour]

It's up on the Paulick Report and says developing.

Great to hear. Can they do this (and by do this i mean do it right) in time for the next meet or are we looking at a few years down the road? Is this statewide or just SA? Dont have time to read the report.

Wonder what Keeneland is thinking.

[illinoisbred]

The racing gods can not be looking down fondly at Keeneland. Poly crap at Keeneland is sacriligious!

[andymays]

Great to hear. Can they do this (and by do this i mean do it right) in time for the next meet or are we looking at a few years down the road? Is this statewide or just SA? Dont have time to read the report.

Wonder what Keeneland is thinking.


They need to do it to get the Breeders Cup back in 2011. They even might be thinking about getting Rachel out here.

Stronach never wanted it but Ron Charles insisted. When Stronach was awarded Santa Anita again the deal was going to get done. Charles came out a couple of weeks ago and said Pro Ride was dissapointing.

[PhantomOnTour]

My main beef with poly is that it muddles the line btw turf and dirt divisions. They all became one big homogenous division. Poly plays like turf for the most part. I like the distinctions btw the surfaces...too late to get up on dirt? got a lil green in your blood? lets try em on turf.
Dunno why I'm all involved with this; I didnt play Cali before poly. They just dont fit into my schedule.

[PhantomOnTour]

Breeders Cup back in Cali in 2011!!??

NOOOOOOO!!!!

[joanied]

As much as I do not like the stuff, it really helps in cold weather at venues like Turfway and especially Woodbine.

zilly...there is a place for everything and everything in it's place...just not S.Cal:)

[joanied]

Breeders Cup back in Cali in 2011!!??

NOOOOOOO!!!!

:lol: that's funny:lol: But seriously, I think S Cal has had the BC enough for now...but, IF that is what one reason for getting dirt back...wooooweeee:jump:

andymays...I know your feet are maybe about one inch off the ground right now:) ...this is really fantastic news... I just hope when they lay down that dirt track...they do it right...it needs to be safe and kind...but, that is another topic,eh!!

[andymays]

http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/santa-anita-likely-to-return-to-dirt-following-2009-10-meeting/

Except:

On an afternoon when heavy rains forced Santa Anita Park management to cancel a special holiday program, track president Ron Charles said the all-weather surface currently in place will be removed at the end of the 2009-’10 and strongly hinted the Arcadia, Calif., racetrack would return to dirt for its main track surface.

[andymays]

http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2010/01/santa-anitas-holiday-card-wipe.html

Excerpt:

But don't despair. A high-ranking Santa Anita official told me recently that Pro-Ride will almost certainly be gone by next Oak Tree meeting, replaced by a natural dirt surface.

The official, who did not want me to use his name because an official decision concerning the track surface has not been reached yet, also told me that the high rollers, people who bet far more on the races than you and I, don't like betting on synthetics. That hurts the handle, just another little fly in the ointment that is California racing these days.