What's going on at Hollywood Park surface? Another Horse had to be put down.

[Igeteven]

Another break down today in the stretch run.

1. Are they maintaining the race track to professional standards.

2. Are they spending money for the best surface to replace what ever they have to replace.

In the last few days, several horse on the run have broke down in the final quarter of a mile.



What the hell is going on?

[Stillriledup]

Maybe the SO Cal TB population is slowly getting worn down from training on these surfaces and the breakdowns are coming out in the wash.

So much for synthetics being safer.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

There have been 3 very bad breakdowns from the 18th November meeting onwards. All 3 happened to horses on the rails. So you have to wonder if there is an issue with the going on the rails????

I don't think they should race there again until they can be sure the track is safe. 3 bad breakdowns in a very short space of time could be coincidence but it could also be a problem with the track

[RichieP]

I don't think they should race there again until they can be sure the track is safe. 3 bad breakdowns in a very short space of time could be coincidence but it could also be a problem with the track

In the limited time I am working races these days I focus on and like the poly surface.

Having said that I HAVE to agree 100% with this post.

Woodbine has a nice card :)

Debussy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5A4CkUAazI&feature=PlayList&p=B5C1F18154F519C4&index=0

[andymays]

Synthetic surfaces need to be replaced every two years to maintain the original specifications.

[toussaud]

I was just going to post something about this. this is getting crazy.

[PaceAdvantage]

It might also be a terrible clustering of terrible events...completely random in nature.

You know, like the kind that led to synthetics being installed in the first place...

[WinterTriangle]

I'm not denying surface considerations in CA, but its not exactly a scientific approach being applied here, causation correlation thing.

Can somebody point me to the location of the centralized uniform system for tracking and reporting deaths/injuries at racing facilities?

Preferably, broken down into categories, which includes both racing and training.

And then further broken down for breeding, racing age, distance of race, medications/drugs, surfaces (composition, as well as characterization {fast/firm vs. heavy/soft} and maintenance schedule), track design, fitness of horses, etc. and/or a combination of all or any?

Otherwise, isn't everyone is just going to pick their own boogey man?

Even with (complete) compilation of data, that data would have to be studied and analyzed. With no accurate or centralized compilation, I feel it's conjecture to even have a conversation about it.

[tzipi]

Del Mar had more a bunch more breakdowns that Saratoga.

[andymays]

I'm not denying surface considerations in CA, but its not exactly a scientific approach being applied here, causation correlation thing.

Can somebody point me to the location of the centralized uniform system for tracking and reporting deaths/injuries at racing facilities?

Preferably, broken down into categories, which includes both racing and training.

And then further broken down for breeding, racing age, distance of race, medications/drugs, surfaces (composition, as well as characterization {fast/firm vs. heavy/soft} and maintenance schedule), track design, fitness of horses, etc. and/or a combination of all or any?

Otherwise, isn't everyone is just going to pick their own boogey man?

Even with (complete) compilation of data, that data would have to be studied and analyzed. With no accurate or centralized compilation, I feel it's conjecture to even have a conversation about it.


You can't compare new surfaces of dirt or synthetic with new bases to anything. The new bases are the key with dirt. 40 and 50 year old bases were the problem with dirt.

Synthetic material wears out. What don't people get about that? Like a new pair of jeans wear out. They need to be replaced every couple of years.

Accurate data on fatalities hasn't been kept until about a year ago and again you are comparing fatalities on a surface with a new base to one with a 40 year old base.

The studies that have been done say there are more hind end injuries on synthetic surfaces and that's with new bases.

The hoof impact study says that there is 40% less vibration or whatever because they tested it on a new synthetic surface. Like Del Mar 2007 vs. Del Mar 2009. Hollywood was fine when it was new and now it's not. If they tested the hoof impact deal on Hollywood when it was new it would test great. If they test it now it's crap. They manipulate the numbers. Again what doesn't anyone understand about that?

For over two years now we've had TVG and HRTV promoting this junk and people buy it. How many recent articles have positive stuff to say about this junk? In the first year all we heard about was how great it is. It's not even close to the claims.

