PDA

View Full Version : Slowly but surely the truth about synthetic surfaces......


Pages : [1] 2 3 4

andymays
06-26-2009, 10:40 AM
By Art Wilson:

http://www.sgvtribune.com/sports/ci_12690905

Excerpt:

Ask the trainers who are discovering all sorts of different ailments with their horses that never cropped up before synthetics, or go solicit the opinions of all the major horse players who are confronted with five- and six-horse fields all too often.

"I'm just not a true believer in the synthetics," jockey Calvin Borel told turf writers on a national conference call this week. "I don't know, it kind of messes with your head and stuff. I know from a gambler's point of view, it has to be hard. You can't go by the (Racing) Form. It's just so hard to pick a horse to win on a synthetic track."

Raise your hand if you really think these artificial surfaces have lived up to their billing.

"Originally, it was probably 60-40 or 70-30 for (synthetics), and I'd say it's 80-20 against right now, maybe even 90-10," trainer Gary Stute said recently. "I mean, I can't name 10 trainers off-hand that I talk to that actually still like it.

cj's dad
06-26-2009, 10:49 AM
Just say no to synthetics, as in 0 wagers. I have.

andymays
06-26-2009, 11:06 AM
http://www.sgvtribune.com/sports/ci_12690905

The article by Art Wilson allows comments below the article and these are from me:


Outstanding article Art. The "synthetic shills" at TVG and HRTV have been promoting this junk on behalf of Santa Anita, Del Mar, and Hollywood Park for too long. Santa Anita is the worst by far. Almost 50% carryovers at that meet. Pro Ride (Hocus Pocus Junk) in my opinion is a fraudulent surface and Ron Charles should be ashamed of himself for screwing the public. The day they dug up the track in the middle of the card (2008) and changed it from a speed favoring surface to a dead closers track was the worst case of defrauding the betting public I have ever seen. Those of us that had bets in action were cheated. The CHRB should have fined Santa Anita $100,000 and put it in a pick 4 pool the following week.

Keep speaking out Art. Lord knows the shills at TVG and HRTV won't. Even the good people on those networks that want to speak out can't because they're afraid of losing their jobs. I hope a couple of them come on here anonymously and verify what I have said.

rastajenk
06-26-2009, 11:08 AM
I think it's amusing that, at the dawn of the synthetic age a couple years ago, the gurus complained it would take away the bias, favorites would be easy to identify and bet, and the payoffs and predictability would resemble harness racing. The big bettors, seeking value, would take their action someplace else.

Now that the new surfaces are unpredictable, bettors are taking their action somewhere else.

I don't have any additional insights into this, except that horseplayers are the toughest bunch of customers to please anywhere in the disposable income industries.

bucksboy
06-26-2009, 11:32 AM
I agree ..... 0 wagers from me on the Poly. I had to laugh when TVG took on
Woodbine, not only with the takeout rate, but the plastic track to boot...
then they showed Woodbine live and showed Belmont on tape delay. I know
racing has it's problems, drugs, takeout, etc.----but the plastic has to go..
JMHO

turfbar
06-26-2009, 11:33 AM
I am just paraphrasing but I read where Nick Zito said , for 200 years we bred horses for speed now we introduce syn tracks which resemble turf racing and we are handing the thorobred crown back to the French and English.

Well said.

Turfbar

cj's dad
06-26-2009, 11:58 AM
I agree ..... 0 wagers from me on the Poly. I had to laugh when TVG took on
Woodbine, not only with the takeout rate, but the plastic track to boot...
then they showed Woodbine live and showed Belmont on tape delay. I know racing has it's problems, drugs, takeout, etc.----but the plastic has to go..
JMHO

Happened yesterday that I am aware of. I normally support TVG, but this decision had me pretty puzzled.

jonnielu
06-26-2009, 12:24 PM
By Art Wilson:

http://www.sgvtribune.com/sports/ci_12690905



If you are going to accept that article as truth, you might want to get your BS meter tuned/calibrated.

jdl

andymays
06-26-2009, 12:41 PM
If you are going to accept that article as truth, you might want to get your BS meter tuned/calibrated.

jdl


The comments from Calvin Borel and Gary Stute speak for themeselves. By the way I had my BS meter calibrated before I started the thread. As soon as you posted your stuff on the subject it went nuts and almost crashed.

Cadillakin
06-26-2009, 12:58 PM
If you are going to accept that article as truth, you might want to get your BS meter tuned/calibrated.

jdl
It's a problem when the only trainer quoted (Gary Stute) is as cold as a well-diggers ass over these last months.. Previously, andymays unearthed some old quotes of Darrel Vienna and Mark Glatt to support his position against synthetics.. Both of those trainers are hitting at a very high rate just now, with Vienna over 33% in the last 90 days... and Glatt well over his averages

I'm guessing both of those guys will be singing a different tune at the moment..

jonnielu
06-26-2009, 01:00 PM
The comments from Calvin Borel and Gary Stute speak for themeselves. By the way I had my BS meter calibrated before I started the thread. As soon as you posted your stuff on the subject it went nuts and almost crashed.

Well then, maybe you could supply the back-up material that the article fails to produce beyond the opinion of a jockey and a trainer.

jdl

Valuist
06-26-2009, 01:00 PM
Just say no to synthetics, as in 0 wagers. I have.

I grew up near Arlington and still live fairly close to it. I bet that track for about 25 years. But no more. I will not support or wager at all on their main track races.

jonnielu
06-26-2009, 01:06 PM
It's a problem when the only trainer quoted (Gary Stute) is as cold as a well-diggers ass over these last months.. Previously, andymays unearthed some old quotes of Darrel Vienna and Mark Glatt to support his position against synthetics.. Both of those trainers are hitting at a very high rate just now, with Vienna over 33% in the last 90 days... and Glatt well over his averages

I'm guessing both of those guys will be singing a different tune at the moment..

I would also like to know if the article strictly revolves around the Cal market as it seems to. If the truth about synthetics actually does get out at some point, I'll try not to be in the way of the horseplayer rush to embrace it.

jdl

jonnielu
06-26-2009, 01:09 PM
I grew up near Arlington and still live fairly close to it. I bet that track for about 25 years. But no more. I will not support or wager at all on their main track races.

Arlington Park is the most rewarding summer meet in the country, you only punish yourself primarily, racing secondarily.

jdl

Valuist
06-26-2009, 01:20 PM
Arlington Park is the most rewarding summer meet in the country, you only punish yourself primarily, racing secondarily.

jdl

I can go there and watch and wager on Belmont or Saratoga. I'll even play Arlington's grass races. But not their Poly races. I had a number of very good meets at the old Arlington but no more. Of all the synthetic surfaces, I believe it is the most puzzling and I'm not going to throw away my money trying to learn it.

jonnielu
06-26-2009, 01:53 PM
I can go there and watch and wager on Belmont or Saratoga. I'll even play Arlington's grass races. But not their Poly races. I had a number of very good meets at the old Arlington but no more. Of all the synthetic surfaces, I believe it is the most puzzling and I'm not going to throw away my money trying to learn it.

That is too bad, because what there is to learn is that there is nothing you need to learn. Which could help you everywhere, not just AP. Frankly, the chalk parade in NY bores me to tears, but I will join you at Saratoga for the 3 weeks that things get out of hand there.

jdl

andymays
06-26-2009, 04:25 PM
More Art Wilson and the synthetic surface debate:

http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/06/official-wishes-stronach-had-s.html

Excerpt:

A Southland racing official who didn't want to be identified because he's not authorized to speak on the subject, told me today he wished Frank Stronach, chairman of Santa Anita's parent company Magna Entertainment Corp., had stood up to Richard Shapiro and other members of the California Horse Racing Board when the ruling body mandated synthetic surfaces for all California tracks in May 2006.

This is the one that I started the thread with.

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/sports/ci_12690905

Imriledup
06-26-2009, 04:44 PM
Just say no. I've invested money into Del Mar's summer meet and now i bet 0 dollars. The economy is not a problem for me, i have the ability to bet just as much as i've bet in years past, but with Plastic, i won't do it.


I just say no.

fmolf
06-26-2009, 04:56 PM
I can go there and watch and wager on Belmont or Saratoga. I'll even play Arlington's grass races. But not their Poly races. I had a number of very good meets at the old Arlington but no more. Of all the synthetic surfaces, I believe it is the most puzzling and I'm not going to throw away my money trying to learn it.
i only concentrate on two tracks ...monmouth and belmont....On breeders cup day i will not be giving caddy any of my money!i will only bet the turf races.....he seems to be the only person who actually likes the stuff.even as a training track trainers will not want to train on it to just run on dirt!some beaches here in my home on long island are eroding badly....maybe polycrap is the answer! :lol:

Bison
06-26-2009, 05:11 PM
I agree ..... 0 wagers from me on the Poly. I had to laugh when TVG took on
Woodbine, not only with the takeout rate, but the plastic track to boot...
then they showed Woodbine live and showed Belmont on tape delay. I know
racing has it's problems, drugs, takeout, etc.----but the plastic has to go..
JMHO

Woodbine can play like a dirt track for 4 or 5 races, and then boom, everything goes to pot! Horses that make no sense from any quantifiable handicapping technique start coming in from the clouds.

I agree with the people who say get rid of this plastic stuff.

KingChas
06-26-2009, 05:14 PM
Just say no to synthetics, as in 0 wagers. I have.

A man of my heart. :kiss:
With all the money we saved I will bring you a six-pack of Pennsylvania Yeungling Lager if we meet at the SPA.

PS;Nothing personal with the kiss-married 20+years. :lol:

cj's dad
06-26-2009, 07:55 PM
I'm concerned - To whom ?

And I hate Yuengling- can we make it Guinness

Hope you make it to Saratoga- it's a good time !!!

A man of my heart. :kiss:
With all the money we saved I will bring you a six-pack of Pennsylvania Yeungling Lager if we meet at the SPA.

PS;Nothing personal with the kiss-married 20+years. :lol:

andymays
06-26-2009, 08:04 PM
How can some of these Racing Executives be so disconnected from their most of their customers? It's astounding!

fmolf
06-26-2009, 08:57 PM
How can some of these Racing Executives be so disconnected from their most of their customers? It's astounding!
well no need to wonder why so many tracks are having financial problems.
here is their business model:
1) tracks:when customer demand is down.... raise the price on product

businesses:when customer demand is down lower prices

2)tracks:when competition tries to sell a similar product they anger
their customers by giving less customer service

businesses:they give more customer service

3)tracks:while trying to grow their business they ignore the needs and
wants of the customer

businesses:when trying to grow their business they do marketing
surveys and analyses and try to accomodate the needs and wants
of their customers


so now we all can see why these executives have been so successful
in their race track careers.Its their superb customer relations!

andymays
06-26-2009, 09:30 PM
Email message I received from Bruno De Julio about Pro Ride at Santa Anita www.racingwithbruno.com

Let me fill you in on a couple of things. I refuse to have my eight horse stable on the pro-ride. I have had five injuries, from ankle chips, and most popular joint damage. It is diagnosed as sclerosis and bone remodeling. Mostly young horses have this issue come up. Well developed joints have a little more resiliency. Second, as the summer is here and heats up the pro-ride you will get one track in the early morning and later in the morning. You can see it yourself go at 6 am and watch horses come from works or gallops, notice the ones with white polo wraps, and how they are soiled. They would be mostly negligible soiling, but as the morning goes and the hotter it gets the track loosens and becomes looser and looser, by the end of the 8 o'clock break and nine you have white bandages soiled heavily up to the fetlock, which suggests a looser, deeper, harder to negotiate track. In laments terms the track went from firm to yielding by the amount of sunlight and heat.

Now, think of horses that work and act on a sounder firm track, and now are asked to run over a yielding one, now you got two surfaces completely opposite of each other.

The yielding surface would promote soft tissue injuries, the firmer ground, joint and tibias.

just a thought from someone at ground zero.

Keep up the good work,

Bruno

________________________________________

jonnielu
06-26-2009, 09:33 PM
Woodbine can play like a dirt track for 4 or 5 races, and then boom, everything goes to pot! Horses that make no sense from any quantifiable handicapping technique start coming in from the clouds.

I agree with the people who say get rid of this plastic stuff.

I love it when handicapping technique is cited as if it were some sort of exacting science.

jdl

jonnielu
06-26-2009, 09:36 PM
How can some of these Racing Executives be so disconnected from their most of their customers? It's astounding!

How can handicappers get so disconnected from the sport of horse racing?

jdl

andymays
06-26-2009, 09:41 PM
How can handicappers get so disconnected from the sport of horse racing?

jdl

I know you don't read much but I just posted this from Bruno De Julio. It is an email he just sent me about the Pro Ride at Santa Anita. He is an owner and a clocker and has been for many years. www.racingwithbruno.com

Let me fill you in on a couple of things. I refuse to have my eight horse stable on the pro-ride. I have had five injuries, from ankle chips, and most popular joint damage. It is diagnosed as sclerosis and bone remodeling. Mostly young horses have this issue come up. Well developed joints have a little more resiliency. Second, as the summer is here and heats up the pro-ride you will get one track in the early morning and later in the morning. You can see it yourself go at 6 am and watch horses come from works or gallops, notice the ones with white polo wraps, and how they are soiled. They would be mostly negligible soiling, but as the morning goes and the hotter it gets the track loosens and becomes looser and looser, by the end of the 8 o'clock break and nine you have white bandages soiled heavily up to the fetlock, which suggests a looser, deeper, harder to negotiate track. In laments terms the track went from firm to yielding by the amount of sunlight and heat.

Now, think of horses that work and act on a sounder firm track, and now are asked to run over a yielding one, now you got two surfaces completely opposite of each other.

The yielding surface would promote soft tissue injuries, the firmer ground, joint and tibias.

just a thought from someone at ground zero.

Keep up the good work,

Bruno

________________________________________


Get a clue Jonnielu!

so.cal.fan
06-26-2009, 09:53 PM
Cadillakin:
You write:
"with Vienna over 33% in the last 90 days"

Vienna trains on the Santa Anita training track(a dirt track). He's been on fire at Hollywood, and Hollywood is more of a sand track now than a synthetic.
The synthetic junk has broken down and is disentigrating and they keep adding sand.

Who knows what Del Mar will be like, anybody's guess.
It's really a mess.

toetoe
06-26-2009, 11:05 PM
I'm guessing both of those guys will be singing a different tune at the moment..

Caddy,

You could write for the King Barack Rhetor. You have invented a surefire way to make the ignorant buy the status quo:

1) Unsuccessful people that bitch will be naysaid as bitter fools.

2) Successful people will keep their mouths shut, and the ensuing silence will be interpreted as implicit approval.

It's so brilliantly simple. Wish I thought of it first. (:Slapping forehead.)

Bruddah
06-27-2009, 12:04 AM
Cadillakin:
You write:
"with Vienna over 33% in the last 90 days"

Vienna trains on the Santa Anita training track(a dirt track). He's been on fire at Hollywood, and Hollywood is more of a sand track now than a synthetic.
The synthetic junk has broken down and is disentigrating and they keep adding sand.

Who knows what Del Mar will be like, anybody's guess.
It's really a mess.


I have known this wonderful lady for 10 years. I can assure you, no one on this board understands and knows So. Cal. racing better than her and her husband. These gracious folks are the embodiment of the Racing Industry in California. They have a 110% understanding of what goes on there.

I will tell all, don't ever doubt what she writes for truth and accuracy. :ThmbUp:

so.cal.fan
06-27-2009, 12:35 AM
What a nice thing to say, Bruddah
You are a fine Southern Gentleman, Sir.
I once visited Oaklawn Park, Bruddah gave me 2 8/1 winners in the same day.
But this man never brags that he is a good handicapper.......so I'll tell you all he is.
I once had thousands of dollars in the Nasdaq stock market, Bruddah told me to get out fast.....that was early in the year 2000........I told him he was wrong, the tech stocks were goinna make me rich! I lost big time! :eek:
This man is a good horseplayer, a good poker player and a good stock investor.
I hope you got out before the November crash, Bro.?
I got "half" out. I should have called you.
Best of luck to you JW.

cj
06-27-2009, 12:50 AM
I have known this wonderful lady for 10 years. I can assure you, no one on this board understands and knows So. Cal. racing better than her and her husband. These gracious folks are the embodiment of the Racing Industry in California. They have a 110% understanding of what goes on there.

I will tell all, don't ever doubt what she writes for truth and accuracy. :ThmbUp:

I have suspected Hollywood is changing, and when I saw Coco Belle cruise to a win last out over Indian Blessing I was sure of it.

I have long thought she is a truly great dirt sprinter, and her race at Monmouth on Breeder's Cup day a few years ago was gigantic. However, her races on turf and synthetics are mediocre at best. I've often wondered just how dumb her connections were to not race her exclusively on real dirt.

JohnGalt1
06-27-2009, 08:41 AM
For those of you who won't bet all weather surfaces, what do you do when a horse with most or all races on AW surfaces shows up at your dirt tracks? You still have to handicap the horse.

I don't play bull rings, but I do run across races run on bull rings in pps.

When Cal horses have 2f races (or QH races) in their pps, I cross them out and consider them a work out. But I won't bet 2f races--on dirt or AW.

So I understand skipping certain tracks, surfaces, distances, breeds, etc.

One handicapping tool I've found works with all surfaces is William L. Scott's Perforamance Class Ratings.

Good fortune at whatever track you invest at.

andymays
06-27-2009, 08:52 AM
What many Horseplayers don't seem to realize is that when these surfaces are first installed the synthetic material is new, but as time goes by with racing, maintenance, and weather the material grinds down and changes shape and consistency. According to all reports (the best was from Bruno De Julio)The Pro Ride at Santa Anita is a mess.

Maintaining it properly would require most of it to be replaced every six months. Where's the Money? We were told it would be less expensive to maintain. I don't think so!

Every Horseplayer should care about an inconsistent surface like Pro Ride. Remember though that Ron Charles (President of Santa Anita) loves the near 50% carryover rate and high takeout wagers like the pick 4's and 6's.


For the Math guys...Inconsistent definition...Mathematics Not solvable for the unknowns by the same set of values. Used of two or more equations or inequalities.

Cadillakin
06-27-2009, 08:57 AM
I have suspected Hollywood is changing, and when I saw Coco Belle cruise to a win last out over Indian Blessing I was sure of it.

And then there are others who state that Indian Blessing lost because she didn't like that very same track. So, Coco Belle loves it, Indian Blessing hates it... Or so it seemed on that racing day.

What is pretty clear is that Indian Blessing didn't fire.. Without her, it was an ordinary allowance race and Coco Belle was the only speed at 6-5.

DanG
06-27-2009, 09:04 AM
Maybe this Jay Hovdey’s article is the “truth” as this thread is being portrayed… or maybe not.

http://hovdeyblog.drf.com/hovdeyblog/

Give me a week with pen and paper and I’ll write an article that says the earth is flat. Actual quotes from humans will be used to reinforce this belief because that is what I set out to achieve.

If a wine grower calls an 87% sand surface ‘plastic’ often enough…it becomes “truth” for those whose agenda it represents.

All opinions are fair game…without discussion this board would be 3 crickets in an echo chamber. When opinion is being represented as “truth” however…it makes debate futile imo.

andymays
06-27-2009, 09:13 AM
Maybe this Jay Hovdey’s article is the “truth” as this thread is being portrayed… or maybe not.

http://hovdeyblog.drf.com/hovdeyblog/

Give me a week with pen and paper and I’ll write an article that says the earth is flat. Actual quotes from humans will be used to reinforce this belief because that is what I set out to achieve.

If a wine grower calls an 87% sand surface ‘plastic’ often enough…it becomes “truth” for those whose agenda it represents.

All opinions are fair game…without discussion this board would be 3 crickets in an echo chamber. When opinion is being represented as “truth” however…it makes debate futile imo.


Without a doubt Jackson is being sarcastic. The thing is Dan that most of the people on the ground at Santa Anita have a negative opinion of Pro Ride. It has not lived up to the infomercial!

When Santa Anita had a traditional surface there were some complaints about it especially when it was sealed.

Now more than 60% of Horseplayers complain about it. Pro Ride is clearly not popular with Horsplayers. From the Report by Art Wilson and the quote from Gary Stute over 80% of Trainers don't like it.

http://www.sgvtribune.com/sports/ci_12690905

Excerpt:

"Originally, it was probably 60-40 or 70-30 for (synthetics), and I'd say it's 80-20 against right now, maybe even 90-10," trainer Gary Stute said recently. "I mean, I can't name 10 trainers off-hand that I talk to that actually still like it.

Email message I received from Bruno De Julio about Pro Ride at Santa Anita. www.racingwithbruno.com

Let me fill you in on a couple of things. I refuse to have my eight horse stable on the pro-ride. I have had five injuries, from ankle chips, and most popular joint damage. It is diagnosed as sclerosis and bone remodeling. Mostly young horses have this issue come up. Well developed joints have a little more resiliency. Second, as the summer is here and heats up the pro-ride you will get one track in the early morning and later in the morning. You can see it yourself go at 6 am and watch horses come from works or gallops, notice the ones with white polo wraps, and how they are soiled. They would be mostly negligible soiling, but as the morning goes and the hotter it gets the track loosens and becomes looser and looser, by the end of the 8 o'clock break and nine you have white bandages soiled heavily up to the fetlock, which suggests a looser, deeper, harder to negotiate track. In laments terms the track went from firm to yielding by the amount of sunlight and heat.

Now, think of horses that work and act on a sounder firm track, and now are asked to run over a yielding one, now you got two surfaces completely opposite of each other.

The yielding surface would promote soft tissue injuries, the firmer ground, joint and tibias.

just a thought from someone at ground zero.

Keep up the good work,

Bruno

Cadillakin
06-27-2009, 09:14 AM
Caddy,

You could write for the King Barack Rhetor. You have invented a surefire way to make the ignorant buy the status quo:

1) Unsuccessful people that bitch will be naysaid as bitter fools.

2) Successful people will keep their mouths shut, and the ensuing silence will be interpreted as implicit approval.

It's so brilliantly simple. Wish I thought of it first. (:Slapping forehead.)
In general, successful people who can adjust to the reality of the world are likely to enjoy continued success.. Then there are others who wish the world was more to their liking.. Some insist they have good reasons for their complaints.. As a group, those who can't adjust generally fall behind...

Like it or not.. In California, we play horses that run over synthetic.. I have adjusted to the change as best I can... I didn't make the choice to change the surfaces from dirt to synthetic..

So friend, don't count me as an apologist for synthetics.. I'm simply a practical man living and playing horses in California who is learning to adjust to the realities in my environment.. If you play a different circuit or don't wish to embrace synthetics.. then, good on ya.

Cadillakin
06-27-2009, 10:22 AM
Maybe this Jay Hovdey’s article is the “truth” as this thread is being portrayed… or maybe not.

http://hovdeyblog.drf.com/hovdeyblog/

Give me a week with pen and paper and I’ll write an article that says the earth is flat. Actual quotes from humans will be used to reinforce this belief because that is what I set out to achieve.

If a wine grower calls an 87% sand surface ‘plastic’ often enough…it becomes “truth” for those whose agenda it represents.

All opinions are fair game…without discussion this board would be 3 crickets in an echo chamber. When opinion is being represented as “truth” however…it makes debate futile imo.
Great post! Not too hard to follow the logic in that simple statement that 87% does not equal "plastic." Sort of takes the steam out of the argument others make when they suggest that adding sand to a synthetic surface (Hollywood), constitutes a change "back to dirt."

What seems to be easily forgotten in this debate is that California dirt and Eastern dirt were always quite a bit different.. Rarely, could a fast eastern colt stay with the quicker California horses.. If I sat down and went over history, I could list literally dozens that could not keep up. Two of the more memorable were Seattle Slew when he was slaughtered by JO Tobin at Hollywood Park, (yes, Triple Crown campaign may have affected him, yes, didn't break too good) and the brilliant sprinter, Groovy, who couldn't keep pace. I saw many top sprinters in the East get their heads handed to them by the brilliantly fast Westerners... All horseman on both coasts were aware of this phenomenon..

Conversely, the California horses often had trouble staying on the sand-based Eastern tracks. Many of the best Western horses couldn't reproduce their good form.. They would quit like cheap claimers.. Their class was often diminished over the deeper sandy surfaces common to the East.

Prior to synthetics, Eastern horses were not wanting to ship West because of the Western speed bias. Now, it is the opposite.. Some don't want to ship west because of the synthetic bias that generally hurts speed..

So, whether it is East to West, or West to East, grass to dirt, dirt to synthetic, or this to that, there has always been horses who adapt well, and horses who don't adapt well.. Nothing has changed.

IMO, the difficulties of adjusting to the differing surfaces is mostly a matter of genetics and acquired muscling and strength - while training and/or racing over varied surfaces, ie, deep versus fast/hard. You can perhaps equate it to a very fast human sprinter doing his training over a sandy beach.. It would not be too long before his natural speed would lessen, as the deeper muscles became more prominent and affected his ability to quicken.

On the matter of communication....

One of my son-in-laws is a big time idiot.. When he is spouting off his nonsense, whether it be politics or anything else that enters his mind, he likes to preface it by saying.. "I know for a fact."

When he goes away, (Thank God) I tell my youngest daughter who is still in our home... "Let that be a lesson to you.. Whenever somebody begins their sentences with "I know for a fact" or "The truth is", get ready for a bunch of bullshit...

Even at the tender age of 14, she nodded knowingly as I advised her...

jonnielu
06-27-2009, 10:24 AM
What many Horseplayers don't seem to realize is that when these surfaces are first installed the synthetic material is new, but as time goes by with racing, maintenance, and weather the material grinds down and changes shape and consistency. According to all reports (the best was from Bruno De Julio)The Pro Ride at Santa Anita is a mess.

Maintaining it properly would require most of it to be replaced every six months. Where's the Money? We were told it would be less expensive to maintain. I don't think so!

Every Horseplayer should care about an inconsistent surface like Pro Ride. Remember though that Ron Charles (President of Santa Anita) loves the near 50% carryover rate and high takeout wagers like the pick 4's and 6's.


For the Math guys...Inconsistent definition...Mathematics Not solvable for the unknowns by the same set of values. Used of two or more equations or inequalities.

As if math ever put a dent in horse racing reality.

Can you tell me how many of those that have actually discovered anything real were guided in their quest by the opinions of others?

jdl

andymays
06-27-2009, 10:30 AM
As if math ever put a dent in horse racing reality.

Can you tell me how many of those that have actually discovered anything real were guided in their quest by the opinions of others?

jdl


Horace Greeley said "Go West Young Man" and they came to California. They even named a Horse Go West Young Man.

And now we have the synthetic thing in California.

I hope this makes as little sense as the stuff you wrote! Have a good day!

andymays
06-27-2009, 10:45 AM
Roger Stein show at 8 am PST. He will most likely comment on this as he usually reads Art Wilsons articles. He is also against synthetic surfaces.


http://www.am830klaa.com/index.htm Click on top right of page to listen!

If you miss it the archived show will be at www.rogerstein.com about an hour after it's over.

so.cal.fan
06-27-2009, 11:29 AM
CJ
Indian Blessing is a GRADE ONE horse
She was prepping in an ALW.

Let's reserve judgement 'till we see her again.

Baffert is known to not push a top class horse in a prep.

fmolf
06-27-2009, 11:36 AM
Roger Stein show at 8 am PST. He will most likely comment on this as he usually reads Art Wilsons articles. He is also against synthetic surfaces.


http://www.am830klaa.com/index.htm Click on top right of page to listen!

If you miss it the archived show will be at www.rogerstein.com about an hour after it's over.
just the fact that they are adding sand says one of two things...
a)We cannot afford to maintain this track and add material as needed,there fore we are adding sand as it is much cheaper...
b)we do not like tha way it is performing and we are adding sandto try to improve this.

and i thought hollywood was supposed to be the best of the lot! :rolleyes:

rwwupl
06-27-2009, 11:43 AM
What many Horseplayers don't seem to realize is that when these surfaces are first installed the synthetic material is new, but as time goes by with racing, maintenance, and weather the material grinds down and changes shape and consistency. According to all reports (the best was from Bruno De Julio)The Pro Ride at Santa Anita is a mess.

Maintaining it properly would require most of it to be replaced every six months. Where's the Money? We were told it would be less expensive to maintain. I don't think so!

Every Horseplayer should care about an inconsistent surface like Pro Ride. Remember though that Ron Charles (President of Santa Anita) loves the near 50% carryover rate and high takeout wagers like the pick 4's and 6's.For the Math guys...Inconsistent definition...Mathematics Not solvable for the unknowns by the same set of values. Used of two or more equations or inequalities.

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

Inconsistent results ,inconsistent Stewards, degrades the handicapping process. When handicapping is degraded in importance it defeats the original charm of one mans skill against the other, and promotes the man with the ability to play multiple horse tickets or say "all".

There is short term gain for the racetrack, but certain long term defeat, because the fewer winners the racetrack sends home ,the fewer fans return.

The racetracks need to send MORE winners home each day and more fans will return.

The current race track policies are creating fewer and fewer winners and the results speak for themselves.

andymays
06-27-2009, 11:44 AM
Roger Stein show at 8 am PST. He will most likely comment on this as he usually reads Art Wilsons articles. He is also against synthetic surfaces.


http://www.am830klaa.com/index.htm Click on top right of page to listen!

If you miss it the archived show will be at www.rogerstein.com about an hour after it's over.


Outstanding show. He addressed the Art Wilson article. The Mullins thing.

Take the time to listen to the archive if you didn't hear it!

rwwupl
06-27-2009, 12:07 PM
Email message I received from Bruno De Julio about Pro Ride at Santa Anita www.racingwithbruno.com

Let me fill you in on a couple of things. I refuse to have my eight horse stable on the pro-ride. I have had five injuries, from ankle chips, and most popular joint damage. It is diagnosed as sclerosis and bone remodeling. Mostly young horses have this issue come up. Well developed joints have a little more resiliency. Second, as the summer is here and heats up the pro-ride you will get one track in the early morning and later in the morning. You can see it yourself go at 6 am and watch horses come from works or gallops, notice the ones with white polo wraps, and how they are soiled. They would be mostly negligible soiling, but as the morning goes and the hotter it gets the track loosens and becomes looser and looser, by the end of the 8 o'clock break and nine you have white bandages soiled heavily up to the fetlock, which suggests a looser, deeper, harder to negotiate track. In laments terms the track went from firm to yielding by the amount of sunlight and heat.

Now, think of horses that work and act on a sounder firm track, and now are asked to run over a yielding one, now you got two surfaces completely opposite of each other.

The yielding surface would promote soft tissue injuries, the firmer ground, joint and tibias.

just a thought from someone at ground zero.

Keep up the good work,

Bruno

________________________________________

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

Bruno :ThmbUp:

Andymays :ThmbUp:

andymays
06-27-2009, 12:13 PM
I keep trying rwwupl. It's tough when TVG and HRTV have a big influence in what people believe. Other than a few good people like you my friend it's an uphill battle. Roger Stein is having someone on tomorrow that may be a Racing Executive who will speak out against synthetics. At least that's what his teaser implied.

TVG and HRTV are biased networks beholden to the Tracks they have contracts with.

Bruddah
06-27-2009, 12:17 PM
CJ
Indian Blessing is a GRADE ONE horse
She was prepping in an ALW.

Let's reserve judgement 'till we see her again.

Baffert is known to not push a top class horse in a prep.

Sounds like it's straight from Indian Blessings mouth, to me. :ThmbUp:

jonnielu
06-27-2009, 12:43 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Inconsistent results ,inconsistent Stewards, degrades the handicapping process. When handicapping is degraded in importance it defeats the original charm of one mans skill against the other, and promotes the man with the ability to play multiple horse tickets or say "all".

The current race track policies are creating fewer and fewer winners and the results speak for themselves.

The consistent results are only degrading that bogus handicapping theory that suggests there is one horse in the race that is so much better then the others, that it is obvious to the past performance reader with a few of the "right" calculations.

Get this BS out of the way, and the fans quickly re-appear to participate in the game that anybody can win.

Current race track policies are attempting to put a full field of contenders in the gate, just like they have always tried to do. That is what makes the game go, the results of competition. The best competition is the where every horse has a shot, that reality always drives the largest handle.

jdl

FenceBored
06-27-2009, 01:12 PM
Maybe this Jay Hovdey’s article is the “truth” as this thread is being portrayed… or maybe not.

http://hovdeyblog.drf.com/hovdeyblog/

...

If a wine grower calls an 87% sand surface ‘plastic’ often enough…it becomes “truth” for those whose agenda it represents.



Great post! Not too hard to follow the logic in that simple statement that 87% does not equal "plastic." Sort of takes the steam out of the argument others make when they suggest that adding sand to a synthetic surface (Hollywood), constitutes a change "back to dirt."

The quote is: "To be fair, Jackson is on the right track, plastically speaking. The Pro-Ride surface is comprised of about 87% sand, coated in a polymer compound."

Sand covered in wax (polytrack) or "a polymer compound" (pro-ride) is not the same as uncoated sand. Otherwise, they wouldn't coat the sand.:)

And if they are adding 'raw' uncoated sand to Hollywood then they are cutting down on the 'synthetic' component of the track in violation of the CHRB mandate (sneaky devils). :D

rwwupl
06-27-2009, 02:40 PM
The consistent results are only degrading that bogus handicapping theory that suggests there is one horse in the race that is so much better then the others, that it is obvious to the past performance reader with a few of the "right" calculations.

Get this BS out of the way, and the fans quickly re-appear to participate in the game that anybody can win.

Current race track policies are attempting to put a full field of contenders in the gate, just like they have always tried to do. That is what makes the game go, the results of competition. The best competition is the where every horse has a shot, that reality always drives the largest handle.

jdl


The current policies speak for themselves.

fmolf
06-27-2009, 02:40 PM
The quote is: "To be fair, Jackson is on the right track, plastically speaking. The Pro-Ride surface is comprised of about 87% sand, coated in a polymer compound."

Sand covered in wax (polytrack) or "a polymer compound" (pro-ride) is not the same as uncoated sand. Otherwise, they wouldn't coat the sand.:)

And if they are adding 'raw' uncoated sand to Hollywood then they are cutting down on the 'synthetic' component of the track in violation of the CHRB mandate (sneaky devils). :D
could that be an admission of guilt! :eek:...Dare i even say it! :lol:

Cadillakin
06-27-2009, 03:56 PM
The quote is: "To be fair, Jackson is on the right track, plastically speaking. The Pro-Ride surface is comprised of about 87% sand, coated in a polymer compound."

Sand covered in wax (polytrack) or "a polymer compound" (pro-ride) is not the same as uncoated sand. Otherwise, they wouldn't coat the sand.:)

And if they are adding 'raw' uncoated sand to Hollywood then they are cutting down on the 'synthetic' component of the track in violation of the CHRB mandate (sneaky devils). :D
I think it might be "more fair" to classify a track that is 87% sand as a sandy race track, rather than a plastic race track. In comparison, Churchill has a 75% sand surface.

In general, tracks with very high sand content are thought to be tougher on speed horses... I think that's probably true of all tracks, dirt or synthetic... So perhaps the synthetic or plastic portion, at least as far as Pro-Ride is concerned, may be of lesser importance than the high content of sand.

fmolf
06-27-2009, 04:10 PM
I think it might be "more fair" to classify a track that is 87% sand as a sandy race track, rather than a plastic race track. In comparison, Churchill has a 75% sand surface.

In general, tracks with very high sand content are thought to be tougher on speed horses... I think that's probably true of all tracks, dirt or synthetic... So perhaps the synthetic or plastic portion, at least as far as Pro-Ride is concerned, may be of lesser importance than the high content of sand.
all joking aside caddy ...do you think maybe the raw sand may help with the temperature fluctuations and how the surface performs during these changes

robert99
06-27-2009, 05:03 PM
The consistent results are only degrading that bogus handicapping theory that suggests there is one horse in the race that is so much better then the others, that it is obvious to the past performance reader with a few of the "right" calculations.

Get this BS out of the way, and the fans quickly re-appear to participate in the game that anybody can win.

Current race track policies are attempting to put a full field of contenders in the gate, just like they have always tried to do. That is what makes the game go, the results of competition. The best competition is the where every horse has a shot, that reality always drives the largest handle.

jdl

My 5 cents worth is coming from a very different angle - turf versus all weather (AW) polytrack. No dirt tracks.
The 4 AW tracks race more than the other UK turf tracks put together.
The track variant on AW is within much tighter bounds than turf and artificial watering causes less unpredictable bias. There are more opportunities to race on AW and large fields are the norm for the smaller owner's horses which often get balloted out on turf.
Most of my income is made from AW because from the sheer amount of racing the game becomes far more predictable. There have been long periods of jockey bias as the surface is so forgiving that jockeys allow the horse to do too much from the front - they then overdo the hanging back. Then a top rider shows them how to win from the front - it takes time (2 years) for them to adjust to ride a horse to its merits, not the bias in the mind of the rider.

Much of USA racing handicap theory seems to be empirical from the way races are run on dirt. The methods apply to dirt and not much else. For us you need AW methods and you need turf methods. The former had to be worked out from scratch, which is another huge edge. Every change is an opportunity.

As regards predictability, if you compare the winning percentage of favourites at Newmarket (turf) and Lingfield (AW) the figures are as follows:

Newmarket (Lingfield AW, in brackets)
2yo stakes 41% (44%)
2yo handicaps 26% (32%)
3yo+ stakes 34% (40%)
3yo+ handicaps 27% (30%)

So the predictability for us is better all round for the AW.

FenceBored
06-27-2009, 05:04 PM
I think it might be "more fair" to classify a track that is 87% sand as a sandy race track, rather than a plastic race track. In comparison, Churchill has a 75% sand surface.

In general, tracks with very high sand content are thought to be tougher on speed horses... I think that's probably true of all tracks, dirt or synthetic... So perhaps the synthetic or plastic portion, at least as far as Pro-Ride is concerned, may be of lesser importance than the high content of sand.

It's not 87% sand, it's 87% sand-coated-with-a-polymer-compound. There is a difference, as you would say if someone tried to serve you rice-coated-with-a-polymer-compound. It doesn't react like untreated sand, which is the whole point of coating it.

Cadillakin
06-27-2009, 06:21 PM
It's not 87% sand, it's 87% sand-coated-with-a-polymer-compound. There is a difference, as you would say if someone tried to serve you rice-coated-with-a-polymer-compound. It doesn't react like untreated sand, which is the whole point of coating it.
I'm sure you have more knowledge than I do on this subject...

How is it different than untreated sand insofar as the horses are concerned? I'm aware that the binding helps with drainage, but how does it affect the horses as they move over it - when compared to untreated sand?

robert99
06-27-2009, 06:41 PM
I'm sure you have more knowledge than I do on this subject...

How is it different than untreated sand insofar as the horses are concerned? I'm aware that the binding helps with drainage, but how does it affect the horses as they move over it - when compared to untreated sand?

The improved drainage of properly designed and laid polytrack will reduce the compactedness (hardness) of pure sand, as the capillary suction action is eliminated (provided the drainage layers are actually built as designed). Pure sand has no binder so there will be kickback as it dries out. Kickback and the shearing action of sand particles reduces traction and wastes energy. Kickback stops horses "closing" too closely and can harm breathing temporarily. Pure sand tends to fall down the camber making the going tougher nearer the rail. Properly designed polytrack has no kickback. Polytrack also has rubber filaments bound in with the mix which cushions the horse's feet on impact, as does springy turf, and returns some energy as well as improving traction.

Cadillakin
06-27-2009, 06:45 PM
Much of USA racing handicap theory seems to be empirical from the way races are run on dirt. The methods apply to dirt and not much else.
Very relevant point.

Cadillakin
06-27-2009, 06:47 PM
The improved drainage of properly designed and laid polytrack will reduce the compactedness (hardness) of pure sand, as the capillary suction action is eliminated (provided the drainage layers are actually built as designed). Pure sand has no binder so there will be kickback as it dries out. Kickback and the shearing action of sand particles reduces traction and wastes energy. Kickback stops horses "closing" too closely and can harm breathing temporarily. Pure sand tends to fall down the camber making the going tougher nearer the rail. Properly designed polytrack has no kickback. Polytrack also has rubber filaments bound in with the mix which cushions the horse's feet on impact, as does springy turf, and returns some energy as well as improving traction.
Thank you. I can see you're somebody I'll need to pay attention to.