[gm10]

The Hollywood surface is not like any of the other synthetic surfaces. It's very speed-favouring, and it doesn't surprise me that horses are breaking down on it. I think they are doing something to it to make it run like a dirt track.

[andymays]

The Hollywood surface is not like any of the other synthetic surfaces. It's very speed-favouring, and it doesn't surprise me that horses are breaking down on it. I think they are doing something to it to make it run like a dirt track.


They've been adding sand and dirt to it for the last year because they don't want to spend the money to replace the matierial. Same with Del Mar this year. It wears out and if they don't replace it this is what happens. The surfaces lose their cushion.

[statepierback]

My guess and {it can be only that}is the cause is in part to the surface changing every three months. The horse goes from Pro-ride to Cushion to Poly in southern California. Each track hits the animals body in a different way. Creating stress at different angles could cause these breakdowns. Sort of like working out with barbells, then dumbells ,then machines. They all hit the joints and muscles in a different way. In any event there will always be breakdowns even if the track surface is the safest it can be. There are many other factors to be considered also. Its a shame when the breakdowns happen but the only sure way to prevent it is to stop racing altogether.

[cj]

The Hollywood surface is not like any of the other synthetic surfaces. It's very speed-favouring, and it doesn't surprise me that horses are breaking down on it. I think they are doing something to it to make it run like a dirt track.

Then how do you explain the Delmar meet?

[Canarsie]

Who can blame Jess Jackson for not running on this stuff and I'm not taking anything away from Zenyatta.

My opinion is that it's probably the track. If my memory serves me right Woodbine and Keeneland don't have these issue on a constant basis.

The sad thing is it breaks my heart when a horse goes down no matter where it is.

[gm10]

Then how do you explain the Delmar meet?

From what I hear the surface was very uneven and full of holes.
I don't think this is the problem with HOL - but I'm not an expert.

[GMB@BP]

Del Mar had more a bunch more breakdowns that Saratoga.

Can you provide the numbers, not that I don't believe you but I am interested in quantifying "bunch more"

[FenceBored]

Can you provide the numbers, not that I don't believe you but I am interested in quantifying "bunch more"

Undetailed- Del Mar had 13 between racing and training, Saratoga had less than 6. I can think of two on the turf, and one in training (IFinallyMadeIt). I want to say there might have been one or two more, but don't hold me to it.

[ddog]

explain Hawthorne - Delta Downs , are they pro-ride?

3 breakdowns - Hawthorne that would be a great day!

:D

[tzipi]

Just in the first 10 days at Del Mar they had 6 breakdowns,split between the polytrack races and morning workouts on the polytracks.
ALL six breakdowns were from six different barns.

[tzipi]

Just in the first 10 days at Del Mar they had 6 breakdowns,split between the polytrack races and morning workouts on the polytracks.
ALL six breakdowns were from six different barns.

Also just to add to my post for some who asked for the numbers. As on Sept 4th. Del Mar-11 Breakdowns. Saratoga-1 breakdown(on turf)

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2009/09/04/2009-09-04_the_day_at_the_races.html

[joanied]

All these break downs make me sick...and if it's true that they are too cheap to replace whatever crap it is that needs replacing every couple of years and put horses & riders at great risk...then they all need to be held accountable...
it is so f****ing obvious that the synthetic surfaces are, for the most part, NOT what everyone thought they'd be...
good old DIRT tracks with excellent, well maintained bases are all that is needed to protect both horse & rider...IMO.

[Igeteven]

Del Mar surface is the worst track in the United States in my opinion, I think they have the most break downs of all the major tracks.


Why on earth does anyone bet there is beyond me.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Del Mar surface is the worst track in the United States...

:rolleyes:

Why would you possibly actually get more than the usual one person to agree with you on something and then make a statement that no sane person could agree with? The last thing that I would want to do is defend that junk they run on there, but having been to a few racetracks in the United States, you force me to do so.

I know of a few traditional dirt surfaces we could trek off to that might open your eyes... some of them even have poles and breakaway rails.

Where's the emoticon for jarring someone back to consciousness?