Sid
06-27-2009, 06:50 PM
Everybody here knows that American tracks are far, far busier in the morning than in the afternoon. Europe is another story. At this stage of the game, has anyone gone back and done serious analysis of whether that might be having a significant impact on various artificial surfaces here vs. across the pond?

andymays
06-27-2009, 06:51 PM
http://www.drf.com/news/article/105032.html


Excerpt:

Moss added that he shares Jackson's negative view of synthetic racetracks.

"It's just that I'm a Californian, I moved out here from New York a long, long time ago," he said. "I like the people. This is where I live. This is where I race mostly."

Moss suggested that one reason he would consider shipping Zenyatta out of the state is to help make her Horse of the Year. She finished second to Curlin for that award last year.

"We want to win that this year if it's possible," Moss said. "The horses have got to perform, every step has got to be the right one.

"We hope both horses do well throughout the year and we can meet somewhere."

andymays
06-27-2009, 06:54 PM
My 5 cents worth is coming from a very different angle - turf versus all weather (AW) polytrack. No dirt tracks.
The 4 AW tracks race more than the other UK turf tracks put together.
The track variant on AW is within much tighter bounds than turf and artificial watering causes less unpredictable bias. There are more opportunities to race on AW and large fields are the norm for the smaller owner's horses which often get balloted out on turf.
Most of my income is made from AW because from the sheer amount of racing the game becomes far more predictable. There have been long periods of jockey bias as the surface is so forgiving that jockeys allow the horse to do too much from the front - they then overdo the hanging back. Then a top rider shows them how to win from the front - it takes time (2 years) for them to adjust to ride a horse to its merits, not the bias in the mind of the rider.

Much of USA racing handicap theory seems to be empirical from the way races are run on dirt. The methods apply to dirt and not much else. For us you need AW methods and you need turf methods. The former had to be worked out from scratch, which is another huge edge. Every change is an opportunity.

As regards predictability, if you compare the winning percentage of favourites at Newmarket (turf) and Lingfield (AW) the figures are as follows:

Newmarket (Lingfield AW, in brackets)
2yo stakes 41% (44%)
2yo handicaps 26% (32%)
3yo+ stakes 34% (40%)
3yo+ handicaps 27% (30%)

So the predictability for us is better all round for the AW.


Respectfully can you tell me why the Horses with the least class and ability race on synthetic surfaces over there? Aren't all the top races on turf?

andymays
06-27-2009, 07:08 PM
http://www.drf.com/news/article/105032.html


Excerpt:

Moss added that he shares Jackson's negative view of synthetic racetracks.

"It's just that I'm a Californian, I moved out here from New York a long, long time ago," he said. "I like the people. This is where I live. This is where I race mostly."

Moss suggested that one reason he would consider shipping Zenyatta out of the state is to help make her Horse of the Year. She finished second to Curlin for that award last year.

"We want to win that this year if it's possible," Moss said. "The horses have got to perform, every step has got to be the right one.

"We hope both horses do well throughout the year and we can meet somewhere."


He does seem to want to go back east and face Rachel on the dirt!

PaceAdvantage
06-27-2009, 08:14 PM
Hey AndyMays, you've posted that Bruno email at least four times (3 times in this thread alone, and once in another thread).

Enough already! :lol:

Tom
06-27-2009, 08:33 PM
I'm beginning to get very interested in AP and WO.
Sure, some races make no sense. Do they all on dirt?
I'll will take a full field of ??? over a stinking 3 horse stakes race with a prohibitive favorite any day of the week.

Synthetics are NOT unbettable, if you do your homework.
I thought last year's BC was one of the best ever.
TP in the winter has become a very playable gold mine. Cha ching.
WO and AP seem to have a lot of opportunities.

KEE will always suck not matter what they do with it. Must be built over a
Indian burial ground or something! :eek:

PID - I have not looked at, but am starting to.

Bel, not interested, Mth, not interested, Sar, not interseted, other than turf.

robert99
06-28-2009, 09:11 AM
Respectfully can you tell me why the Horses with the least class and ability race on synthetic surfaces over there? Aren't all the top races on turf?

Before AW winter racing if a national hunt (jump) meeting was cancelled due to flooding etc there was no betting income for racing so AW races were set up from scratch to race under bad weather, winter conditions. These were additional fixtures and naturally courses with prestigious turf races hung on to them. So AW racing has had to build from the bottom up. It now has major races and the top international turf horses regularly run on AW. One recent example is Ghanaati who raced twice on AW (1st and 3rd) before winning the Gr1 1000 Guineas and another Group 1 win at Royal Ascot on turf.

cj
06-28-2009, 10:31 AM
CJ
Indian Blessing is a GRADE ONE horse
She was prepping in an ALW.

Let's reserve judgement 'till we see her again.

Baffert is known to not push a top class horse in a prep.

I was talking mostly about Coco Belle's greatly improved effort after a long string of poor runs on turf and synthetics.

cj
06-28-2009, 10:36 AM
And then there are others who state that Indian Blessing lost because she didn't like that very same track. So, Coco Belle loves it, Indian Blessing hates it... Or so it seemed on that racing day.

What is pretty clear is that Indian Blessing didn't fire.. Without her, it was an ordinary allowance race and Coco Belle was the only speed at 6-5.

Coco Belle has been the only speed many times lately, but she doesn't usually show it on synthetics. A perusal of her lifetimes PPs shows a clear preference for dirt.

Valuist
06-28-2009, 10:44 AM
I'm beginning to get very interested in AP and WO.
Sure, some races make no sense. Do they all on dirt?
I'll will take a full field of ??? over a stinking 3 horse stakes race with a prohibitive favorite any day of the week.

Synthetics are NOT unbettable, if you do your homework.
I thought last year's BC was one of the best ever.
TP in the winter has become a very playable gold mine. Cha ching.
WO and AP seem to have a lot of opportunities.

KEE will always suck not matter what they do with it. Must be built over a
Indian burial ground or something! :eek:

PID - I have not looked at, but am starting to.

Bel, not interested, Mth, not interested, Sar, not interseted, other than turf.


Be careful with Arlington. I know the patterns of 95% of the trainers at the Chicago tracks since I've been playing them for over 25 years. I can tell you this; IMO, Arlington's Polytrack is the most random surface I've ever played. Their grass course is exceptional but the main track produces more WTF moments than any other track I've seen. Yes, you will see some favorites win; it seems like overbet favorites and impossible to use 25-1 shots make up a too big a chunk of their winners.

Another thing; to make their stats not look TOO speed killing, they started carding 1 1/16 mile races on their main track after Poly was put in. The track is 1 1/8 mile circumference so the finish is at the 1/16th pole. Obviously there's a tremendous advantage to be inside and close up in those races with the ultra short stretch, and short run to the clubhouse turn.

rastajenk
06-28-2009, 10:48 AM
What is an "overbet" favorite when it wins?

fmolf
06-28-2009, 11:03 AM
What is an "overbet" favorite when it wins?
heres my take on the "truth about synthetics"...It is the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the american racing and wagering public!..

Valuist
06-28-2009, 11:06 AM
What is an "overbet" favorite when it wins?

It is completely subjective. But anyone who has been around the track for awhile knows exactly what I'm talking about. The horse that is a contender, but not much more who goes off at 6-5 when they should be around 3-1/7-2ish. Yes underlays DO win.

Valuist
06-28-2009, 11:16 AM
Let's get beyond the handicapping and betting aspects of synthetics. Because when someone claims their dislike for the surface, immediately the response of the Pro synth camp is "you just can't beat it". I admit that I have not made money at Arlington since 2007 but I have at Turfway, Keeneland (post the 2006 stamina fest) and at the lone Hollywood meet I played.

The problem is the racing itself. It is the most boring type of racing imaginable. I would gladly take harness racing over it, and I'm not a harness racing guy. We already have grass racing in this country, and it is liked and well accepted; probably because it isn't overdone. Synthetic is like a bastardized version of grass painted brown. Every race, its the same; a field of bunched horses, the entire field bottled up within 5-6 lengths until the quarter pole. I remember the mixed feelings I had watching a bet on Dominican come in at around 9-1 in the 2007 Blue Grass but thinking the sport was dying if we'd have a major Triple Crown prep race run with a half in 53 and change. Maybe they like that stuff in other parts of the world, but I think most here hate it. I think someday there will be enough uproar against it in Southern California to overturn that ridiculous mandate.

Bison
06-28-2009, 12:00 PM
Yes, you will see some favorites win; it seems like overbet favorites and impossible to use 25-1 shots make up a too big a chunk of their winners.


You've hit the nail on the head here. I find this happening on most of the plastic tracks.

Bison
06-28-2009, 12:07 PM
The problem is the racing itself. It is the most boring type of racing imaginable. I would gladly take harness racing over it, and I'm not a harness racing guy. We already have grass racing in this country, and it is liked and well accepted; probably because it isn't overdone. Synthetic is like a bastardized version of grass painted brown. Every race, its the same; a field of bunched horses, the entire field bottled up within 5-6 lengths until the quarter pole.

Yes, I don't find anything exciting about watching the jocks strangle the hell out of their horses until they reach the quarter pole. I think it is this strangling that actually kills a lot of these horses' chances, and actually contributes to the random nature of poly racing.

rwwupl
06-28-2009, 12:26 PM
Yes, I don't find anything exciting about watching the jocks strangle the hell out of their horses until they reach the quarter pole. I think it is this strangling that actually kills a lot of these horses' chances, and actually contributes to the random nature of poly racing.




Valuist :ThmbUp:

Bison :ThmbUp:


Yes !

andymays
06-28-2009, 12:31 PM
Yes, I don't find anything exciting about watching the jocks strangle the hell out of their horses until they reach the quarter pole. I think it is this strangling that actually kills a lot of these horses' chances, and actually contributes to the random nature of poly racing.


Don't you just love it when all the Jocks have the brakes on early in a race and half the field is running up on heels?


Just say no to sythetic surfaces!

so.cal.fan
06-28-2009, 12:48 PM
Robert from UK

Your comments are very interesting. I copied and printed them out.
My husband used to ride in England as a teenager, many, many years ago.
He rode mostly jumps, but a few flats as an apprentice. He then worked for some of the top yards of the time.
He'll be interested in your comments. Thanks for sharing.
I think one reason a lot of our California horses don't do all that well on the synthetics is they are bred for speed, and it usually comes out cheap speed.
Your horses in England and France are of a much higher class as a general rule. This is not even debatable.
When they came over here for the Breeder's Cup, they did fantastic, imho, changing my mind about the effects of hot weather on your shippers.
Your top class turf horses took to the Santa Anita synthetic surface likes ducks to water.
I will be looking forward to seeing them again this fall at SA. We all need to watch those races with keen interest!
Getting back to our Cal breds, I know one owner with about 8 horses (cal breds) who shipped all of them to Philadelphia Park, where they race around that circuit on dirt.
So could it have to do with CLASS? The closest definition I can give to CLASS is the ability of a horse to carry it's speed over a distance of ground.

andymays
06-28-2009, 01:01 PM
Kirk Breed (head of CHRB) on Roger Stein this morning.

www.rogerstein.com

archived show for 2-28

Says synthetics have not been a success in California!

robert99
06-28-2009, 01:10 PM
Robert from UK

Your comments are very interesting. I copied and printed them out.
My husband used to ride in England as a teenager, many, many years ago.
He rode mostly jumps, but a few flats as an apprentice. He then worked for some of the top yards of the time.
He'll be interested in your comments. Thanks for sharing.
I think one reason a lot of our California horses don't do all that well on the synthetics is they are bred for speed, and it usually comes out cheap speed.
Your horses in England and France are of a much higher class as a general rule. This is not even debatable.
When they came over here for the Breeder's Cup, they did fantastic, imho, changing my mind about the effects of hot weather on your shippers.
Your top class turf horses took to the Santa Anita synthetic surface likes ducks to water.
I will be looking forward to seeing them again this fall at SA. We all need to watch those races with keen interest!
Getting back to our Cal breds, I know one owner with about 8 horses (cal breds) who shipped all of them to Philadelphia Park, where they race around that circuit on dirt.
So could it have to do with CLASS? The closest definition I can give to CLASS is the ability of a horse to carry it's speed over a distance of ground.

Thank you.
Riding jumps takes a very brave man. :ThmbUp:
Our Breeders Cup horses all have the opportunity to try out first on all-weather tracks in Ireland, France or UK, or have already raced on them. Their biggest disadvantage in BC is often that they are galloping horses, better on long straights than on tight turning tracks. Your definition of class takes in the important area for turf and AW racing - that is how many furlongs can it last at top pace (relatively speaking) after racing earlier at cruising pace or in the red zone. From other comments it seems US jockeys still have dirt pace locked in their minds. AW needs an even pace, not an all-out early pace, nor a hold up style with a sprint finish. Jockeys like Frankie Dettori who have also ridden and learnt in the States can do that expertly.

Valuist
06-28-2009, 04:52 PM
Thank you.
Riding jumps takes a very brave man. :ThmbUp:
Our Breeders Cup horses all have the opportunity to try out first on all-weather tracks in Ireland, France or UK, or have already raced on them. Their biggest disadvantage in BC is often that they are galloping horses, better on long straights than on tight turning tracks. Your definition of class takes in the important area for turf and AW racing - that is how many furlongs can it last at top pace (relatively speaking) after racing earlier at cruising pace or in the red zone. From other comments it seems US jockeys still have dirt pace locked in their minds. AW needs an even pace, not an all-out early pace, nor a hold up style with a sprint finish. Jockeys like Frankie Dettori who have also ridden and learnt in the States can do that expertly.

There is very little pace in North American synthetic racing. The only track I see it at all is Turfway, which is probably the lowest quality, in terms of runners and jockeys. In some cases, the runners either can't rate, or the riders are incapable of it. But no, at virtually every other synthetic track in the U.S. its a paceless race with bottled up fields as riders see who can strangle their mount the most. Then turning for home they let them run. Another problem I see with the surface is that it punishes those with the ability to accelerate. This could be early speed types or strong closers. The early speed types invariably are gasping for air at the end and the deep closers are spinning their wheels trying to accelerate. And the middle of the pack type who just grinds away evenly, usually gets there. This is the type of horse that often "clunks up" for 3rd or even 2nd on real dirt. On Poly, THEY are the ones winning. This doesn't make for exciting racing.

rwwupl
06-28-2009, 05:03 PM
As a famous Trainer once said(Bob Baffert):

"Synthetics make average horses look good and Good horses look average."



Ugh-- Why race?

so.cal.fan
06-28-2009, 05:06 PM
Interesting comment, Valuist
I know several horsemen and handicappers at Santa Anita who agree with you.
It's interesting what Robert from the UK said about our old handicapping factors being all but obsolete on these new surfaces and he also mentions that in England, it took the jockeys 2 years to "get it", figure how to ride.
I think a lot of jocks here assumed, perhaps prematurely that the synthetic was just like riding on the turf.
It is and it isn't.
I know a few handicappers who have all but abandoned pace figures on the synthetics. They are of the opinion that at a track like Del Mar, the figures are useless.
I'm not sure.
I'm going to give your comment, Valuist, some serious thought.

fmolf
06-28-2009, 06:07 PM
Interesting comment, Valuist
I know several horsemen and handicappers at Santa Anita who agree with you.
It's interesting what Robert from the UK said about our old handicapping factors being all but obsolete on these new surfaces and he also mentions that in England, it took the jockeys 2 years to "get it", figure how to ride.
I think a lot of jocks here assumed, perhaps prematurely that the synthetic was just like riding on the turf.
It is and it isn't.
I know a few handicappers who have all but abandoned pace figures on the synthetics. They are of the opinion that at a track like Del Mar, the figures are useless.
I'm not sure.
I'm going to give your comment, Valuist, some serious thought.I think that in synthetic races with the horses being bunched up like they are makes it that much more likely for racing luck and bad trips to play a part in the outcome.Whether this is real or not it is widely perceived to be true.some here claim hollywood performs like a dirt track,i do not see that either ...if it performed like a dirt track why are they modifying it by adding sand.....I hope they all disappear as unnecessary ,because they are not cheaper to maintain,not safer...and not generally well liked by trainers or owners...Jerry Moss says the only reason he stays in california with his horses is he likes living there...but dislikes the plastic stuff!

so.cal.fan
06-28-2009, 06:49 PM
The CHRB ordered synthetics put in at Santa Anita, Hollywood and Del Mar.
It was absolutely a rush to judgment at best and something far more sinister at worst.
It probably hasn't increased injuries to horses, but it hasn't decreased them either.
It breaks down after a lot of use, and is expensive to maintain.
We don't get that much bad weather in So. Calif. and we really didn't need to put these in. Safety was their excuse......and many horses are getting injuries same as always, they are a bit different, but are happening.
Many here hope that horsemen will buy Santa Anita when it goes on the auction block in Sept. Possibly we can change back to dirt. Hollywood Park is not likely to close anytime soon, despite what we hear and read.
Unless they get stimulous money from the Feds.....no one can afford to develop that property. City of Inglewood will have to okay HP to continue racing, if they want their tax dollars....can't get anything from empty land or worse, as in the case of Bay Meadows.....demolished old racetrack in a pile of rubble, they can't even afford to clean up!
California racing is in free fall.
Sorry to get off on a rant.....

kenwoodallpromos
06-28-2009, 07:45 PM
How about run all turf in So Cal and all dirt in Nor Ca? Just use inside turf for sprints, outside turf for routes? All the dirt horses can run on speed-favoring So Ca turf!!

kenwoodallpromos
06-28-2009, 07:49 PM
SoCal- turf only, NoCal- dirt. SoCal all routes, and current non-turf stakes, can be run on "Firm" speed-favoring SoCal turf outside course, and sprints on the "good" inside (current turf course). NorCal can host the "California Claiming Crown"!

ddog
06-29-2009, 01:16 PM
There is very little pace in North American synthetic racing. The only track I see it at all is Turfway, which is probably the lowest quality, in terms of runners and jockeys. In some cases, the runners either can't rate, or the riders are incapable of it. But no, at virtually every other synthetic track in the U.S. its a paceless race with bottled up fields as riders see who can strangle their mount the most. Then turning for home they let them run. Another problem I see with the surface is that it punishes those with the ability to accelerate. This could be early speed types or strong closers. The early speed types invariably are gasping for air at the end and the deep closers are spinning their wheels trying to accelerate. And the middle of the pack type who just grinds away evenly, usually gets there. This is the type of horse that often "clunks up" for 3rd or even 2nd on real dirt. On Poly, THEY are the ones winning. This doesn't make for exciting racing.


You play Arlington, right?

If so, I can't believe you posted this.

It's simply not true as I see it.

If you look at the last week of racing there (and previous ones as well) I don't see it.

Qaulity speed or closers ran exactly as they should and did on a dirt track to my way of reading it.

Cheap and out of or going out of form horses maybe penalized more on poly but that's fine by me.

Makes for more dramatic reversals which is where the money is to be made anyway.


I only post this to allow for the possibility that the attitudes being pushed by those who can't abide any change(o legion they are) may keep you from the success you could have.


I expect what remains of the plastic in Cal will be gone within 3 years.

They are shrinking anyway and they will use that as another excuse for the shrinkage thus the next "quick fix" will be back to dirt.

so.cal.fan
06-29-2009, 03:14 PM
Dog:
"I expect what remains of the plastic in Cal will be gone within 3 years.

They are shrinking anyway and they will use that as another excuse for the shrinkage thus the next "quick fix" will be back to dirt".


I hope you're right! I don't mind betting on these surfaces, but I'm hearing there are just as many injuries as on dirt, and it's more expensive for the tracks to keep it up.
It has really hurt the Cal Breds here. They are for the most part cheap speed that is penalized on these tracks to be sure.
I even wonder if this scheme to force all the major tracks to synthetics was part of a more sinister plan to get rid of Calif. racing. Combine this with the lack of TAX BREAKS for owners and breeders in California.....and it sure seems that this has happened.
If it is, we probably won't get the dirt tracks back. But I'm just guessing on this, I have no verifiable information to prove it.

joanied
06-29-2009, 03:44 PM
I also hope you're right about going back to dirt within 3 years... have you got some 'insider information'...or is this just your guess?

Valuist
06-29-2009, 05:31 PM
You play Arlington, right?

If so, I can't believe you posted this.



I haven't made a wager on Arlington in over a month. I'll play the grass stakes on Million day.

andymays
06-30-2009, 12:38 PM
More Art Wilson Blog!

http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/06/moss-not-crazy-about-synthetic.html#comments


Read Arts comments below the blog!

so.cal.fan
06-30-2009, 12:41 PM
Interesting comments by Art....same thing we've been hearing from most horsemen at Santa Anita.

andymays
06-30-2009, 12:43 PM
Interesting comments by Art....same thing we've been hearing from most horsemen at Santa Anita.

http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/06/moss-not-crazy-about-synthetic.html#comments

It's about time more of the media told the truth about synthetic surfaces!

Keep it up Art!

Bobzilla
06-30-2009, 01:14 PM
Interesting comments by Art....same thing we've been hearing from most horsemen at Santa Anita.


I have to admit I'm a little surprised. Though I'm a little out of touch with the west coast racing scene these days as I primarily concentrate my focus on New York racing day to day, it seemed to me that many California based trainers were quite enthusiastic about the conversions, at least initially. Guys like Cerin, Mandella, and McAnally always seemed very positive about the new tracks. I can't imagine that Ellis, Harty and Hendricks would have changed their minds even at this point. My impression was that Baffert was viewed by many as the only pariah. Perhaps more trainers are sensing a changing climate and are feeling more at ease these days about expressing any misgivings they may have.

Andy,

Thanks for sharing these articles. They've been interesting to say the least.

andymays
06-30-2009, 01:45 PM
I have to admit I'm a little surprised. Though I'm a little out of touch with the west coast racing scene these days as I primarily concentrate my focus on New York racing day to day, it seemed to me that many California based trainers were quite enthusiastic about the conversions, at least initially. Guys like Cerin, Mandella, and McAnally always seemed very positive about the new tracks. I can't imagine that Ellis, Harty and Hendricks would have changed their minds even at this point. My impression was that Baffert was viewed by many as the only pariah. Perhaps more trainers are sensing a changing climate and are feeling more at ease these days about expressing any misgivings they may have.

Andy,

Thanks for sharing these articles. They've been interesting to say the least.


I'll put them up whenever I find them. It seems the tide has changed and the truth is coming out slowly but surely.

Bob Baffert was almost run out of California for expressing his opinion and many of his fellow Trainers put knives in his back and ridiculed him for speaking out initially against synthetic surfaces. Time has proven Mr. Baffert to be right in my opinion.

It's unfortunate that TVG and HRTV were permitted to perpetuate this myth that synthetic surfaces are everything the infomercials said they were! We know they are not!

joanied
06-30-2009, 02:28 PM
Three years ago I said htree cheers for Baffert to have to guts to speak out on synthetics...
Anydmays, thanks for posting this...it kinda gives us the hope that the powers that be will see the light and go back to dirt...I hear that the pro Ride is 'breaking down'...and seems to me, if that is true, they'll need to do one of 2 things...spend a fortune to 'fix' it, or get smart and go back to dirt...with a hell of a good cushion...IMO, that is all a dirt track need to be as safe as possible...a really good base.

That there are no published report of breakdown/injuries form these tracks makes you wonder what's going on...that was their 'battle cry' form day one...it'll be so much safer for the horses...yet, they don't seem to want to let the stats go public...surely they are keeping track of injuries/breakdowns...they were supposed to complie these stats for study...well, where are they? "THye' don't want to stats made public because they will show that the synthetic is no safer than a good cushioned dirt surface.

I voted to support Jackson in his boycott of the BC...with some mixed feelings because I would love to see RA run...but now I am thinking that he should keep her away...unless he feels she'll loose an Eclipse Award for not going, keep her away from there.

You know what they say about the truth...it always comes out in the wash...and me thinks SA has some mighty dirty laundry:)

andymays
06-30-2009, 03:29 PM
Art Wilson article

http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/06/moss-not-crazy-about-synthetic.html#comments

Excerpt from comments below article:


Gordon said:
Art, I would like to know the latest stats on breakdowns at Santa Anita this year and the current Hollywood Park meet. It's hard for me to have a strong opinion on the subject without having those numbers.

June 28, 2009 5:42 PM
Art Wilson said:
Gordon,
The rest of us would like to have those stats too. And the stats would also need to include breakdowns and injuries in the mornings as well, and that's not even counting the number of soft tissue injuries that have cropped up since the synthetics arrived on the scene. Add that to the fact they have not: (1) increased the size of fields as they were supposed to do; (2) proven to be maintenance free as advertised; and (3) attracted top horses from all over the country as they were supposed to do. In fact, many owners are now leaving the state and citing synthetics as one of the many reasons. Del Mar probably does the best job of keeping track of breakdowns both in the mornings and afternoons. Other than the terrible summers at Del Mar when there were far too many breakdowns before the synthetics, I just don't see a huge difference in breakdowns since the synthetics arrived. And what Del Mar needed most of all was a new base, which was installed when they put in their new Polytrack surface in time for the 2007 meet. It's only my opinion, and it's an opinion arrived at after nearly two years of observing and talking to many in the industry, but I think the CHRB's mandate was an overraction to the Barbaro breakdown in the 2006 Preakness. I don't think you'll ever see a synthetic track at Churchill Downs or any of the New York tracks, which include Belmont, Saratoga and Aqueduct.

June 28, 2009 7:46 PM

Imriledup
06-30-2009, 05:37 PM
Just say no to synthetic. The more of you who don't play this stuff, the faster we will get back to real dirt and get back to the way racing in California is supposed to be.


California speed needs to make a comeback. (california plodders isn't getting it done)

fmolf
06-30-2009, 06:22 PM
Just say no to synthetic. The more of you who don't play this stuff, the faster we will get back to real dirt and get back to the way racing in California is supposed to be.


California speed needs to make a comeback. (california plodders isn't getting it done)
ive been boycotting since day one!All tracks not just polifornia tracks all synthetic tracks...no ifs ands or buts! I hope many more will heed your message!

Imriledup
06-30-2009, 06:27 PM
ive been boycotting since day one!All tracks not just polifornia tracks all synthetic tracks...no ifs ands or buts! I hope many more will heed your message!

This is extremely important and players must understand that they should not bet one dollar on plastic.

Fake tracks produce fake results.

fmolf
06-30-2009, 07:09 PM
This is extremely important and players must understand that they should not bet one dollar on plastic.

Fake tracks produce fake results.
i believe it is called a secondary boycott....count me in not one nickel will they get of mine!

CBedo
06-30-2009, 07:36 PM
This is extremely important and players must understand that they should not bet one dollar on plastic.

Fake tracks produce fake results....but produce real profits!

I hope everyone continues to believe they can't beat synthetics. It's good for my bottom line. My personal view is that just like there are differences between turf and dirt handicapping, there are differences between synthetics and dirt (and differences between each synthetic track--just like differences between different distinct turf and dirt tracks). I have synthetics that I don't do very well on, but I also have synthetics that I seem to be more in tune with and CRUSH! I continue to try to better understand these tracks and how to profit from them.

fmolf
06-30-2009, 07:47 PM
...but produce real profits!

I hope everyone continues to believe they can't beat synthetics. It's good for my bottom line. My personal view is that just like there are differences between turf and dirt handicapping, there are differences between synthetics and dirt (and differences between each synthetic track--just like differences between different distinct turf and dirt tracks). I have synthetics that I don't do very well on, but I also have synthetics that I seem to be more in tune with and CRUSH! I continue to try to better understand these tracks and how to profit from them.i am happy for you ....also happy that you won't be getting a nickel of mine.what other people do is their own business.their are enough dirt and turf races at the two tracks i am currently following to keep me happy

CBedo
06-30-2009, 07:56 PM
i am happy for you ....also happy that you won't be getting a nickel of mine.what other people do is their own business.their are enough dirt and turf races at the two tracks i am currently following to keep me happyOne thing I definitely agree with is that if you either haven't put in the time or just can't figure them out, then don't bang your head against the wall! Don't bet them--bet where you have an edge. There are too many other opportunities to be recklessly throwing money away.

fmolf
06-30-2009, 10:41 PM
One thing I definitely agree with is that if you either haven't put in the time or just can't figure them out, then don't bang your head against the wall! Don't bet them--bet where you have an edge. There are too many other opportunities to be recklessly throwing money away.
a fool and his money soon part... :lol: i do not even bet too many turf races..though i do bet some!

Imriledup
07-01-2009, 06:37 AM
...but produce real profits!

I hope everyone continues to believe they can't beat synthetics. It's good for my bottom line. My personal view is that just like there are differences between turf and dirt handicapping, there are differences between synthetics and dirt (and differences between each synthetic track--just like differences between different distinct turf and dirt tracks). I have synthetics that I don't do very well on, but I also have synthetics that I seem to be more in tune with and CRUSH! I continue to try to better understand these tracks and how to profit from them.

They don't produce real profits. People who bet more than you are not betting these tracks because they can't win. If you are winning, god bless you. There are many large bettors who just have said no because they have no shot. How you are winning consistently on these plastic tracks is a small wonder. I'm glad to hear you are doing well, i admit, i can't beat em, so i've given up.

miesque
07-01-2009, 08:24 AM
They don't produce real profits. People who bet more than you are not betting these tracks because they can't win. If you are winning, god bless you. There are many large bettors who just have said no because they have no shot. How you are winning consistently on these plastic tracks is a small wonder. I'm glad to hear you are doing well, i admit, i can't beat em, so i've given up.

I am sorry, but I disagree with the statement that they don't produce real profits, especially the premise you are using to point out that they don't. Profit is profit whether its on turf, dirt, synthetic, football, stocks, etc. Now if you are going to argue that just because XYZ isn't able to make money on synthetic then the profit that ABC makes on the surface is not profit, that is just flat out wrong and the logic is flawed, in my opinion. This is pari-mutuel racing its not like the money is disappearing and nobody is winning. My most profitable tracks are synthetic tracks and I have more and more been allocating more and more of my play to turf and synthetic races. Now I realize that there are probably only five other people in the entire United States besides myself playing synthetic tracks based on the amount of anti-synthetic threads/posts/rants currently in the racing section on this Forum, so you will probably get your way soon enough, if only for the sheer reason that Horseplayers as a whole are not exactly the healthiest of individuals. :D

DanG
07-01-2009, 08:43 AM
Profit is profit whether its on turf, dirt, synthetic, football, stocks, etc.This is pari-mutuel racing its not like the money is disappearing and nobody is winning. My most profitable tracks are synthetic tracks and I have more and more been allocating more and more of my play to turf and synthetic races. Now I realize that there are probably only five other people in the entire United States besides myself playing synthetic tracks based on the amount of anti-synthetic threads/posts/rants currently in the racing section on this Forum, so you will probably get your way soon enough, if only for the sheer reason that Horseplayers as a whole are not exactly the healthiest of individuals. :D
Well put; now we know who two of the five are Miesque. ;)

andymays
07-01-2009, 12:38 PM
In my opinion whether someone likes of dislikes synthetic surfaces depends on the method(s) they use to handicap races and the method(s) they use to wager on those races.

The process I use is time consuming to say the least and I've found that my results are not nearly as good on a synthetic surface as a dirt surface. What has hurt me more than anything is the fact that my home tracks, and specifically my most successfull meet (Santa Anita) went to synthetic surfaces. I also never spread much in P3's, P'4's, Tri's, and Supers when my home tracks had a dirt surface. On synthetic surfaces I spread a lot more.

I do think that most HANA members and most on this Forum dislike synthetic surfaces. Slowly but surely the message is getting out to members of the media and Racetrack Executives.

I could be wrong, and I will post this under the HANA section as well, but I think rating Keenland #1 in HANA ratings was a huge mistake because of the synthetic surface. The buildup was great and got a lot of publicity but the final top 10 was so anticlimactic that I think thousands of potential members chose not to join. I know it turned me off but I still support HANA. Having said that there really was no way for the hard working people that run HANA (and do it for no compensation by the way) to know how it would affect membership.

In my opinion future ratings should be in catergories of Tracks and those with synthetic surfaces should be placed in a separate category. Until membership gets to over 20k, not pissing people off, whether it's the Racetracks or potential members should be a consideration particularly when it comes to rating Racetracks!

Cadillakin
07-01-2009, 12:58 PM
They (synthetics) don't produce real profits. People who bet more than you are not betting these tracks because they can't win.
That's not true. Winning a pari-mutual game only requires the player to understand more than those he is playing against... That's all. Nothing else is required.

Bison
07-01-2009, 01:04 PM
That's not true. Winning a pari-mutual game only requires the player to understand more than those he is playing against... That's all. Nothing else is required.

You need a little more than that.
You've also got to beat the takeout.

ddog
07-01-2009, 01:38 PM
I haven't made a wager on Arlington in over a month. I'll play the grass stakes on Million day.


Can't wait for Million, hope for great weather and that you do well.

ddog
07-01-2009, 01:43 PM
I also hope you're right about going back to dirt within 3 years... have you got some 'insider information'...or is this just your guess?


Jut a wild guess, but the economic times I think will play into it more and more and if a couple of major owner/trainers at a certain point say no more and we are leaving , then I guess the track will be forced to go dirt again.

Just a hunch and a little talk here and there.

I wouldn't bet on it either way though. :)

CBedo
07-01-2009, 02:13 PM
They don't produce real profits. People who bet more than you are not betting these tracks because they can't win. If you are winning, god bless you. There are many large bettors who just have said no because they have no shot. How you are winning consistently on these plastic tracks is a small wonder. I'm glad to hear you are doing well, i admit, i can't beat em, so i've given up.I agree whole heartedly with Miesque and would also add that it's possible that one reason I've done well on synthetics is the lack of larger bettors, according to you. I tend to not think I'm the smartest guy in the world, and if people smarter than me are not playing the fake dirt, then that is better for me!

ddog
07-01-2009, 02:41 PM
i tend to know that a large bettor is not by that fact smarter than me!
:D

Bruddah
07-01-2009, 03:26 PM
Every 6 months or so, we rehash this same ole (now tiring) arguments on synthetic tracks. Back in 2006, several on this board, including myself, spoke against these tracks and predidted they would end up the same way as Asteo Turf. All the lies would finally be exposed and come to the surface.

I am sure some of you synthetic supporters remember this post:

Why is everyone so suprised ?

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

From the very beginning, I, and a few others on this board, said the truth of the polycrap tracks would eventually come to the surface. (Pun very much intended). I compared the whole thing to football installing artificial surfaces because they were supposedly "SAFER" and said it would probably be less than 5 years and the Racing/Horse Industry would realize they were being sold a bunch of horse sh*t. These surfaces are not safer, they are more expensive and do require more maintenance.

The whole PolyCrap mess is the salesmanship of a few key "hoity toity" influential individuals in this Industry, who wish to Europeanize American racing. In essence they have sold ice to the Eskimos.

It is what is. Wake up and smell the horse sh*t on those boots. The best thing is for American racing to get back to dirt and concentrate on growing their customer base. These are the folks that put money into racing and through the windows. It starts and ends with the Customer. It's a shame the Industry has never and still doesn't realize this.

We got tired of telling you this 3 years ago.
__________________
If ignorance is bliss, I am a very happy man.

andymays
07-01-2009, 03:28 PM
I agree with the grit thing. Grit is good to have.

If you're saying that people should keep playing synthetic surfaces even if they don't like playing them or don't do well on them then I disagree.

After 2 plus years I think everyone has made up their minds based on their experiences.

ddog
07-01-2009, 03:30 PM
spilled the grits ---- was in the wrong thread. sorry.

I didn't mean to imply that people that don't like poly lack grit or anything else for that matter.

I generally don't have the grits to play against you Cal players.

that's just me admitting I don't do well enough out there to bother.

andymays
07-01-2009, 03:31 PM
spilled the grits ---- was in the wrong thread. sorry.

I didn't mean to imply that people that don't like poly lack grit or anything else for that matter.


That was good one ddog. I was going to say "we can try try again until we're all broke,busted, and disgusted"!

Indulto
07-01-2009, 09:33 PM
In my opinion whether someone likes of dislikes synthetic surfaces depends on the method(s) they use to handicap races and the method(s) they use to wager on those races.No, it depends on the results their selections and wagers produce using those methods which can be different for different people using the same data and wagering strategies.The process I use is time consuming to say the least and I've found that my results are not nearly as good on a synthetic surface as a dirt surface. What has hurt me more than anything is the fact that my home tracks, and specifically my most successfull meet (Santa Anita) went to synthetic surfaces. I also never spread much in P3's, P'4's, Tri's, and Supers when my home tracks had a dirt surface. On synthetic surfaces I spread a lot more.I have also found it harder to separate contenders and consequently do spread more and avoid WIN bets and EXWs, but my results have improved as more fields contain more entrants who have performed positively over plastic and fewer that have no performances to analyze.I do think that most HANA members and most on this Forum dislike synthetic surfaces. Slowly but surely the message is getting out to members of the media and Racetrack Executives.There is as much proof that most on this forum "dislike" synthetic as there is that synthetics are either better or worse than dirt.I could be wrong, and I will post this under the HANA section as well, but I think rating Keenland #1 in HANA ratings was a huge mistake because of the synthetic surface. The buildup was great and got a lot of publicity but the final top 10 was so anticlimactic that I think thousands of potential members chose not to join. I know it turned me off but I still support HANA. Having said that there really was no way for the hard working people that run HANA (and do it for no compensation by the way) to know how it would affect membership.How many people do you know -- or would venture to guess -- refused to join HANA despite a terrific job of marketing and fortuitous exposure simply because they disagreed with the results derived from an "objective" emphasis on wagering aspects? I don't doubt there were some, but I don't think that's a major reason people are holding back.In my opinion future ratings should be in catergories of Tracks and those with synthetic surfaces should be placed in a separate category. Until membership gets to over 20k, not pissing people off, whether it's the Racetracks or potential members should be a consideration particularly when it comes to rating Racetracks!Did you notice that this initial effective impact by HANA on behalf of horseplayers did not depend on the size of its membership?

I agree that synthetics appear to be a failed experiment in CA at this point, and I hope that Santa Anita, at least, returns to dirt. My opposition to holding BC races on synthetics is well documented.

Every horseplayer has varying success at different venues and with different data products. HANA should be focusing on issues that affect ALL horseplayers, at least to some degree. The specific issues HANA has chosen to address so far all fall under the umbrella of getting the industry to start listening to its customers in order to restore the game’s popularity and keep it viable. To sic HANA on tracks with synthetics -- or on TVG for which tracks it carries -- seems inappropriate to me.

Since NYRA reduced takeout under Barry Schwartz, KEE has been the only major racing association to make any effort to help the player with lower takeout, lower exotic minimums ($.50 TRIs & P4s), and willingness to do business with PTC. Their attendance and handle reflect their attitude toward their customers. The class of racing at KEE assures it will continue to be successful, especially if it lowers takeout to compensate for any horseplayer reluctance regarding its surface.

andymays
07-01-2009, 10:04 PM
No, it depends on the results their selections and wagers produce using those methods which can be different for different people using the same data and wagering strategies.

Handicappers that rely on shortcuts through the use of various programs to do the handicapping for them are the ones I think could care less about the surface. I may be wrong in assuming this.

I have also found it harder to separate contenders and consequently do spread more and avoid WIN bets and EXWs, but my results have improved as more fields contain more entrants who have performed positively over plastic and fewer that have no performances to analyze.

There is as much proof that most on this forum "dislike" synthetic as there is that synthetics are either better or worse than dirt.How many people do you know -- or would venture to guess -- refused to join HANA despite a terrific job of marketing and fortuitous exposure simply because they disagreed with the results derived from an "objective" emphasis an wagering aspects?

I believe thousands of people like me (I did join and support HANA) decided not to join based upon the fact that keenland has a synthetic surface and that many Horseplayers felt dissed because their home track was far down the list. There was a great buildup for the top 10 but after it was over everyone I talked to thought it was anticlimactic to say the least. And again I know the numbers HANA used were good, but if the object was to get people to join, it wasn't the best way to go about it. This is of course hindsight.

I don't doubt there were some, but I don't think that's a major reason people are holding back.Did you notice that this initial effective impact by HANA on behalf of horseplayers did not depend on the size of its membership?

Negotiating from weakness (1200 members) is not as effective as negotiating from strenth (20k plus members). I can find no reason other than the Track Ratings that HANA doesn't have more members. Every Horseplayer should agree with most (not all) of HANA's principles.