[Igeteven]

Check how many horse died running on the track and got hurt , taken to the barn and later put down.

It's crap, nothing more.

[gm10]

Check how many horse died running on the track and got hurt , taken to the barn and later put down.

It's crap, nothing more.

If I'm not mistaken, this happened on the old surface as well. There are probably some underlying factors here. Drugs, bad track management, bad trainers ... ?

[PaceAdvantage]

If I'm not mistaken, this happened on the old surface as well.Yes, it did...however, back in the day, one of the main thrusts of those pushing this change to synthetics was how much safer the synths would be for horse and rider compared to those mean, nasty, meat-grinding dirt tracks.

[andymays]

If I'm not mistaken, this happened on the old surface as well. There are probably some underlying factors here. Drugs, bad track management, bad trainers ... ?


The types of catasrophic breakdowns at Hollywood Park where horses are going on to win or run well and break both front legs with no warning were very rare on dirt. They are much more common on this Hollywood Park synthetic surface.

[senortout]

The types of catasrophic breakdowns at Hollywood Park where horses are going on to win or run well and break both front legs with no warning were very rare on dirt. They are much more common on this Hollywood Park synthetic surface.

Could we have some opinions on this thread as to the quality of the fields, at each of the Ca. major tracks?

I would rate them in this manner, to start off

Santa Anita, Main meet
Hollywood Park
Oak Tree meet
Del Mar
Golden Gate
Fair tracks (all combined)

So, I reason that the cheaper stock would tend to break down more often.
This is unsound theory of course, but isn't it somewhat reasonable to imagine that the more expensive stock would be handled with more care, as there is often a great deal of money invested therein?

[andymays]

Could we have some opinions on this thread as to the quality of the fields, at each of the Ca. major tracks?

I would rate them in this manner, to start off

Santa Anita, Main meet
Hollywood Park
Oak Tree meet
Del Mar
Golden Gate
Fair tracks (all combined)

So, I reason that the cheaper stock would tend to break down more often.
This is unsound theory of course, but isn't it somewhat reasonable to imagine that the more expensive stock would be handled with more care, as there is often a great deal of money invested therein?


From what I'm seeing it's the younger horses who are going down.

Remember this from John Shirreffs:

http://horseracing.bloginky.com/2009/10/06/shirreffs-running-on-synthetics-like-running-on-velcro/

Excerpt:

California-based trainer John Shirreffs, who conditions undefeated champion Zenyatta, has long been a vocal opponent of synthetic tracks and, during a national teleconference today, he detailed why he feels the surface does more harm than good in developing young prospects.

“I personally hate synthetics,” Shirreffs said. “I’m more into developing young horses and I find that young horses really don’t like training on synthetics. I don’t know if you can imagine training on Velcro. When the foot lands, it doesn’t slide, it sticks to the ground. Depending on how synthetic the surface is, the horse can’t rotate the foot into the track and push off.

“Imagine running around flat-footed all the time without getting up on your toes and pushing off,” Shirreffs continued. “That’s probably how it would feel to a human.”

[joanied]

From what I'm seeing it's the younger horses who are going down.

Remember this from John Shirreffs:

http://horseracing.bloginky.com/2009/10/06/shirreffs-running-on-synthetics-like-running-on-velcro/

Excerpt:

California-based trainer John Shirreffs, who conditions undefeated champion Zenyatta, has long been a vocal opponent of synthetic tracks and, during a national teleconference today, he detailed why he feels the surface does more harm than good in developing young prospects.

“I personally hate synthetics,” Shirreffs said. “I’m more into developing young horses and I find that young horses really don’t like training on synthetics. I don’t know if you can imagine training on Velcro. When the foot lands, it doesn’t slide, it sticks to the ground. Depending on how synthetic the surface is, the horse can’t rotate the foot into the track and push off.

“Imagine running around flat-footed all the time without getting up on your toes and pushing off,” Shirreffs continued. “That’s probably how it would feel to a human.”

I was going to mention this...that the horses have no slide at all on the synthetic, which causes a huge amount of pressure..the Vlecro example is perfect.
Good post, andymays!