I agree that synthetics appear to be a failed experiment in CA at this point, and I hope that Santa Anita, at least, returns to dirt. My opposition to holding BC races on synthetics is well documented.

Every horseplayer has varying success at different venues and with different data products. HANA should be focusing on issues that affect ALL horseplayers, at least to some degree. The specific issues HANA has chosen to address so far all fall under the umbrella of getting the industry to start listening to its customers in order to restore the game’s popularity and keep it viable. To sic HANA on tracks with synthetics -- or on TVG for which tracks it carries -- seems inappropriate to me.

TVG and HRTV promote the surfaces of the Tracks they are contracted with and that does not serve the Horseplayer. They are not objective networks. Placing Tracks with synthetic surfaces in a separate category does not diminish them in my opinion. That would be the same as saying that the Tracks with dirt surfaces are diminished by being in a different category than Tracks with synthetic surfaces.

Since NYRA reduced takeout under Barry Schwartz, KEE has been the only major racing association to make any effort to help the player with lower takeout, lower exotic minimums ($.50 TRIs & P4s), and willingness to do business with PTC. Their attendance and handle reflect their attitude toward their customers. The class of racing at KEE assures it will continue to be successful, especially if it lowers takeout to compensate for any horseplayer reluctance regarding its surface.


Again, the perception of Keenland as a Track with a synthetic surface, and that surface being bad for Horseplayers (I agree with the perception), is all that matters. The reality that the takeout numbers show is fine and good but that doesn't outweigh the fact that they have a synthetic surface.

It is a mistake to underestimate the level of animosity toward synthetic surfaces that many Traditional Horseplayers like me feel.

Please excuse the way I responded becasue I don't know how to do it any other way. You've gotten me to do more work than I am used to in any forum. I like to keep it pithy as Bill O'Reilly would say.

andymays
07-01-2009, 10:31 PM
If I had a choice and the first was Santa Anita with a synthetic surface and a 10% across the board takeout, or Santa Anita with a traditional dirt surface with the takeout as it is I would choose the higher takeout and the traditional dirt surface.

Imriledup
07-01-2009, 10:31 PM
The polytrack surface at Keeneland turns races into guessing games. Since more horses dislike poly than actual dirt, you are guessing if your athlete will like this surface or not. Combine that with the weird pace scenarios (see the Street Sense Bluegrass) and you have something where handicappers who watch video tape and bet on horses off of their eyes really have to factor in other variables in order to win consistently. Of course it can be done, but my bone of contention is why should i have to factor in extra stuff when i can just wager on dirt tracks and not have to concern myself with jockeys not knowing how to ride the surface and horses not handling it? As long as there are major racetracks offering wagering on conventional dirt, i don't really see a reason for a long time handicappers to toss away decades of experience on conventional dirt to invest their hard earned money on some 'experiment'. Big bettors don't want to be the synthetic guinea pigs, who can blame them.

Indulto
07-01-2009, 10:47 PM
If I had a choice and the first was Santa Anita with a synthetic surface and a 10% across the board takeout, or Santa Anita with a traditional dirt surface with the takeout as it is I would choose the higher takeout and the traditional dirt surface.As long as we're tossing around fantasies here, my preference to both would be that HOL didn't close.;)

But I'd go for the lower takeout since I'd last longer while not not being fed to whales until I figured out how to beat synthetics. :lol:

andymays
07-01-2009, 10:53 PM
As long as we're tossing around fantasies here, my preference to both would be that HOL didn't close.;)

But I'd go for the lower takeout since I'd last longer while not not being fed to whales until I figured out how to beat synthetics. :lol:


I'm relieved that you didn't come back at me with a long one. :)

CBedo
07-01-2009, 11:05 PM
I can find no reason other than the Track Ratings that HANA doesn't have more membersBad Track Ratings => Low HANA Membership?

This logic is utterly ridiculous.

andymays
07-01-2009, 11:11 PM
Bad Track Ratings => Low HANA Membership?

This logic is utterly ridiculous.


Do you have a good reason? What's your opinion?

The buildup for the top 10 was on every major website that I visited. It was the topic of discussion among most Horseplayers.

On the HANA thread there have been many suggestions on where to go from here and I probably made a few. But then I started thinking what's next? Is someone going to suggest a bake sale? Something is fundamentally wrong and whether I'm right or wrong is a matter of opinion but at least I have one.

And again, it's a big mistake to underestimate the animosity that some Traditional Horseplayers like myself have toward synthetic surfaces!

Respectfully,

Andy

magwell
07-01-2009, 11:59 PM
If I had a choice and the first was Santa Anita with a synthetic surface and a 10% across the board takeout, or Santa Anita with a traditional dirt surface with the takeout as it is I would choose the higher takeout and the traditional dirt surface. Andy that would be a good poll to take....... Actually I know it makes too much sense but all the big tracks have to do is have all three surfaces to run on .....;)

WinterTriangle
07-02-2009, 12:12 AM
I'm a naturalist, didn't Zito say something like God made dirt and grass? Those are the surfaces for me.

"Migliore, who has ridden over artificial surfaces in California the last two years, said a jockey can get a false sense of security. He said horses travel so smoothly over synthetic surfaces that when a horse is sore, a rider might not feel it.

“I rode a horse I might not have ridden on a conventional track,” said Migliore, who urged tracks to conduct more studies before rushing to install synthetic surfaces. “He broke his leg, and it was as fast as I went down in my life.”....Bloodhorse

RXB
07-02-2009, 03:41 PM
Since more horses dislike poly than actual dirt

Prove this.

People can like or not like artificial surfaces as they see fit. Like some horses, some handicappers win more on particular surfaces. But maybe try to distinguish between facts and opinions, and don't try to present unsubstantiated opinions as facts.

CincyHorseplayer
07-02-2009, 04:04 PM
It seems that only when you are stuck in California and don't want to give up your circuit does this have relevance at all.

And hey I don't blame you Cali players at all for not wanting to abandon a circuit you know and love and go to,to bet foreign tracks at home.I don't blame you at all.I wouldn't give up my much cheaper Ohio circuit when the ADW wars were in full bloom(at first anyway).

But outside of the state we don't have to debate whether were intellectually credible or have the intestinal fortitude to withstand the synthetic "Reality"!

Like CJ's Dad said 5 pages ago,we just don't bet it.We don't have to.You guys should hate the fact that you have to make that choice more than the surface itself.

ddog
07-02-2009, 04:31 PM
cincy

to us poly lovers that stuff you guys have in Ohio looks kind of strange.

All those cheap speed horses and small prices.

Glad I don't have to bet those either.

Just kiddin, kinda. ;)

CincyHorseplayer
07-02-2009, 04:54 PM
cincy

to us poly lovers that stuff you guys have in Ohio looks kind of strange.

All those cheap speed horses and small prices.

Glad I don't have to bet those either.

Just kiddin, kinda. ;)

That's just it.Whatever works for the each of us.:ThmbUp:

andymays
07-22-2009, 12:05 PM
More evidence of the bad decisions made by the bigshots regarding synthetic surfaces!

Just in time for opening day at Del Mar!


http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/jul/22/ex-chrb-boss-having-second-thoughts/

Excerpt:

DEL MAR — Richard Shapiro, head of the California Horse Racing Board when the mandate for synthetic racing surfaces at the state's major tracks passed three years ago, is among the ranks of the disillusioned with what the rule has wrought.
“In 20-20 hindsight, I would not have pushed for a mandate,” Shapiro, now retired, said in a phone interview yesterday. “You ask me if I'm disappointed and, in a word, the answer is yes.”


:bang:

rwwupl
07-22-2009, 12:29 PM
More evidence of the bad decisions made by the bigshots regarding synthetic surfaces!

Just in time for opening day at Del Mar!


http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/jul/22/ex-chrb-boss-having-second-thoughts/

Excerpt:

DEL MAR — Richard Shapiro, head of the California Horse Racing Board when the mandate for synthetic racing surfaces at the state's major tracks passed three years ago, is among the ranks of the disillusioned with what the rule has wrought.
“In 20-20 hindsight, I would not have pushed for a mandate,” Shapiro, now retired, said in a phone interview yesterday. “You ask me if I'm disappointed and, in a word, the answer is yes.”


:bang:


WOW! -- Case Made. Thanks Andy ;)

Indulto
07-22-2009, 03:30 PM
From the article:… “Every segment of the industry was in favor. It wasn't just Richard Shapiro and the board pushing something through,” Shapiro said. …I believe this. The only clear voice against them was Beyer’s and not because of the safety issue, but rather the effect on handicapping. Ironically some feel that was a self-fulfilling prophecy, as handicappers using Beyer figures appeared less able to adapt than users of some other data. In a mea culpa similar to this post-mortem, Beyer himself adjusted his figures for those surfaces.… “We went in thinking that this would benefit the industry as a whole.”All groups advocating racing reform please take note.“They have lessened the fatalities, but have not proven to be what we thought they would,” Shapiro said. “They require more maintenance and have not been as consistent as we anticipated. And while they have lowered fatalities there are indications of problems with injuries that aren't fatal. …Attention Howard Zucker whose exchange with horseplayers at the HRI blog proved that some horsemen have their heads in the sand, … er, fibers.

I was 100% against the mandate and 200% against BC races on synthetics. I don’t bother trying to handicap non-stakes races on synthetics unless they are part of a Pick Four. BUT, as time has gone on and more races involve horses who have established either their ability or inability to handle synthetics, my results have marginally improved.

Would closers like Zenyatta or even the recent HOL winner, Evita Argentina, have won over the old dirt surface there? Would Misremembered and Zensational have been able to go wire to wire during the previous couple of years?

More and more I’m convinced synthetics have returned an emphasis on jockeys to the proceedings in a positive way since IMO they are important to casual bettors as rooting interests. I predict that Joel Rosario will be to synthetics what Fernando Toro was to the turf.

Would I prefer a return to dirt surfaces with a proper base? Yes?

Is the money to accomplish that going to be available anytime soon? Your guess is as good as mine.

Should the synthetic issue be used to apply pressure to lower takeout? Why not?

andymays
07-22-2009, 03:41 PM
Bottom line is that synthetics in California were pushed through without much thought. They could have been put in at one Track as a test.

The people in charge at the time thought they knew what was best for us and for them so they shoved it down our throats and we were supposed to thank them and love it. They lied about the cost of maintenance and fudged the injury and breakdown statistics until 5 months ago when they were caught.

Beware of people and organizations that tell you they know what's best for you! Can anyone say Obama Administration?

Imriledup
07-22-2009, 03:50 PM
That's not true. Winning a pari-mutual game only requires the player to understand more than those he is playing against... That's all. Nothing else is required.

I disagree with this. You need to not only know more than your competition, you need to know enough to beat the high takeout rate. Even if you know more you still have to beat the takeout.

gm10
07-22-2009, 03:59 PM
I am just paraphrasing but I read where Nick Zito said , for 200 years we bred horses for speed now we introduce syn tracks which resemble turf racing and we are handing the thorobred crown back to the French and English.

Well said.

Turfbar

You've got to be kidding. American racing hasn't been anywhere near the European level for about 2 decades. American horses who win a few Breeders Cup races on a surface that the rest of the world ignores because it's unsafe, is really not good enough for America.

Bruddah
07-22-2009, 04:06 PM
You've got to be kidding. American racing hasn't been anywhere near the European level for about 2 decades. American horses who win a few Breeders Cup races on a surface that the rest of the world ignores because it's unsafe, is really not good enough for America.

Just two questions.

1. Your statement seems very sure and definintive. What proof do you have for your assertions?

2. What the H*LL have you been smoking? :lol:

PaceAdvantage
07-22-2009, 04:08 PM
American horses who win a few Breeders Cup races on a surface that the rest of the world ignores because it's unsafe, is really not good enough for America.Really, they ignore it because it's unsafe?

Has "the rest of the world" EVER raced primarily on dirt? If so, during what years, and what were the injury/fatality rates that made "the rest of the world" wise up and conclude dirt is "unsafe?"

Thank you in advance for any info you might be able to provide.

gm10
07-22-2009, 04:17 PM
I like synthetic surfaces a lot. I see less breakdowns. I see more competititve races. I love the fact that many bettors find it a random surface.

Is it less predictable? Here's my take on that.
I've fit statistical models for different types of races, and measured the predictive power for each of those models.

When it comes to ratings, synthetic (both sprint and route) races are about as predictable as turf routes, turf sprints and dirt claiming routes.

If you take all factors into account (ratings, class, money won, surface preference, etc etc), synthetic races are somewhere in the middle. Stakes/Maiden sprints are the most predictable events. But ..... the least predictable are dirt claiming routes, followed by dirt claiming sprints and dirt claiming allowance races.

My conclusion: the unpredictability of synthetic racing is a MYTH. The only truth to it is that speed ratings are slightly less reliable, but other factors more than make up for this.

gm10
07-22-2009, 04:29 PM
Just two questions.

1. Your statement seems very sure and definintive. What proof do you have for your assertions?

2. What the H*LL have you been smoking? :lol:

Name me one big race that American horses have won in the last decade which wasn't on the dirt.

And who races on the dirt? Only Ameirca and Dubai, it's really a minority. If you look at the top 50 purses in world racing, you will find that that only about 20% had an American winner at some point. (The top 50 purses are in Shuback's "Global Racing").

No offense, I much prefer American racing to European, but on a global scale, American horsemen are niche players.

PaceAdvantage
07-22-2009, 04:30 PM
I like synthetic surfaces a lot. I see less breakdowns. I see more competititve races. I love the fact that many bettors find it a random surface. This is the only thing I could find in your reply that remotely addresses my question....is that it?

gm10
07-22-2009, 04:32 PM
Really, they ignore it because it's unsafe?

Has "the rest of the world" EVER raced primarily on dirt? If so, during what years, and what were the injury/fatality rates that made "the rest of the world" wise up and conclude dirt is "unsafe?"

Thank you in advance for any info you might be able to provide.

Why on earth would they need to race on the dirt? It's clear that there are much more American breakdowns than European ones. I watch racing on both continents about 300 days a year. I think America outnumbers Europe something like 2 to 1 when it comes to fatalities.

As for the synthetic stuff, I admit this is just based on daily observation, but I think I see less horses breaking down.

gm10
07-22-2009, 04:34 PM
This is the only thing I could find in your reply that remotely addresses my question....is that it?

sorry what was the question?

cj
07-22-2009, 04:34 PM
Japan has some big races on dirt.

PaceAdvantage
07-22-2009, 04:41 PM
Why on earth would they need to race on the dirt? It's clear that there are much more American breakdowns than European ones. I watch racing on both continents about 300 days a year. I think America outnumbers Europe something like 2 to 1 when it comes to fatalities.I didn't say they need to race on dirt. I'm trying to discover what made them come to the conclusion that dirt is "unsafe." Your statement sort of implied that they USED to race on dirt, but somehow discovered it was unsafe, and thus left dirt racing to the mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging Americans. :lol:

gm10
07-22-2009, 04:41 PM
Japan has some big races on dirt.
I'e just checked the top 25, I won't go any further

6. Japan Cup (4.3 million): TURF
7. Arima Kinen (3.1 million): TURF
10. Tokyo Yushun (2.8 million): TURF
17. Kikua Sho (2.4 million): TURF
18. Japan Cup Dirt (2.3 million): DIRT
19. Autumn Tenno Sho (2.2 million): TURF
23. Spring Tenno Sho (2.1 million): TURF
24. Takarazuka Kinen (2 million): TURF

PaceAdvantage
07-22-2009, 04:41 PM
sorry what was the question?:lol:

Good one!

gm10
07-22-2009, 04:45 PM
I didn't say they need to race on dirt. I'm trying to discover what made them come to the conclusion that dirt is "unsafe." Your statement sort of implied that they USED to race on dirt, but somehow discovered it was unsafe, and thus left dirt racing to the mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging Americans. :lol:

Well if you think I implied this, you misunderstood. When a new track is built, I think it's more of a "let's see the pro's and con's of each surface", and dirt just doesn't come off that well. 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.

andymays
07-22-2009, 04:50 PM
In Europe and elsewhere the Horses with the least class and ability race on synthetics.

Why would we want to copy that?

Many Racing Executives including the former head of the CHRB who mandated synthetic surfaces wishes he hadn't.

Fatalities are down a little but soft tissue injuries are up dramatically.

Most regular Horseplayers hate it. There is no upside for synthetic racing in the U.S. unless it was used at a Track where it rained more often than it was dry.

Bottom line is that the informercial they bought the synthetic surfaces from was fraudulent!

R.I.P Billy Mays! :)

46zilzal
07-22-2009, 04:51 PM
And longer distances on the dirt ... I think we can agree that's a bit boring.
That is what all the breeders think too when it IS what the Turf bred European contingent retains and we are losing.

No graded platform for stamina on the dirt and it disappears pure and simple. I have been harping upon this since I first voiced it in the Blood Horse in 1991

gm10
07-22-2009, 04:55 PM
In Europe and elsewhere the Horses with the least class and ability race on synthetics.

Why would we want to copy that?

Many Racing Executives including the former head of the CHRB who mandated synthetic surfaces wishes he hadn't.

Fatalities are down a little but soft tissue injuries are up dramatically.

Most regular Horseplayers hate it. There is no upside for synthetic racing in the U.S. unless it was used at a Track where it rained more often than it was dry.

Bottom line is that the informercial they bought the synthetic surfaces from was fraudulent!

R.I.P Billy Mays! :)

Soft tissue injuries up dramatically? Where are the numbers for that pls?

And yes, synthetic races are still towards the bottom end. But that's not really an argument though, is it? Would you not play bottom level dirt tracks?

gm10
07-22-2009, 04:58 PM
That is what all the breeders think too when it IS what the Turf bred European contingent retains and we are losing.

No graded platform for stamina on the dirt and it disappears pure and simple. I have been harping upon this since I first voiced it in the Blood Horse in 1991

I think you have been vindicated a while ago :-(

PaceAdvantage
07-22-2009, 04:59 PM
Where are the numbers for that pls?Where are the numbers that prove dirt racing is "unsafe?"

gm10
07-22-2009, 05:02 PM
Where are the numbers that prove dirt racing is "unsafe?"

would you agree that American turf racng is safer than American dirt racing?

PaceAdvantage
07-22-2009, 05:05 PM
If I had numbers available, I'd surely be able to come to a conclusion and get you that answer. Isn't it sad though that neither you nor I know where to turn to get what should be easily attainable statistics on the matter?

46zilzal
07-22-2009, 05:06 PM
would you agree that American turf racng is safer than American dirt racing?
By a LONG SHOT

PaceAdvantage
07-22-2009, 05:06 PM
By a LONG SHOTI assume 46 has access to the stats. Can you point me to them 46?

I've seen plenty of horses break down in turf races over my lifetime. I also know that America runs tons more dirt races than turf races...thus, we're apt to see tons more breakdowns on dirt vs. turf.

I also know Saratoga went a whole meeting on the dirt without one breakdown.

I also know Keeneland and I believe Santa Anita (or was it Hollywood) suffered a rash of breakdowns on their synthetic surfaces.

Again, I ask, where are the stats?

46zilzal
07-22-2009, 05:08 PM
I assume 46 has access to the stats. Can you point me to them 46?
It is called almost 45 years of observation and working at tracks and along side of people in the business.

I can't count enough times I have heard trainers say things like "when we get him to GGF we will have a chance to ease up on his joints by prepping him in a grass route."

PaceAdvantage
07-22-2009, 05:09 PM
It is called almost 45 years of observation and working at tracks and along side of people in the business.In other words, anecdotal evidence with nothing concrete to back it up...don't you like to refer to yourself as a man of science and medicine? :lol:

gm10
07-22-2009, 05:12 PM
If I had numbers available, I'd surely be able to come to a conclusion and get you that answer. Isn't it sad though that neither you nor I know where to turn to get what should be easily attainable statistics on the matter?

it's very sad

and it's even sadder than we must compare AMERICAN dirt racing with AMERICAN turf racing - could take European or Asian turf racing, but that would be a bad comparison because of the drugs issue!!

maybe synthetics woudln't be needed if there were less drugs?

gm10
07-22-2009, 05:14 PM
I assume 46 has access to the stats. Can you point me to them 46?