[Igeteven]

good post andy

[andymays]

I was going to mention this...that the horses have no slide at all on the synthetic, which causes a huge amount of pressure..the Vlecro example is perfect.
Good post, andymays!


Posting this stuff only seems to matter to a few people like yourself. :ThmbUp:

Many others close their eyey and choose to ignore! :eek: :rolleyes:

[Show Me the Wire]

I am inclined to agree with senortout. It seems the lower level horse are breaking down like yesterday's low level claimer for nw2l. There is an inherent soundness question, especially with young horses. Young horses', 3 year olds, have soundness problems if they are racing at this low level.

These horses need to be protected too and should be subjected to a bit more scrutiny by the track vet, especially the young ones.

[andymays]

I am inclined to agree with senortout. It seems the lower level horse are breaking down like yesterday's low level claimer for nw2l. There is an inherent soundness question, especially with young horses. Young horses', 3 year olds, have soundness problems if they are racing at this low level.

These horses need to be protected too and should be subjected to a bit more scrutiny by the track vet, especially the young ones.


Beginning this year they started inspecting them way more in the mornings and on the way to the gate. That's why there have been quite a few late scratches on the track going to the gate.

Young horses should not be unsound to the point where they snap both legs and the neck with the lead in the stretch. That's the Hollywood park surface and it seems to happen in nearly the same spots on the track. There is no cushion left in the cushion track. The material needs to be replaced every two years to maintain its integrity.. All of it!

[Show Me the Wire]

I am not saying the track isn't a contributting factor, if the horse is unsound.

I don't think this rash of break downs is solely due to the track. Usually, when the track is solely responsible for break downs it is due to uneveness or holes in the track. Given the low level type horses breaking down it is more than likely a combination of unsoundness and the surface or just undetected unsoundness.

BTW I am sure the horse didn't break its neck while running. Horses break their necks from the fall, when they fall forward on any racing surface, including dirt.

[andymays]

I am not saying the track isn't a contributting factor, if the horse is unsound.

I don't think this rash of break downs is solely due to the track. Usually, when the track is solely responsible for break downs it is due to uneveness or holes in the track. Given the low level type horses breaking down it is more than likely a combination of unsoundness and the surface or just undetected unsoundness.

BTW I am sure the horse didn't break its neck while running. Horses break their necks from the fall, when they fall forward on any racing surface, including dirt.


These types of catastrophic breakdowns rarely occured on the dirt at Hollywood Park but they happen with regularity on the now old cushion track. The Jockeys have no time to react when that happens. I believe the horse I'm talking about was a 2yo first timer from the Mitchell barn (ridden by Gomez) and it happened a few weeks ago. Something similar happened in the last race on Wednesday.

[Show Me the Wire]

Your recall is faulty. Bonnie Brown Eyes started before on Oct. 14 for a tag of 28K, same as the most recent race. A young horse starting twice for 28k claiming price, indicates a soundness problem. A problem that came to light during a race, while being pushed for everything, in order to win.

[andymays]

Your recall is faulty. Bonnie Brown Eyes started before on Oct. 14 for a tag of 28K, same as the most recent race. A young horse starting twice for 28k claiming price, indicates a soundness problem. A problem that came to light during a race, while being pushed for everything, in order to win.


I stand corrected on the number of starts but she was lightly raced nonetheless. Running for a 28k claiming price doesn't always indicate a soundness problem. With young horses it's usually an ability problem! ;)

[Show Me the Wire]

I stand corrected on the number of starts but she was lightly raced nonetheless. Running for a 28k claiming price doesn't always indicate a soundness problem. With young horses it's usually an ability problem! ;)

The bottom level tag is a pretty good indication of unsoundness, as the connections did not even want to waste one start to assess ability at a higher level or at least to get higher odds on the next start, as it is rumored the Mitchell barn is a betting barn. Hmmm a betting barn missing an opportunity to darken form, could unsoundness be a major factor influencing that decision? I will leave that to your imagination.

[andymays]

The bottom level tag is a pretty good indication of unsoundness, as the connections did not even want to waste one start to assess ability at a higher level or at least to get higher odds on the next start, as it is rumored the Mitchell barn is a betting barn. Hmmm a betting barn missing an opportunity to darken form, could unsoundness be a major factor influencing that decision? I will leave that to your imagination.


So maiden 5k and 8k horses should be .......................................

[Show Me the Wire]

Synthetic surfaces need to be replaced every two years to maintain the original specifications.

This is the real issue, the maintenance or lack of it. You can't blame the aws for the break downs if there is faulty maintenance of the surface. If the track owner is failing to maintain a proper racing surface that is an operational decision where, as another poster has opined, the entity is balancing risk of injury versus economic harm.

This is not a surface versus surface issue, but an economic issue deciding to risk horse and human life through inadequate safety measures being taken.

[Show Me the Wire]

So maiden 5k and 8k horses should be .......................................

avoided.

BTW how does this question relate to my suggestion why a betting barn would pass up an opportunity to darken form for a better score?

[andymays]

This is the real issue, the maintenance or lack of it. You can't blame the aws for the break downs if there is faulty maintenance of the surface. If the track owner is failing to maintain a proper racing surface that is an operational decision where, as another poster has opined, the entity is balancing risk of injury versus economic harm.

This is not a surface versus surface issue, but an economic issue deciding to risk horse and human life through inadequate safety measures being taken.


They don't know how to maintain it. How long should we experiment while people are betting and horses are having new and unusual physical problems.

I guess what you may not be understanding is that the synthetic material degrades and breaks down from weather, usage, and maintenance. It reaches a point where the surface needs to be replaced not simply maintained.

[46zilzal]

A significant portion of the Holly track was resurfaced

[Show Me the Wire]

They don't know how to maintain it. How long should we experiment while people are betting and horses are having new and unusual physical problems.

I guess what you may not be understanding is that the synthetic material degrades and breaks down from weather, usage, and maintenance. It reaches a point where the surface needs to be replaced not simply maintained.

I am not using maintenance in the narrow meaning of harrowing, watering, and evening out.

Replacing the surface is proper maintenance. They are not replacing the whole infra structure. It is common for dirt surfaces to be scraped up and replaced, that is called proper maintenance.

[andymays]

I am not using maintenance in the narrow meaning of harrowing, watering, and evening out.

Replacing the surface is proper maintenance. They are not replacing the whole infra structure. It is common for dirt surfaces to be scraped up and replaced, that is called proper maintenance.


If you could see me I'm throwing my hands up in the air! ;)

What exactly has the synthetic surface at Hollywood Park (others aside) done for racing there? Keep in mind it almost never rains. ;) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pyC7WnvLT4 :ThmbUp:


Is it easier to maintain?

Is it less expensive to maintain?

Are there less biases?

Is it safer?

Do we have bigger fields because of the cushion track?

[Show Me the Wire]

Speaking of throwing hands up in air. Now you have come full circle decrying the decision to install aws.

Is it safer I don't know, hasn't been around long enough to evaluate and is not being properly maintained at Hollywood..

Nothing is going to promote full fields except more horses or fewer racing dates (races). I think the the thought was aws would increase the number of starts for each horse, making full fields a theoretical possibility.

As far as bias, I say yes. I think aws' play fairer than speed bias dirt tracks.

Maintenance, I don't know if it is easier or more economical in the long run.

[andymays]

Speaking of throwing hands up in air. Now you have come full circle decrying the decision to install aws.

Is it safer I don't know, hasn't been around long enough to evaluate and is not being properly maintained at Hollywood..

Nothing is going to promote full fields except more horses or fewer racing dates (races). I think the the thought was aws would increase the number of starts for each horse, making full fields a theoretical possibility.

As far as bias, I say yes. I think aws' play fairer than speed bias dirt tracks.

Maintenance, I don't know if it is easier or more economical in the long run.


Hollywood is speed biased.

One of the reason for installing synthetic surfaces is that we would have full fields all day every day because they were so safe. Sorry, Not True! ;)

[Show Me the Wire]

Hollywood is speed biased.