I've seen plenty of horses break down in turf races over my lifetime. I also know that America runs tons more dirt races than turf races...thus, we're apt to see tons more breakdowns on dirt vs. turf.

I also know Saratoga went a whole meeting on the dirt without one breakdown.

I also know Keeneland and I believe Santa Anita (or was it Hollywood) suffered a rash of breakdowns on their synthetic surfaces.

Again, I ask, where are the stats?

there was one study that showed a lower fataility rate on synthetic surface but that was with little data, plus tracks were still learning how to maintain the new surface (that was the cause behind those two bad first days @ SA imo)
it will only get better imo

andymays
07-22-2009, 05:42 PM
there was one study that showed a lower fataility rate on synthetic surface but that was with little data, plus tracks were still learning how to maintain the new surface (that was the cause behind those two bad first days @ SA imo)
it will only get better imo


gm10 if you read the thread from the beginnig you will find many instances of people who are considered experts in Horse Racing in the United States with a negative opinion of synthetics.

andymays
07-22-2009, 06:41 PM
Track Maintenance could be a big deal when they decide to dump water on the polytrack at Del Mar.

Select a Day: 07/22/200907/21/200907/20/200907/17/2009
DATE TIME ACTIVITY TEMP DETAILS
07/21/2009 7:00PM - 8:00PM Cultivator n/a (1) Cultivator set to 3 inches, groom from inside to outside rail
07/21/2009 8:00PM - 9:00PM Gallop Master n/a (5) Gallop Masters set to racing depth (2 5/8 inches) groom from inside to outside rail
07/22/2009 4:30AM - 7:00AM Training n/a Horses on Polytrack
07/22/2009 7:30AM - 8:00AM Gallop Master n/a (5) Gallop Masters set to racing depth (2 5/8 inches) groom from inside to outside rail
07/22/2009 8:00AM - 10:00AM Training n/a Horses on Polytrack
07/22/2009 10:00AM - 10:30AM Gallop Master n/a (5) Gallop Masters set to racing depth (2 5/8 inches) groom from inside to outside rail
07/22/2009 10:30AM - 11:00AM Cultivator n/a (1) Cultivator set to 3 incles, groom from inside to outside rail
07/22/2009 11:15AM - 11:45AM Gallop Master n/a (5) Gallop Masters set to racing depth (2 5/8 inches) groom from inside to outside rail
07/22/2009 11:45AM - 12:30PM Water n/a 3 Loads of Water
07/22/2009 1:00PM Air Temp 84 n/a
07/22/2009 1:30PM Track Temp 91 at four inch depth

Tom
07-22-2009, 06:59 PM
As long as the breakdown and any data is kept by the tracks themselves, it is highly suspect.

Would anyone take anything a race track them to be true?
I certainly would not.

The best data we will ever get on poly surfaces is at best probably a wild ass guess by a biased person with an agenda, and at worst outright lies.

As far as I am concerned, everything we were told about poly from day one has been a lie. I am 100% convinced dirt is better if properly maintained. Therein lies the rub - I think crap tracks like Kee, AP, and TP were looking for ways to cut costs. Their dirt tracks were crap because their maintenance crews were crap. Thier poly tracks are crap becase you still have the same crap maintenance crews.

Poly an improvement over dirt? :lol::lol::lol:

cj
07-22-2009, 07:18 PM
Of course we have more breakdowns on dirt. We have, as a whole, much better, sounder, classier horses racing on turf in this country. If all our horses raced on turf, I am sure there would be an increase in the breakdown percentage on turf.

p.s. did anyone catch the 3rd at Delmar today?

andymays
07-22-2009, 07:52 PM
From Del Mar press box:

Jockey Rafael Bejarano, one of the nation's leading riders, was taken by ambulance to Scripps Hospital in La Jolla for precautionary x-rays after he was unseated in the stretch run of the third race on opening-day of the 2009 Del Mar racing season.

Areas of concern for Bejarano were his left clavicle and the left side of his jaw, according to medical personnel who examined him in the track first aid station.

Mi Rey sustained a catastrophic injury to his right front leg, necessitating the horse being humanely euthanized.

Bruddah
07-22-2009, 09:25 PM
Name me one big race that American horses have won in the last decade which wasn't on the dirt.

And who races on the dirt? Only Ameirca and Dubai, it's really a minority. If you look at the top 50 purses in world racing, you will find that that only about 20% had an American winner at some point. (The top 50 purses are in Shuback's "Global Racing").

No offense, I much prefer American racing to European, but on a global scale, American horsemen are niche players.

If you are going to use statistics and percentages made up by you, that's not addressing my question for substantiated facts. You avoid factual answers by trying to put me on the defensive answering your questions. Sir, you are unarmed in a debate.

gm10
07-23-2009, 02:39 AM
Of course we have more breakdowns on dirt. We have, as a whole, much better, sounder, classier horses racing on turf in this country. If all our horses raced on turf, I am sure there would be an increase in the breakdown percentage on turf.

p.s. did anyone catch the 3rd at Delmar today?

That's really impossible to prove isn't it. I don't believe it at all. I think I've been to 20 English turf meets, and only saw one fataility (heart attack). I've been to one dirt meeting in the US and saw one fatality (George Washington).

gm10
07-23-2009, 03:59 AM
If you are going to use statistics and percentages made up by you, that's not addressing my question for substantiated facts. You avoid factual answers by trying to put me on the defensive answering your questions. Sir, you are unarmed in a debate.
Mine are facts. Buy Shuback's book and see for yourself: American horse racing is bogged down by it's own provincialism and that's a big big shame.

As for your 'facts' what were they Again pls?

Tom
07-23-2009, 07:28 AM
OK, take all the dirt injuries and breakdown and throw out all that happened to claimers and cheap purses since those normally do not run on turf.
Now compare the numbers.

andymays
07-23-2009, 07:29 AM
This email from Art Wilson responding to my question:

Andy,
It's really quite simple. There are NO official stats because no one keeps them. In fact, I remember reading something about a year ago where Arthur was quoted as saying that the reduction in fatalities was minimal. I've written this before and I stand by it -- until there is a third-party study that keeps official numbers regarding the fatalities, we'll continue to get different numbers in every story. If I'd used a number in my story Wednesday, we'd have probably had different stats in my story, Hank's and Bill's. You can't get a straight answer. And try digging up morning breakdowns and you might as well try to send a man to Mars.
Art

---- Original Message ----
From:Andy
To: art.wilson
Subject: FW: Two Articles by Hank Wesch/ Shapiro/Harper and Arthur lying!
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 10:25:45 -0700

>
>
>Art, maybe you can get to the bottom of the discrepancies in breakdown
>statistic listed below. The big difference between the Hank Wesch
>article and the Bill Dwyer article.

Bobzilla
07-23-2009, 07:51 AM
Name me one big race that American horses have won in the last decade which wasn't on the dirt.

And who races on the dirt? Only Ameirca and Dubai, it's really a minority. If you look at the top 50 purses in world racing, you will find that that only about 20% had an American winner at some point. (The top 50 purses are in Shuback's "Global Racing").

No offense, I much prefer American racing to European, but on a global scale, American horsemen are niche players.


Wesley Ward trained 2yo STRIKE THE TIGER won the Windsor Castle Stakes only last month at the prestigious Royal Ascot meet. I thought it was noteworthy as it's quite a rare occurence when an American based outfit travels abroad to compete in a Group Stakes on anything other than dirt. Though it was within the last two decades I can remember back in 1991 how surprised, as well as proud, I was when NY-Bred and based Fourstars Allstar won the prestigious Irish 2000 Guineas. Our best performers here in America compete primarily on our main tracks which are still, for the most part, traditional dirt. Though our historical playing field does seem to be unique to the Americas and parts of Asia, and I would guess viewed with a condescending eye in some parts, it's no less a legitimate racing surface on which to conduct some of the world's most important stakes races. Maybe it's personal with me but I just feel I might be scoffing at much of our racing history and all its legendary performers if I were to quickly dismiss dirt racing as not valid only because it's not more popular worldwide.

Sid
07-23-2009, 08:04 AM
A somewhat different, purely personal, anecdotal and unquantified observation would be:

"Sounder, classier, healthier horses racing on turf than dirt" was a more sensible assertion when Gulfstream (pre-Stronach) did not card any maiden turf races. Now GP commonly offers cards on which all grass entries are maidens. This switch occurred even as the cheap track up in Tampa added a turf course, allowing snowbird stock from minor Midwest circuits to rehab on fescue and maybe can earn a check. All the moaning about the ascendancy of turf sprints also seems not to signal a better class of horse -- certainly not a longer horse -- on grass. Evangeline now has a turf course for all those Louisiana-breds. NYRA fills majority-turf cards by making them majority-statebred. A large number of customers actually enjoy these sod heats that tend to bring 'em together at the wire (which used to be what a condition book was about). With non-captive customers betting from thousands of miles away, every effort is made to load up as many runners on grass as possible without destroying the grass. Or so it would appear here in extreme Flyover Country.

Bobzilla
07-23-2009, 08:35 AM
Last August the Blood-Horse had D. G. Van Clief as a guest for their weekly Talkin' Horses segment where questions are provided from fans. I thought many of his responses casted light on the current mindset of those running the game. Of particular interest and germane to this thread was the 19th question halfway down (poster was from Trenton, NJ) where he was asked about any concerns about having a BC with the main track being a synthetic track. In the last two sentences of his response he states that it's his belief North American racing will eventually be conducted predominately on synthetics. He also expressed a desire to see "uniformity" from track to track. I've long felt that one of the reasons industry officials have embraced the synthetic switch has been the desire for a universal surface and that they feel this can be best accomplished through getting a handle on synthetics. I guess the idea of a universal surface might mean different things to different people but I've not only enjoyed the distiction between dirt and grass in American Racing but I've also found the differences and nuances of individual tracks of the same surface type to make the game more interesting and fun. I realize not everyone will share that view and I think different people will enjoy the game in different ways. Maybe I'll start a poll someday asking peoples' thoughts on the concept of a universal surface. Another concern would be whether or not a move towards a universal surface might contribute towards horses that are more inbred than they already are. If anyone is interested in Van Clief's thoughts on the current state of the game, at least as they were last year, here is the link:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/TalkinHorses/DV081408.asp

andymays
07-23-2009, 03:04 PM
I don't believe the breakdown at Del Mar yesterday could be blamed on the surface unless there is an epidemic of them in the next few weeks.

One of the reasons Racing Executives like synthetic surfaces is that they feel it usually produces a more exciting finish to a race.

I do think that most people would agree that one of the characteristics of synthetic surface racing is a bunched up field in the stretch. Much more so than a typical dirt surface race. And because of the bunched up fields in the stetch, I think we could see more serious injuries to the Jockeys as time goes by. ( I hope not though)

gm10
07-23-2009, 03:12 PM
Wesley Ward trained 2yo STRIKE THE TIGER won the Windsor Castle Stakes only last month at the prestigious Royal Ascot meet. I thought it was noteworthy as it's quite a rare occurence when an American based outfit travels abroad to compete in a Group Stakes on anything other than dirt. Though it was within the last two decades I can remember back in 1991 how surprised, as well as proud, I was when NY-Bred and based Fourstars Allstar won the prestigious Irish 2000 Guineas. Our best performers here in America compete primarily on our main tracks which are still, for the most part, traditional dirt. Though our historical playing field does seem to be unique to the Americas and parts of Asia, and I would guess viewed with a condescending eye in some parts, it's no less a legitimate racing surface on which to conduct some of the world's most important stakes races. Maybe it's personal with me but I just feel I might be scoffing at much of our racing history and all its legendary performers if I were to quickly dismiss dirt racing as not valid only because it's not more popular worldwide.

Hey I'm with you. American racing is indeed not highly regarded inEurope which I regret because I like it more than any Eurooean racing. BUT ... Dirt is a minority surface and at the same time the prime surface in the US, so there is no real chance for American horse racing to be dominant on the world stage right now. But I 'll keep watching and betting as long as I can.

so.cal.fan
07-23-2009, 03:13 PM
I agree Andy. We are seeing more bunched up horses in the stretch....the horses are tiring more, some are actually staggering. You make a good point, this could make for a very bad situation.
Synthetics were a mistake. In California, it was a rush to judgement.
Many people, including myself, think there was some major corruption involved here. I hope I am wrong about that. We sure don't need anymore scandals....but some things just don't add up.

andymays
07-23-2009, 03:14 PM
I agree Andy. We are seeing more bunched up horses in the stretch....the horses are tiring more, some are actually staggering. You make a good point, this could make for a very bad situation.
Synthetics were a mistake. In California, it was a rush to judgement.
Many people, including myself, think there was some major corruption involved here. I hope I am wrong about that. We sure don't need anymore scandals....but some things just don't add up.


I agree with the staggering comments completely. Some of them were weaving in an out because they were so worn out.

andymays
07-23-2009, 03:37 PM
I don't believe the breakdown at Del Mar yesterday could be blamed on the surface unless there is an epidemic of them in the next few weeks.

One of the reasons Racing Executives like synthetic surfaces is that they feel it usually produces a more exciting finish to a race.

I do think that most people would agree that one of the characteristics of synthetic surface racing is a bunched up field in the stretch. Much more so than a typical dirt surface race. And because of the bunched up fields in the stetch, I think we could see more serious injuries to the Jockeys as time goes by. ( I hope not though)


http://www.drf.com/news/article/105739.html

Excerpt:

DEL MAR, Calif. - Jockey Rafael Bejarano, injured in a terrifying accident at Del Mar on Wednesday, underwent surgery early Thursday morning on his fractured left cheek and jaw. It went so well that he could be back in action by the middle of Del Mar's meeting next month, his agent, Joe Ferrer, said Thursday morning.
"They repaired it at 2 a.m. last night," Ferrer said. "Once the swelling goes down, and the pain goes away, he'll be able to ride with a mask. As long as the pain goes away, he can ride with a mask to protect his face. Hopefully, he'll be back riding in two to three weeks."

andymays
07-23-2009, 04:54 PM
Maintenance of the Del Mar surface:

07/22/2009 11:45AM - 12:30PM Water n/a 3 Loads of Water

07/23/2009 11:15AM - 11:45AM Water n/a Water trucks did 2 track loops


I thought the surface was less speed favoring as the day went on. In my opinion the water dumped on the Track helps speed. It will be interesting to follow this for a while!

Indulto
07-24-2009, 01:43 AM
http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog.php/Lines-in-the-Sand (http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog.php/Lines-in-the-Sand)
About $40 Million Later. . .
by Bill Christine July 24, 2009… In California and elsewhere, Shapiro will be known as the poster boy for the synthetic-track era out West, no matter what he says. During the interview, he tried to make a case that all segments of the industry were behind the change, but I remember it otherwise. There were suggestions from some trainers that half the money could have been spent at Del Mar in a major renovation of the dirt track. There was only a five-minute discussion period, tops, before the vote was taken at the racing board meeting to mandate the artificial surfaces. I walked out of the room shaking my head. They've just approved something that's going to drastically change the way races are run in an entire state, and that's all the public comment they needed? I wondered if the issue had been diced and shredded in some smoke-filled room before the board ever met.

He probably doesn't need to be reminded, but Shapiro shouldn't forget that one member of his own board at the time, Jerry Moss, didn't follow the other commission sheep to approval. Moss, whose horses have included Giacomo, Tiago and Zenyatta, was the most prescient man in the room. "I'll just vote 'present,'" he said. "I think these new tracks need much more study before we do all this." …OK, I stand corrected. Perhaps the overwhelming enthusiasm I remember with Fravel as cheerleader was just for installing it at Del Mar as opposed to the mandate. I do remember Moss not being on-board (pun intended).

Bruddah
07-24-2009, 07:30 AM
I may be off topic but, a "remembrance" just came to me. When Shapiro was appointed to the CHRB, I thought at the time it was pecuiliar to appoint someone to that position who didn't have much racing experience, in any area. Am I correct in that Shapiro had little or no experience prior to his position on the board and it was just a Political appointment? :confused:

Bobzilla
07-24-2009, 08:33 AM
I may be off topic but, a "remembrance" just came to me. When Shapiro was appointed to the CHRB, I thought at the time it was pecuiliar to appoint someone to that position who didn't have much racing experience, in any area. Am I correct in that Shapiro had little or no experience prior to his position on the board and it was just a Political appointment? :confused:

I can't recall his business/racing credentials prior to being appointed chairman of the CHRB. I do know that his family owned a prominent racehorse some time in the middle of the 20th century and if I recall correctly I believe it was the "Grey Ghost" himself, Native Dancer. I'm not entirely sure about that one but I think that was the horse they owned.

Bruddah
07-24-2009, 08:46 AM
Answering my own question. Shapiro was appointed to his position by Gov. Schwarzanegger in 2004 and reappointed in 2008.. The best I have been able to determine is, Shapiro's father and grandfather raised a few horses. He has a remembrance at 10 years old of them racing and winning with Native Diver. Their best Homebred.

After graduating from College (abt. 1979) he went to work for his Grandfathers Harness Co. and 7 years later he was appointed President of that company. The Company was a player in So. Cal Harness racing back in the 1980's. Seems to have gone out of business in 1986, apparently about the same time he was appointed President. No other Industry exposure was noted in his CHRB Bio, until his appointment as Chairman head of the CHRB. He indicated when he was appointed he owned a few horses.

Another case against "Blue Blood" cronyism, as far as I'm concerned. :ThmbDown: His "keying" of the car owned by an advisary indicates a total lack of Class and spoiled little rich kid attitude. (JMHO)

Bruddah
07-24-2009, 08:48 AM
I can't recall his business/racing credentials prior to being appointed chairman of the CHRB. I do know that his family owned a prominent racehorse some time in the middle of the 20th century and if I recall correctly I believe it was the "Grey Ghost" himself, Native Dancer. I'm not entirely sure about that one but I think that was the horse they owned.

Good recall Bob. The horse was Native Diver. 81 starts-37-7-12. He was the first Ca. bred to be a millionaire and elected to the Hall ofFame in 1978.

rwwupl
07-24-2009, 09:03 AM
I can't recall his business/racing credentials prior to being appointed chairman of the CHRB. I do know that his family owned a prominent racehorse some time in the middle of the 20th century and if I recall correctly I believe it was the "Grey Ghost" himself, Native Dancer. I'm not entirely sure about that one but I think that was the horse they owned.


The Shapiro family is well known in So. Ca. Richard Shapiro at an early age drove harness horses for Jack Harris,founder of the giant Harris ranch,which was inherited by Jack`s son John Harris, current Chairman of the CHRB and longtime pal of Shapiro.

Shapiro`s Grandfather and Father were the President of the Western Harness Association and Owner of "Native Diver", a California thoroughbred favorite and multiple winner of the Hollywood Gold Cup race

illinoisbred
07-24-2009, 09:18 AM
I am new here but wholeheartedly agree with almost all the negative criticism of synthetic surfaces. My handicapping is confined to the chicago circuit only and what one sees day in and out can only be described as ludicrous. The stranglehold jockeys are putting on their mounts are not helping their chances. My experience with most illinois horses is that they basically have one speed and begin to deaccelerate from there.Only one current rider gets this(E.T.Baird),and he is making fools out of the others.Also,this holding-back causes severe bunching up and creates very dangerous racing scenarios.I am one who personally feels this is what caused the problem that led to Rene Douglas`s unfortunate spill.Arlington has proven to be the great equalizer.Well-spotted,advantaged horses early in the meet quickly lose their edge and fields take on a sameness quality,leading to uninteresting racing.

andymays
07-24-2009, 12:33 PM
I am new here but wholeheartedly agree with almost all the negative criticism of synthetic surfaces. My handicapping is confined to the chicago circuit only and what one sees day in and out can only be described as ludicrous. The stranglehold jockeys are putting on their mounts are not helping their chances. My experience with most illinois horses is that they basically have one speed and begin to deaccelerate from there.Only one current rider gets this(E.T.Baird),and he is making fools out of the others.Also,this holding-back causes severe bunching up and creates very dangerous racing scenarios.I am one who personally feels this is what caused the problem that led to Rene Douglas`s unfortunate spill.Arlington has proven to be the great equalizer.Well-spotted,advantaged horses early in the meet quickly lose their edge and fields take on a sameness quality,leading to uninteresting racing.