One of the reason for installing synthetic surfaces is that we would have full fields all day every day becasue they were so safe. Sorry, Not True! ;)


Yes Hollywood as of now is speed bias, but I was talking on the whole.

How can you fairly and reasonably say on the whole that a properly maintained aws is not safer? There is not enough data to support any position yet.

BTW, I thought from reading some of your posts, that the real reason for the aws mandate was economic gain for well -connected persons. I am not saying this isn't true, as this would not be the first time some product was used due to undue influence.

[andymays]

Yes Hollywood as of now is speed bias, but I was talking on the whole.

How can you fairly and reasonably say on the whole that a properly maintained aws is not safer? There is not enough data to support any position yet.


There is no such thing as a properly maintained synthetic surface because the more you maintain it the more it breaks down. The machinery that runs over it and "maintains" it is part of the problem. Was Arlington 2009 like Arlington 2007? Was Del Mar 2009 like Del Mar 2007? Is Hollywood 2009 like Hollywood 2007? Why is that?

It needs to be totally replaced every two years to keep it's cushion.

[Show Me the Wire]

There is no such thing as a properly maintained synthetic surface because the more you maintain it the more it breaks down.

It needs to be totally replaced every two years to keep it's cushion.

:bang: :bang: then it should be replaced, just like the tracks maintain the dirt surfaces through replacement.

Are you under the impression, dirt surfaces are not replaced as part of proper track maintenance? If so your impression is incorrect.

[andymays]

:bang: :bang: then it should be replaced, just like the tracks maintain the dirt surfaces through replacement.


Then all I have to say is ...... Wait for it..............


Show Me the Wire meet Show me the Money! :D

[Show Me the Wire]

Well if they don't have the money to properly maintain the surface through periodic replacement. They certainly do not have the money to install dirt and the infrastructure to support (base and drainage) a dirt surface. :bang: :bang: :lol: :lol:

[andymays]

Well if they don't have the money to properly maintain the surface through periodic replacement. They certainly do not have the money to install dirt and the infrastructure to support (base and drainage) a dirt surface. :bang: :bang: :lol: :lol:

Synthetic surfaces were the biggest mistake in the history of California Racing and nearly all of the people that voted for the mandate say it was a mistake. That includes Richard "keyed the car" Shapiro! :D

[andymays]

Nearly half not even half? So the majority still thinks it wasn't a mistake. I think you should wait to the majority feels it voted incorrectly, before it is safe to say it was the biggest mistake.

It is correct to say nearly all who voted say it was a mistake! The only reason I can't say all is that they all haven't been interviewed but the ones that have are clear.

[Stillriledup]

Without Synth, Rachel would have raced vs Z. We would have known. Now, we're just left wondering for the rest of our lives. That's what Synth gave us. They gave us wondering and not knowing.

But, then again, without Synth, Z isnt undefeated. If Z raced 14 races on dirt, she's not undefeated, she wouldnt have had the career she's had. She wouldve gotten beat at some point. She would have encountered a tremendously speed favoring track at least once and wouldn't have gotten there, especially in California.

[Show Me the Wire]

It is correct to say nearly all who voted say it was a mistake! The only reason I can't say all is that they all haven't been interviewed but the ones that have are clear.


Well it looks like a no win situation. Hollywood doesn't have the money to properly maintain the aws by replacing the top surface every two years, and certainly can't afford to reinstall dirt with the costs associated with dirt installation.

I have a suggestion, instead of bad mouthing the existing surface, which results in handle decrease and further economic barriers to installing dirt, you should be encouraging people to wager on So.Cal. racing by touting the winning percentage of favorites, the speed bias of the Hollywood surface, in order to, push the handle up. The possibility of reinstalling a dirt track, your goal, would be attainable with increased revenue.

By posting negative posts about the aws you harm your own agenda.

Ever hear the phrase, a word to the wise?

[andymays]

Well it looks like a no win situation. Hollywood doesn't have the money to properly maintain the aws by replacing the top surface every two years, and certainly can't afford to reinstall dirt with the costs associated with dirt installation.

I have a suggestion, instead of bad mouthing the existing surface, which results in handle decrease and further economic barriers to installing dirt, you should be encouraging people to wager on So.Cal. racing by touting the winning percentage of favorites, the speed bias of the Hollywood surface, in order to, push the handle up. The possibility of reinstalling a dirt track, your goal, would be attainable with increased revenue.

By posting negative posts about the aws you harm your own agenda.

Ever hear the phrase, a word to the wise?

I didn't start the thread but every time someone does people get things wrong and don't understand what's really happening. When that happens I post quotes from John Shirreffs and others who tell it like it is. Are they bad for racing by telling the public the truth? I wish there were more like them don't you?

As far as hurting my own case I don't know what you're talking about. I'm fighting to get dirt back and I sent out emails to about 20 people yesterday including Racing Officials, Racing Executives, and members of the media.

I will never stop until this Hocus Pocus Junk is gone! ;)

[Moyers Pond]

These threads are stupid. Horses break down everyday, all over the place.

[andymays]

These threads are stupid. Horses break down everyday, all over the place.


Why don't you stay out of them then? :ThmbDown:

I don't go into threads I don't like and tell them theyr'e stupid. Get Lost!

[Show Me the Wire]

As you said ....wait for it .................................................. .................................................. ................................................ Show Me the Money

[andymays]

As you said ....wait for it .................................................. .................................................. ................................................ Show Me the Money


They spent it all on synthetic surfaces. :D 40 million or something like that. :D


Money well spent? :bang:

[Show Me the Wire]

They spent it all on synthetic surfaces. :D 40 million or something like that. :D


Money well spent? :bang:

You said you didn't understand what I meant about your complaining hurting your cause.

I repeat:

..........bad mouthing the existing surface, which results in handle decreases and further economic barriers to installing dirt.

[Moyers Pond]

Why don't you stay out of them then? :ThmbDown:

I don't go into threads I don't like and tell them theyr'e stupid. Get Lost!

You are just another of the clowns trying to hurt the reputation of the sport. There is no statistical information that backs up that there is anything wrong with any track in America.

Go join PETA. :D

[andymays]

You said you didn't understand what I meant about your complaining hurting your cause.

I repeat:

..........bad mouthing the existing surface, which results in handle decreases and further economic barriers to installing dirt.

I'm aware of that. That's why I tell the truth about what's going on to everyone I can. Wouldn't it be nice if TVG or HRTV actually told the truth to the betting public for once?

California Racing has been run by people who shouldn't be running a hot dog stand let alone Race Tracks in my opinion.

The sooner people stop playing the sooner things will change.

The Synthetic Geeks spread their propaganda for two years and now that the truth is coming out they don't look too good. This campaign has only been of mine has only been going on for a year so I have another year to go.

I'm sticking to my guns because I believe sythetic surfaces are bad for racing and bad for Horseplayers. I'm as informed or more informed than anyone on this subject. Other than in areas with a lot of rain they are completely fraudulent surfaces in my opinon. Nothing like the informercial told us they would be.

Whenever we get to the end of these threads people like yourself try to make it about me and not the issue. Why don't I do this or why don't I do that? That always happens when people are losing the argument.

I was having fun with the thread until you decided to make it about me and not the surface. ;)

[andymays]

You are just another of the clowns trying to hurt the reputation of the sport. There is no statistical information that backs up that there is anything wrong with any track in America.

Go join PETA. :D

You are about as ignorant as they come. Did you miss the study released over the summer saying there were more hind end injuries on sythetic surfaces?

I'll stick with John Shirreffs on this one who said sythetic surfaces are the worst thing ever to happen to racing. What do you have to say about him?

As far as asking me to join Peta> :lol:

[miesque]

I think that if you want to have these sorts of death march threads you really need to do it for all tracks, you should not be allowed to pick and choose just because of the surface and your agenda. How about someone actially compile a list of all breakdowns at all the Thoroughbred Tracks in North America with name of horse, date and trainer (a very key data element). That might actually be useful and shed a hell of a lot more light on this subject matter instead of regurgitating the same five sentences every few posts.

[andymays]

What is there not to understand about new bases vs. old bases?

What's not to understand that there are more hind end injuries on sythetic even though they have new bases?