Welcome and good first post!

andymays
07-24-2009, 01:53 PM
40 Million Dollars Later........

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog.php/lines-in-the-sand/07242009-about-40-million-later/

Excerpt:

The racing board's directive was expensive, about $40 million expensive. These are not tracks that are exactly swimming in profits. Bay Meadows, because it was soon to go out of business, wrangled a waiver, but Santa Anita, Hollywood Park, Del Mar and Golden Gate Fields followed the Shapiro-led board's marching orders and all installed the surfaces. Any one of those tracks could have pushed the envelope and said it wouldn't run under the burden of all that added expense, and it's likely the racing board would have blinked. Instead, typical of racing, this foursome lost any chance of getting a group discount by buying from different manufacturers. Well, Hollywood Park and Santa Anita had the same surface, Cushion Track, for a while, but Santa Anita's oval didn't work out, it sued the maker and now horses there run over something called Pro-Ride. Del Mar's is a Polytrack surface, and Golden Gate has Tapeta.

andymays
07-24-2009, 04:17 PM
Maintenance of the Del Mar surface:

07/22/2009 11:45AM - 12:30PM Water n/a 3 Loads of Water

07/23/2009 11:15AM - 11:45AM Water n/a Water trucks did 2 track loops


I thought the surface was less speed favoring as the day went on. In my opinion the water dumped on the Track helps speed. It will be interesting to follow this for a while!

07/24/2009 1:00PM - 1:15PM Water n/a Water trucks did two track loops

andymays
07-24-2009, 09:25 PM
Looks like another Horse broke down at Del Mar. In the 7th Race at Del Mar #1 I Want My Money had to be vanned off and it didn't look too good.

That's all I know right now!

Imriledup
07-24-2009, 11:50 PM
40 Million Dollars Later........

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog.php/lines-in-the-sand/07242009-about-40-million-later/

Excerpt:

The racing board's directive was expensive, about $40 million expensive. These are not tracks that are exactly swimming in profits. Bay Meadows, because it was soon to go out of business, wrangled a waiver, but Santa Anita, Hollywood Park, Del Mar and Golden Gate Fields followed the Shapiro-led board's marching orders and all installed the surfaces. Any one of those tracks could have pushed the envelope and said it wouldn't run under the burden of all that added expense, and it's likely the racing board would have blinked. Instead, typical of racing, this foursome lost any chance of getting a group discount by buying from different manufacturers. Well, Hollywood Park and Santa Anita had the same surface, Cushion Track, for a while, but Santa Anita's oval didn't work out, it sued the maker and now horses there run over something called Pro-Ride. Del Mar's is a Polytrack surface, and Golden Gate has Tapeta.


Its absolutely comical. Not only do players hate this surface, but they put their premier meet, Del Mar, in a position where horseplayers cannot use anything they saw at Hollywood with confidence, since the surfaces are completely different. A horse who gets over Hollywood isn't any indicator that he'll like DeL mar.

When you are handicapping Del mar, do you look at videos of horses performances at Hollywood to get a gauge on how they might race at DMR? No, because Cushion and Poly aren't the same things.

andymays
07-25-2009, 11:11 AM
Good Show today (7-25-09) Going over the Synthetic Controversy at Del Mar!

Lenny Shulman on the show.

Archived show up an hour after live show (about 10:00 am PST).

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




Live show starts at 8:00 am PST.

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

andymays
07-25-2009, 08:18 PM
Art Wilson Article:

Not a great start for those "safer" surfaces
http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/07/not-a-great-start-for-those-sa.html

Excerpt:

We're still receiving conflicting data, which helps explain why two Southland newspapers reported different statistics this past week when reporting the number of fatalities at Del Mar the first two years of Polytrack.
It's a good thing for the CHRB that there's never been an official list of all the horses that have come down with soft tissue injuries since the synthetics were installed. That would be a mighty long list.

Bruddah
07-25-2009, 09:52 PM
Its absolutely comical. Not only do players hate this surface, but they put their premier meet, Del Mar, in a position where horseplayers cannot use anything they saw at Hollywood with confidence, since the surfaces are completely different. A horse who gets over Hollywood isn't any indicator that he'll like DeL mar.

When you are handicapping Del mar, do you look at videos of horses performances at Hollywood to get a gauge on how they might race at DMR? No, because Cushion and Poly aren't the same things.

Not even the trainers know how the horse will perform. It ALL DEPENDS on the track surface. Not ability or class, but whether his horse likes the surface and another doesn't. What a fu*king shame that the Blue Bloods insist on Globalization of American Racing.

Indulto
07-25-2009, 11:21 PM
Art Wilson Article:

Not a great start for those "safer" surfaces
http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/07/not-a-great-start-for-those-sa.html

Excerpt:

We're still receiving conflicting data, which helps explain why two Southland newspapers reported different statistics this past week when reporting the number of fatalities at Del Mar the first two years of Polytrack.
It's a good thing for the CHRB that there's never been an official list of all the horses that have come down with soft tissue injuries since the synthetics were installed. That would be a mighty long list.AM,
With Art Wilson and Bill Christine beating the drum, the former CHRB chairman in disgrace for more than just the mandate, the renewed breakdown watch, and the repeal of California's anti-rebate statute -- we players have an incrediby fortuitous opportunity to get takeout lowered at DMR (and possibly even other reforms as well), but we have to be tough.

But we'll have to stop betting synthetics in California ... completely!

With SAR, MTH, AP turf, DMR turf, etc., there's plenty of other great racing opportunities to concentrate on.

If you believe that lower takeout is the way not just to make it better for the players, but also for the industry as a whole, then force them to experiment NOW.

Tell every other bettor you know what it is you're doing and why!

If we start stopping soon enough, they may cave in time to salvage the second half of the meet. If we were then to piled it on -- especially on their biggest days -- it could carry over to Oak Tree and the Breeder's Cup.

I was just saw the movie, "Network," again, and was re-inspired by the Peter Finch character. Let's show Harper and Fravel that "we're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more."

Sometimes problems are opportunities in disguise. Maybe some turf writers will sign on if we actually do something. Sieze the day!


I invite any reasons NOT to do this. :jump:

andymays
07-26-2009, 09:07 AM
AM,
With Art Wilson and Bill Christine beating the drum, the former CHRB chairman in disgrace for more than just the mandate, the renewed breakdown watch, and the repeal of California's anti-rebate statute -- we players have an incrediby fortuitous opportunity to get takeout lowered at DMR (and possibly even other reforms as well), but we have to be tough.

But we'll have to stop betting synthetics in California ... completely!

With SAR, MTH, AP turf, DMR turf, etc., there's plenty of other great racing opportunities to concentrate on.

If you believe that lower takeout is the way not just to make it better for the players, but also for the industry as a whole, then force them to experiment NOW.

Tell every other bettor you know what it is you're doing and why!

If we start stopping soon enough, they may cave in time to salvage the second half of the meet. If we were then to piled it on -- especially on their biggest days -- it could carry over to Oak Tree and the Breeder's Cup.

I was just saw the movie, "Network," again, and was re-inspired by the Peter Finch character. Let's show Harper and Fravel that "we're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more."

Sometimes problems are opportunities in disguise. Maybe some turf writers will sign on if we actually do something. Sieze the day!


I invite any reasons NOT to do this. :jump:

I've written this a few times before but guess I'm the only one that thinks this way.


The only way to do this is to plan a 10% takeout weekend next year that is heavily promoted by everyone (Tracks, HANA,TVG,HRTV,etc..) one or two months before it happens.

It would involve 2 tracks (maybe more) like Del Mar and Saratoga. We know for sure that handle would go up but we need to see how much it would go up. This is the only way to get some movement on the subject.

Right now too many people in the industry (Trainers, Owners, Breeders) are living month to month and can't afford to keep going much longer. Suggesting that they lower takeout right now would be met with laughter. It has to be planned and coordinated by HANA.

I don't know what this has to do with synthetic surfaces so I'll get the thread back on track with my feelings about synthetic surfaces.

"Synthetic Surfaces Suck" :)

Indulto
07-26-2009, 07:16 PM
I've written this a few times before but guess I'm the only one that thinks this way.


The only way to do this is to plan a 10% takeout weekend next year that is heavily promoted by everyone (Tracks, HANA,TVG,HRTV,etc..) one or two months before it happens.

It would involve 2 tracks (maybe more) like Del Mar and Saratoga. We know for sure that handle would go up but we need to see how much it would go up. This is the only way to get some movement on the subject.

Right now too many people in the industry (Trainers, Owners, Breeders) are living month to month and can't afford to keep going much longer. Suggesting that they lower takeout right now would be met with laughter. It has to be planned and coordinated by HANA.

I don't know what this has to do with synthetic surfaces so I'll get the thread back on track with my feelings about synthetic surfaces.

"Synthetic Surfaces Suck" :)AM,
I saw your poll thread on the class action suit approach. I'm glad to see that someone of your energy, passion, and influence (miesque likes to talk to you ;)) hasn't abandoned the call for action on takeout reform entirely.
Knowing that you've scaled the walls of whaledom, even if only temporarily, gives you a measure of status here that Mickey Minnow bettors will never achieve.:D

However, I think you're ignoring a ready-made situation which won't require the financing that your legal challenge would, assuming it is even valid. As Irish Boy pointed out in that thread, some tracks will have to close, and that's no laughing matter. So I doubt anyone at venues in danger would dismiss an effort that might eventually save some of them.

DMR is not in danger, but is vulnerable right now in a way that a major venue ordinarily would not be.

We have to strike while the iron is hot.

While HANA could indeed be a tremendous asset, IMO they appear tied to a blinkered vision of non-confrontational activity -- programmed to gain them long-term influence among players and other industry participants. That such influence is potentially profitable may be a happy circumstance for its evolving membership. We shall see.

From my perspective, though, such a course would eliminate their effectiveness in achieving reform during my lifetime, and probably that of several racing venues.

fmolf
07-26-2009, 10:49 PM
AM,
I saw your poll thread on the class action suit approach. I'm glad to see that someone of your energy, passion, and influence (miesque likes to talk to you ;)) hasn't abandoned the call for action on takeout reform entirely.
Knowing that you've scaled the walls of whaledom, even if only temporarily, gives you a measure of status here that Mickey Minnow bettors will never achieve.:D

However, I think you're ignoring a ready-made situation which won't require the financing that your legal challenge would, assuming it is even valid. As Irish Boy pointed out in that thread, some tracks will have to close, and that's no laughing matter. So I doubt anyone at venues in danger would dismiss an effort that might eventually save some of them.

DMR is not in danger, but is vulnerable right now in a way that a major venue ordinarily would not be.

We have to strike while the iron is hot.

While HANA could indeed be a tremendous asset, IMO they appear tied to a blinkered vision of non-confrontational activity -- programmed to gain them long-term influence among players and other industry participants. That such influence is potentially profitable may be a happy circumstance for its evolving membership. We shall see.

From my perspective, though, such a course would eliminate their effectiveness in achieving reform during my lifetime, and probably that of several racing venues.
I have not made a bet on any polifornia track's races since the demise of their dirt track racing.Here is all you need to know about what is going on in california...All the leading west coast trainers send trings of horses to stable at saratoga.I do not see any trainers from anywhere shipping in to delmar.

Indulto
07-26-2009, 11:07 PM
I have not made a bet on any polifornia track's races since the demise of their dirt track racing.Here is all you need to know about what is going on in california...All the leading west coast trainers send trings of horses to stable at saratoga.I do not see any trainers from anywhere shipping in to delmar.fmolf,
Your seniority entitles you to a leadership role in this movement. :jump:

ddog
07-27-2009, 11:49 AM
Its absolutely comical. Not only do players hate this surface, but they put their premier meet, Del Mar, in a position where horseplayers cannot use anything they saw at Hollywood with confidence, since the surfaces are completely different. A horse who gets over Hollywood isn't any indicator that he'll like DeL mar.

When you are handicapping Del mar, do you look at videos of horses performances at Hollywood to get a gauge on how they might race at DMR? No, because Cushion and Poly aren't the same things.


syn aside , the current form of horses from Holly being used at DMR will and has always been a ticket to the poorhouse at DMR.

You must look at the two meets as apples and oranges to succeed at DMR in my opinion.

The horses are pointed to DMR by many trainers/owners, that's where they want to win.

There was always a big diff in the surface back in the dirt days between the two tracks.

No fan of syn, but let's keep a little perspective here.

andymays
07-27-2009, 11:55 AM
The surface at Hollywood and the surface at Del Mar are like night and day. Very few will handle both surfaces equally.

Bison
07-27-2009, 01:24 PM
The surface at Hollywood and the surface at Del Mar are like night and day. Very few will handle both surfaces equally.

The bias at Del Mar changes day to day, and for that matter race to race.
Effectively turning into one giant Roulette wheel.

andymays
07-27-2009, 01:27 PM
The bias at Del Mar changes day to day, and for that matter race to race.
Effectively turning into one giant Roulette wheel.

The dump 2 loads of water before the races usually between 11:30 am and 12:30 pm and depending on how hot it gets after that it changes speeds. In my opinion it is less speed favoring as the day progresses. Of course that depends on how many clouds pass over and whether or not the cooler wind is coming in from the Ocean. Just another Head Trip from Old Del Mar!

gm10
07-27-2009, 04:58 PM
The surface at Hollywood and the surface at Del Mar are like night and day. Very few will handle both surfaces equally.

I've looked it up .... here are the stats by "track of the horse's last race". Make of it what you want.

(track .... win %)

AP 7.7%
BM 17.4%
BMF 14.3%
CD 5.6%
CRC 28.6%
DMR 11.8%
EMD 16.7%
FPX 0.0%
GG 14.1%
HOL 11.9%
OSA 4.3%
PLN 10.3%
SA 6.1%
SOL 15.8%
SR 5.6%
STK 7.7%
TUP 0.0%

gm10
07-27-2009, 05:03 PM
I've looked it up .... here are the stats by "track of the horse's last race". Make of it what you want.

(track .... win %)

AP 7.7%
BM 17.4%
BMF 14.3%
CD 5.6%
CRC 28.6%
DMR 11.8%
EMD 16.7%
FPX 0.0%
GG 14.1%
HOL 11.9%
OSA 4.3%
PLN 10.3%
SA 6.1%
SOL 15.8%
SR 5.6%
STK 7.7%
TUP 0.0%

And these are the stats for the "previous surface". Nothing earth shattering here. Yes there is a surface preference, but it's not nearly as strong as some people would have it.

D 8.5%
P 12.0%
T 10.5%

ddog
07-27-2009, 05:42 PM
The dump 2 loads of water before the races usually between 11:30 am and 12:30 pm and depending on how hot it gets after that it changes speeds. In my opinion it is less speed favoring as the day progresses. Of course that depends on how many clouds pass over and whether or not the cooler wind is coming in from the Ocean. Just another Head Trip from Old Del Mar!

you KNOW that Delmar was always debating bias on the old dirt track.
tides,clouds,water,subsurface water,astrology you name it.

andymays
07-27-2009, 07:13 PM
I've looked it up .... here are the stats by "track of the horse's last race". Make of it what you want.

(track .... win %)

AP 7.7%
BM 17.4%
BMF 14.3%
CD 5.6%
CRC 28.6%
DMR 11.8%
EMD 16.7%
FPX 0.0%
GG 14.1%
HOL 11.9%
OSA 4.3%
PLN 10.3%
SA 6.1%
SOL 15.8%
SR 5.6%
STK 7.7%
TUP 0.0%


You can throw stats at me till I die but I will stand by my statement that the Hollywood Park surface and the Del Mar surface are nothing alike. I don't know of any informed person that would say they were even similar!

andymays
07-27-2009, 07:14 PM
you KNOW that Delmar was always debating bias on the old dirt track.
tides,clouds,water,subsurface water,astrology you name it.


You are correct but in the past I would guess that less than 2% of Horseplayers complained about the surface. Now, with the synthetic surface I would put that number at 70%!

Indulto
07-27-2009, 08:04 PM
Originally Posted by Bison
The bias at Del Mar changes day to day, and for that matter race to race.
Effectively turning into one giant Roulette wheel.The dump 2 loads of water before the races usually between 11:30 am and 12:30 pm and depending on how hot it gets after that it changes speeds. In my opinion it is less speed favoring as the day progresses. Of course that depends on how many clouds pass over and whether or not the cooler wind is coming in from the Ocean. Just another Head Trip from Old Del Mar!AM,
I've been advised that refraining from betting DMR to get their takeout lowered may be a legitimate issue, but that I haven’t stated it properly. DMR is a top venue whose product quality has gone down because their synthetic surface isn’t working as advertised. Why should any player pay full price for damaged goods? The quality of the product has been lowered even further by the Fermin flap which puts any disqualification into question.

I'm not comfortable with business analogies, but perhaps others would be. This isn’t like Wal-Mart where you’d be buying the same quality for less. It’s more like a fire sale where you’d be buying something only if it were a bargain.

If it should turn out that the reduced price creates increased demand, then someone will find a way to provide the product less expensively.

andymays
07-27-2009, 08:09 PM
AM,
I've been advised that refraining from betting DMR to get their takeout lowered may be a legitimate issue, but that I haven’t stated it properly. DMR is a top venue whose product quality has gone down because their synthetic surface isn’t working as advertised. Why should any player pay full price for damaged goods? The quality of the product has been lowered even further by the Fermin flap which puts any disqualification into question.

I'm not comfortable with business analogies, but perhaps others would be. This isn’t like Wal-Mart where you’d be buying the same quality for less. It’s more like a fire sale where you’d be buying something only if it were a bargain.

If it should turn out that the reduced price creates increased demand, then someone will find a way to provide the product less expensively.

Saratoga has some ridiculous takeout rates on exotics and I expect they will blow the doors off Del Mar when it comes to handle increase this season. Opening Day at Del Mar had a record crowd on track but overall handle was down 5% (7% if you consider they ran an extra race this year). Monmouth has a 15% take on their pick 4 for Haskell day and nobody's talking about it!

gm10
07-28-2009, 02:17 PM
You can throw stats at me till I die but I will stand by my statement that the Hollywood Park surface and the Del Mar surface are nothing alike. I don't know of any informed person that would say they were even similar!

I'm not disagreeing with you that they are different surfaces, but I'm not sold on the notion that horses perform very differently on different surfaces. Imo, a healthy horse will often usually show the same talent wherever it runs, but the art/science is of course to upgrade or downgrade that talent wrt today's course/surface/going. That upgrade/downgrade is usually not THAT big - as long as you analyze its previous races properly (only looking at Beyer numbers, for example, will never be enough if you want to have an edge - for example, some quantification of its running style might be useful).

I think the whole synthetic debate is way overblown. Yes, there are differences between them just like their are differences between many dirt tracks. But if the argument is that surfaces should play out identically, you'd have to favour turf racing over dirt, because turf courses are much more similar to each other than dirt courses are.

And besides, as others have pointed out here, fields are more bunched on the poly, which is endlessly more exciting for the majority of track visitors who are there to be entertained. Personally I also feel that there are more profitable wagering opportunities when races are less predictable than say a 6F dirt race @ TUP, but that's subjective of course.

andymays
07-28-2009, 02:22 PM
I'm not disagreeing with you that they are different surfaces, but I'm not sold on the notion that horses perform very differently on different surfaces. Imo, a healthy horse will often usually show the same talent wherever it runs, but the art/science is of course to upgrade or downgrade that talent wrt today's course/surface/going. That upgrade/downgrade is usually not THAT big - as long as you analyze its previous races properly (only looking at Beyer numbers, for example, will never be enough if you want to have an edge).

I think the whole synthetic debate is way overblown. Yes, there are differences between them just like their are differences between many dirt tracks. But if the argument is that surfaces should play out identically, you'd have to favour turf racing over dirt, because turf courses are much more similar to each other than dirt courses are.

And besides, as others have pointed out here, fields are more bunched on the poly, which is endlessly more exciting for the many track visitors who are there to be entertained. Personally I also feel that there are more profitable wagering opportunities when races are less predictable than say a 6F dirt race @ TUP, but that's subjective of course.


When we had only Turf and Dirt in the United States we had two distinct and wonderful surfaces. Only a rare few could perform equally well on both.

When we added synthetic into the picture it diminished the quality and integrity of Horse Racing in the United States in my opinion, which I believe is the opinion of the majority of Horseplayers in the U.S.!

gm10
07-28-2009, 02:36 PM
When we had only Turf and Dirt in the United States we had two distinct and wonderful surfaces. Only a rare few could perform equally well on both.

When we added synthetic into the picture it diminished the quality and integrity of Horse Racing in the United States in my opinion, which I believe is the opinion of the majority of Horseplayers in the U.S.!

Perhaps, just like the majority of race players used to think that final times weren't very useful until Beyer proved them wrong.

And if they disagree, they aren't really showing it in their betting. I just looked it up, here are the win % for the betting favourites:

Sprints:

Dirt: 34.1%
Poly: 32.1%
Turf: 32.5%

Routes:

Dirt: 34%
Poly: 33.2%
Turf: 29.9%


I also did the same for the horses who I assign the highest projected speed figure:

Sprints:

Dirt: 29%
Poly: 29.2%
Turf: 25%

Routes:

Dirt: 28.3%
Poly: 27.7%
Turf: 23.5%


I hardly notice any difference between poly and dirt. Turf % are lower, but fields sizes are bigger, so that might be playing there.

andymays
07-28-2009, 02:49 PM
Perhaps, just like the majority of race players used to think that final times weren't very useful until Beyer proved them wrong.

And if they disagree, they aren't really showing it in their betting. I just looked it up, here are the win % for the betting favourites:

Sprints:

Dirt: 34.1%
Poly: 32.1%
Turf: 32.5%

Routes:

Dirt: 34%
Poly: 33.2%
Turf: 29.9%


I also did the same for the horses who I assign the highest projected speed figure:

Sprints:

Dirt: 29%
Poly: 29.2%
Turf: 25%

Routes:

Dirt: 28.3%
Poly: 27.7%
Turf: 23.5%


I hardly notice any difference between poly and dirt. Turf is lower, but fields sizes are bigger, so that might be playing there.


I'm not sure what you're trying to prove to me here. If you're trying to prove that I am benefitting from synthetic surfaces in some way I must have missed it.

I generally don't live and die with Beyer numbers and in fact I don't pay too much attention to them at all. With all the sophisticated programs that are supposed to produce more accurate numbers you would think that the win percentage for favorites would be at 50%! But the quest for the perfect number continues on.

cees with dees
07-28-2009, 03:04 PM
You people make me laugh.
I've been saying from day one that synthetic surfaces are the equivalent to artificial turf. And with so many types of surfaces: Poly, tapeta, cushion, proride, I mean really. And to run the Breeders Cup on a synthetic surface is blaspheme.
We the bettors support everything and to stop betting all synthetic races is the answer to getting back conventional dirt where it ought to be.
If someone told me 5 years ago that Keeneland would have an artificial surface with computerized ping pong balls following the horses on the screen during the race, I'd have laughed them out of town.
Ben

Black Ruby
07-28-2009, 03:08 PM
The last thing horseplayers needed was more surfaces thrown in the handicapping equation. I wish Keeneland had redone their dirt track, put poly where the turf course is. When I go to Kee now, I bet a lot less, and ogle the fillies more, if that's possible.

gm10
07-28-2009, 03:13 PM
I'm not sure what you're trying to prove to me here. If you're trying to prove that I am benefitting from synthetic surfaces in some way I must have missed it.

I generally don't live and die with Beyer numbers and in fact I don't pay too much attention to them at all. With all the sophisticated programs that are supposed to produce more accurate numbers you would think that the win percentage for favorites would be at 50%! But the quest for the perfect number continues on.

Only trying to prove that synthetic surfaces are not very different from dirt or turf surfaces, which you probably hold in higher esteem. They are different just like 2 dirt tracks are never the same.

Not sure if there is a magic number ... I certainly wouldn't believe anyone who told me he or she had it :)

andymays
07-28-2009, 03:19 PM
Only trying to prove that synthetic surfaces are not very different from dirt or turf surfaces, which you probably hold in higher esteem. They are different just like 2 dirt tracks are never the same.

Not sure if there is a magic number ... I certainly wouldn't believe anyone who told me he or she had it :)


I agree that synthetic surfaces vary and so do dirt surfaces but to a lesser degree in my opinion. The Pro Ride at Santa Anita is much closer to a turf surface than a dirt surface!

gm10
07-28-2009, 03:21 PM
You people make me laugh.
I've been saying from day one that synthetic surfaces are the equivalent to artificial turf. And with so many types of surfaces: Poly, tapeta, cushion, proride, I mean really. And to run the Breeders Cup on a synthetic surface is blaspheme.
We the bettors support everything and to stop betting all synthetic races is the answer to getting back conventional dirt where it ought to be.
If someone told me 5 years ago that Keeneland would have an artificial surface with computerized ping pong balls following the horses on the screen during the race, I'd have laughed them out of town.
Ben

Hold the phone. Dirt tracks are made of clay. How is that a natural running surface for a horse? You can only call it "conventional" because it's been around for a while.

gm10
07-28-2009, 03:29 PM
I agree that synthetic surfaces vary and so do dirt surfaces but to a lesser degree in my opinion. The Pro Ride at Santa Anita is much closer to a turf surface than a dirt surface!

I really don't think so. I managed to walk on the SA track last year, feel it, smell it, pretend I had four legs, a tail and weighed a ton. It is nothing like a turf track, it is much softer for example. But there is no doubt that horses with a certain acceleration are suited by both. I have my ideas on why but that's not relevant here.

I've been to quite a few synthetic venues. There was one in England that closed down a few months ago (Great Leighs). That surface was like fresh snow, I've never seen anything like it. But the track played out very logically imo. The horses' hoofs got sucked into the surface (unlike SA) and horses couldn't do all that much with their late kick.

Bruddah
07-28-2009, 03:58 PM
If I ran a business, any business, I would have to damn sure listen to my customers needs and perceptions of my products. I could have the best widget known to man but, if man didn't like it, I couldn't insist man use it or buy it. But that's the real world. Horse Racing mgmt and "Blue Bloods" don't live in the real world. They live in fantasy land. A land where they can do as they please.

If you can't see the correlation here, you have to be blind or crazy. If the customer (horse players) don't stop betting synthetic tracks, they don't care how much the man bitches and moans. Vote by not betting synthetic venues. The plain and simple way to get your opinion heard. Enough said on this subject. By the way, I don't play synthetic surfaces. It doesn't matter if I am right or wrong for my reasons not to play. I don't like them, I don't win on them, therfore all the other ifs, ands, and butts don't matter. :bang:

Steve 'StatMan'
07-28-2009, 04:04 PM
Dirt tracks vary widely! Hawthorne is nearly all sand. Isn't Belmont known as Big Sandy. Churchill Downs is mostly sand - it dries out much faster. The west coast dirt tracks used to have clay in it. Last I looked Monmouth's dirt track had a darker color indictative of more clay and/or other stuff than highly sand based tracks.

I never regularly bet SoCal, but when they were both "Dirt" tracks, most stuff I read talked about how different Del Mar was from Hollywood and Santa Anita, and attributed it to so many things, including the nearby ocean and it being closer to underneath the ground at Del Mar, etc. They also once had differerences with the banking of the turns, etc.

I haven't had time to delve into the book yet, but Bill Finley's in his book "Betting Synthetic Surfaces" and in his seminar at AP which I attended, contends that Synthetic Tracks are not dirt and not turf, but that of the 2 types, they were more similar to dirt than turf, except that it does tend to favor early speed types. He also suggested that versitile horses that run well on dirt and turf tended to do fine in general on synthetics, but that horse that were good on turf but poor on dirt were likely to run poorly on synthetics - mentioned, as I often wondered, where this legend/myth of 'turf horses loving synthetics' and 'synthetics are just like turf' came from.

ryesteve
07-28-2009, 04:07 PM
I often wondered, where this legend/myth of 'turf horses loving synthetics' and 'synthetics are just like turf' came from.I figured it was because the way the races are run made them seem similar, not necessarily studying the performances of individual horses as they move from surface to surface.

Steve 'StatMan'
07-28-2009, 04:31 PM
I figured it was because the way the races are run made them seem similar, not necessarily studying the performances of individual horses as they move from surface to surface.

Yeah, I sense some of it came from that. They race may be run similar, but the horse may or may not like the surface, or be able to run up to those speeds and intervals on that differing surface. The races shapes may be similar, but who can run those races on the differing surface may very well be different.

I also wondered if, since the latest wave of synthetics came from Europe, esp. GB, maybe people just assumed that since they are very big on grass racing over there, that this new surface must somehow be compatiable with their horses that are bred for grass.

gm10
07-28-2009, 04:34 PM
If I ran a business, any business, I would have to damn sure listen to my customers needs and perceptions of my products. I could have the best widget known to man but, if man didn't like it, I couldn't insist man use it or buy it. But that's the real world. Horse Racing mgmt and "Blue Bloods" don't live in the real world. They live in fantasy land. A land where they can do as they please.

If you can't see the correlation here, you have to be blind or crazy. If the customer (horse players) don't stop betting synthetic tracks, they don't care how much the man bitches and moans. Vote by not betting synthetic venues. The plain and simple way to get your opinion heard. Enough said on this subject. By the way, I don't play synthetic surfaces. It doesn't matter if I am right or wrong for my reasons not to play. I don't like them, I don't win on them, therfore all the other ifs, ands, and butts don't matter. :bang:

I think the majority of customers don't want to see horses breaking-down, and prefer watching exciting finishes. If poly delivers on the first point is not 100% sure yet, but the second point is def. achieved.

But of course it depends on where revenue comes from. It would be interesting to know how much casual visitors contribute to the industry, compared with let's say more dedicated gamblers.

andymays
07-28-2009, 05:35 PM
I think the majority of customers don't want to see horses breaking-down, and prefer watching exciting finishes. If poly delivers on the first point is not 100% sure yet, but the second point is def. achieved.

But of course it depends on where revenue comes from. It would be interesting to know how much casual visitors contribute to the industry, compared with let's say more dedicated gamblers.


http://www.drf.com/news/article/105887.html

Rider hurt, horse euthanized!

Exercise rider Jorge Soto was taken to Scripps Hospital in nearby La Jolla on Tuesday morning after being injured when his mount, the filly Maggie and Hopie, suffered a catastrophic fracture in the homestretch during a workout.
Soto was complaining of shoulder pain, according to Jack Carava, the trainer of Maggie and Hopie.

"It didn't seem bad, but he was complaining of shoulder pain, so he went to the hospital to be examined," Carava said.

The accident happened just before the mid-morning renovation break. Because the ambulance was away from the track transporting Soto, the track's reopening for training was delayed, for safety's sake, until the ambulance returned. The track normally reopens just after 8 a.m, but it was not until 8:25 a.m. that horses were allowed back on the track.
Maggie and Hopie, 4, most recently had won a $25,000 claiming race at Hollywood Park on July 4. Carava said she had to be euthanized because of her injuries.

Maggie and Hopie is the fifth horse to be euthanized at Del Mar in the past 10 days. Three were the result of incidents in races, two in workouts.

so.cal.fan
07-28-2009, 06:14 PM
I've spoken to a friend who is with a major stable in So. Cal.
There are as many or more injuries, this is after a few seasons on them.
The injuries are different, but none the less, very serious....as Andy Mays points out.....5 horses euthanized at Del Mar, so far.....this is quite alarming.

andymays
07-28-2009, 06:16 PM
I've spoken to a friend who is with a major stable in So. Cal.
There are as many or more injuries, this is after a few seasons on them.
The injuries are different, but none the less, very serious....as Andy Mays points out.....5 horses euthanized at Del Mar, so far.....this is quite alarming.


What people fail to realize, I think, is that when the first put them in they lied about the injury and fatality statistics.

The stuff wears out and I would be very interested to know if Del Mar spent the money to recondition the material (I've heard close to 100k but I'm not sure).

andymays
07-29-2009, 02:29 PM
Art Wilson article:

http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2009/07/speed-is-king-again-so-far-at.html


Excerpt:

No, it has not been a good first week for Del Mar's synthetic Polytrack surface, seeing as though there have been four fatalities -- two during live racing and two during morning workouts -- dating back to Sunday, July 19. An additional breakdown on the turf during afternoon racing makes it five horses total that have had to be euthanized so far this summer.

Those are the type of numbers that led to these mandated artificial tracks in the first place. Del Mar's stats in 2006 concerning breakdowns were dreadful, setting into motion the move by the California Horse Racing Board -- led by then chairman Richard Shapiro -- to force all major California race tracks to install synthetic surfaces by the start of the 2008 racing calendar.

While the number of catastrophic injuries is up, so too are the number of gate-to-wire winners at the seaside oval. Here are some surprising numbers through the first five days of Del Mar racing, especially when you consider that speed horses were up against it in 2007 and '08:

46zilzal
07-29-2009, 03:58 PM
A.

While the number of catastrophic injuries is up, so too are the number of gate-to-wire winners at the seaside oval. Here are some surprising numbers through the first five days of Del Mar racing, especially when you consider that speed horses were up against it in 2007 and '08:
When I was in Europe there was a great article about Great Leighsin the Racing Post, regarding the newest English race course and how all the 'regulars' said to leave it alone for a year unil the surface matured (They called it bedding in) and as it packed down it would get faster.

andymays
07-29-2009, 04:38 PM
Jeff Nahil from North County Times:

Excerpt:

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/07/29/sports/horseracing/zdcca5ca01f0bae2e88257602006c9e8b.txt

DEL MAR ---- Officials of the Del Mar Thoroughbred Club are concerned that the number of horses euthanized at the week-old meet has risen to six.

Excerpt:

On Wednesday, officials confirmed Peanut Ridge suffered an injury to its right front leg in a race last Thursday and was euthanized on Friday.

Three horses have been euthanized after workouts in the morning and three others died after injuries while racing. Five of the six injuries have occurred on the Polytrack. The other injury came on the turf course.

gm10
07-29-2009, 05:38 PM
When I was in Europe there was a great article about Great Leighsin the Racing Post, regarding the newest English race course and how all the 'regulars' said to leave it alone for a year unil the surface matured (They called it bedding in) and as it packed down it would get faster.

well it's certainly been packed in ... the track has been shut down!! what did you think of it??

andymays
07-29-2009, 06:01 PM
Filly Life is Sweet won't run in San Diego Cap

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/jul/29/delmar4web122740/?sports/horseracing&zIndex=140363

Excerpt:

Trainer John Shirreffs Wednesday morning confirmed a decision he said had been all but finalized over the weekend.

Owner Marty Wygod of Rancho Santa Fe said the decision was based on concerns over the Storm Cat filly's affinity for the Polytrack racing surface here.

fmolf
07-29-2009, 06:38 PM
obviously the chrb was mislead when it came to the amount of maintenance and cost of maintenance.Anyone who thinks this racing surface comes anywhere near dirt is not paying attention.the delmar meet is a joke and a shame that such a beautiful, elegant racetrack has been ruined.I belive that all the california tracks will just continue to add sand and other natural materials till they have a hybrid type track...or one that is mostly dirt ,clay and sand.Look at what is happening in baseball and football the move is away from synthetic turf and back to natural grass.Do not mess with mother nature!

Space Monkey
07-29-2009, 07:52 PM
When synthetics first hit the scene it was hell to handicap. But as time has gone on I don't see any difference in them and I don't change my handicapping style one bit. I treat synthetics the same way I treat turf races. If I see multiple horses with no surface form that I consider a ? in my picks, I just pass on the race. There's enough synthetic form now for that scenario to be the exception instead of the rule. I think the complaining from handicappers was justified early on, but not now. Quit belly aching and just deal with it.

I do believe the harm that it is doing is at the top level of the game. We're not seeing a Zenyatta/Rachel matchup because of it and many other trainers are skipping big races due to the surface. I'm a big fan of Jess Jackson, but I think hes wrong to blame Curlin's defeat in last years BC on the surface and not running RA on it because of that race.

andymays
07-30-2009, 05:01 AM
Six Catastrophic Breakdowns at Del Mar | BloodHorse.com

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/51896/six-catastrophic-breakdowns-at-del-mar?source=rss

Excerpt:

Craig Fravel, Del Mar’s executive vice president, said Del Mar re-graded its surface since last year. He said they tested the track before the meet to ensure that the Polytrack ingredients, such as the wax, were the same as the previous year.

Does anyone out there know if it’s possible for the wax and other ingredients to be exactly the same as a prior year without doing anything to it?

andymays
07-30-2009, 03:44 PM
This from Hank Wesch of the San Diego Union July 30th

Andy,
Yes, there was another fatal breakdown. A 6-year-old gelding named Pocosin's Game Boy recently claimed out of his 25th career start by Jack Carava from Doug O'Neill fractured a right hind ankle. Information on morning breakdowns is dutifully reported to me by the Del Mar publicity department each day when I get to the track because they know that I'll have either been made aware of it on my morning stops on the backside or get a call or an email from people who are concerned and watchful like you.
In regards to your question earlier this week. I am told that Del Mar does whatever is necessary in the upkeep of the surface during the offseason without regard to cost.
Thank you for your email.
Hank Wesch

rwwupl
07-30-2009, 06:16 PM
This from Hank Wesch of the San Diego Union July 30th

Andy,
Yes, there was another fatal breakdown. A 6-year-old gelding named Pocosin's Game Boy recently claimed out of his 25th career start by Jack Carava from Doug O'Neill fractured a right hind ankle. Information on morning breakdowns is dutifully reported to me by the Del Mar publicity department each day when I get to the track because they know that I'll have either been made aware of it on my morning stops on the backside or get a call or an email from people who are concerned and watchful like you.
In regards to your question earlier this week. I am told that Del Mar does whatever is necessary in the upkeep of the surface during the offseason without regard to cost.
Thank you for your email.
Hank Wesch


Andy,

This is bad news ,but it is news. There must be transparency,which has not always been of late. I do feel better that there are still many people who devote so much to the game we all love.

Thanks,Andy

andymays
07-30-2009, 06:24 PM
Andy,

This is bad news ,but it is news. There must be transparency,which has not always been of late. I do feel better that there are still many people who devote so much to the game we all love.

Thanks,Andy


To tell you the truth it makes me sick for the Horses and the Connections of the ones that go down.

As for Track management and the CHRB who have lied to us in the past and are responsible for the mess we have today I hope they have a very hard time. They have caused a lot of misery for animals and people that could have been avoided.

They could have tried synthetics on one California Track and or changed the bases of Santa Anita and Del Mar. That makes too much sense though!

andymays
07-30-2009, 10:07 PM
DEL MAR: Trainer loses second horse in three days by Jeff Nahill of the North County Times

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/07/30/sports/horseracing/z186dd6a2769ab17688257603006d19e2.txt

Excerpt:

The rash of fatalities comes with the presence of members from the National Thoroughbred Racing Association's Safety and Integrity Alliance, who are touring the grounds to see if Del Mar should receive accreditation. The goal of the alliance is to establish national uniform standards in the areas of safety and integrity.

"It ain't the track's fault," said Del Mar Thoroughbred Club president Joe Harper of the fatalities. "There's not much we can control in the mornings. We can control it a little bit in the afternoons, but there are a lot of sore horses."

They didn't get sore running and training on dirt did they Joe?

fmolf
07-30-2009, 10:23 PM
DEL MAR: Trainer loses second horse in three days by Jeff Nahill of the North County Times

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/07/30/sports/horseracing/z186dd6a2769ab17688257603006d19e2.txt

Excerpt:

The rash of fatalities comes with the presence of members from the National Thoroughbred Racing Association's Safety and Integrity Alliance, who are touring the grounds to see if Del Mar should receive accreditation. The goal of the alliance is to establish national uniform standards in the areas of safety and integrity.

"It ain't the track's fault," said Del Mar Thoroughbred Club president Joe Harper of the fatalities. "There's not much we can control in the mornings. We can control it a little bit in the afternoons, but there are a lot of sore horses."

They didn't get sore running and training on dirt did they Joe?
Mr Harper is surely speaking in jest!What is the difference with the surface from morn to afternoon?If i were a socal handicapper and player i would resent this guy talking to me like i am some kind of moron.

andymays
07-30-2009, 10:37 PM
Mr Harper is surely speaking in jest!What is the difference with the surface from morn to afternoon?If i were a socal handicapper and player i would resent this guy talking to me like i am some kind of moron.


The big question is whether or not the so called Safety Alliance will certify Del Mar when all this is happening while they inspect the place. How the hell can they?