How can you compare a synthetic surface with a new base to a dirt surface with a 40 year old base?

The same things are said over and over again. You can't compare them!

What's not to understand about post #30? Is John Shirreffs an idiot?

[Show Me the Wire]

miesque:

He doesn't get it. He has no facts just speculation and conjecture. People like me don't make it about you, you do.

My original posts discussed possible unsoundness as a contributing factor. You ignored my reasons and came back to your original lament that AWS were the worst mistake in So.Cal. history.

Then you bring up tha lack of funds, excuse for proper maintenance of the track. Well, if they can't afford to maintain the track now, they can't afford to install dirt.

They won't be able to install dirt until profit increases and cash flow increases. Calling for boycotts, etc, doesn't increase cash flow or profit and means less opportunity for dirt.

BTW you still have not refuted my original thoughts and reasons about unsoundness of the young horses. You chose to ignore unsoundness as a reasonable suggestion and move back to your view AWS are bad for racing.

I am still of the opinion unsoundness of young cheap level horses is the overriding factor not the surface for the current break downs.

[Cadillakin]

I think that if you want to have these sorts of death march threads you really need to do it for all tracks, you should not be allowed to pick and choose just because of the surface and your agenda. How about someone actially compile a list of all breakdowns at all the Thoroughbred Tracks in North America with name of horse, date and trainer (a very key data element). That might actually be useful and shed a hell of a lot more light on this subject matter instead of regurgitating the same five sentences every few posts.
Exactly. Like a broken record.

I saw some brutal breakdowns in the stretch at Philly Park on the 23rd of November.

http://community.tvg.com/t5/The-Handicapsule/Rich-Sorry-About-The-Bad-Day/m-p/67979

But not a word from the resident truth teller about the breakdowns - presumably because they occurred on dirt.

[Show Me the Wire]

What is there not to understand about new bases vs. old bases?

What's not to understand that there are more hind end injuries on sythetic even though they have new bases?

How can you compare a synthetic surface with a new base to a dirt surface with a 40 year old base?

The same things are said over and over again. You can't compare them!

What's not to understand about post #30? Is John Shirreffs an idiot?

Don't know if he is or isn't. His statement is only an opinion, his perception, not a proven fact.

[andymays]

Exactly. Like a broken record.

I saw some brutal breakdowns in the stretch at Philly Park on the 23rd of November.

http://community.tvg.com/t5/The-Handicapsule/Rich-Sorry-About-The-Bad-Day/m-p/67979

But not a word from the resident truth teller about the breakdowns - presumably because they occurred on dirt.


And then I can say there was only one breakdown at Saratoga and how many at Del Mar?

Once again I'll stick with John Shirreffs. Is he the resident truth teller at Hollywood Park? :lol:

And you probably ought to check yourself about the resident truth teller crap. I've been one of the few defending you on the board about your winning record and other stuff. Thanks for the personal shot! ;)

[FenceBored]

Exactly. Like a broken record.

I saw some brutal breakdowns in the stretch at Philly Park on the 23rd of November.

http://community.tvg.com/t5/The-Handicapsule/Rich-Sorry-About-The-Bad-Day/m-p/67979

But not a word from the resident truth teller about the breakdowns - presumably because they occurred on dirt.

Or, because he's so. cal based and doesn't pay attention to Philly.

[Show Me the Wire]

Well he pays attention to Saratoga. So Philly is in fair play as an example.

[andymays]

Well he pays attention to Saratoga. So Philly is in fair play as an example.


I never said dirt was much safer than synthetics but the synthetic geeks said over and over again how safe synthetic surfaces would be. The infomercial was wrong. Not just a little but a lot.

But then again all this stuff has been asked an answered many times before. :rolleyes:

[cj]

There are plenty of people that watch NYRA and don't give Philly a second thought.

The point is that nobody ever said there aren't breakdowns on dirt. What many said is the breakdowns aren't because of dirt. The alleged NUMBER ONE REASON for installing synthetics in SoCal was SAFETY. How has that panned out?

I doubt with what has happened in SoCal that the management at Philly Park is getting ready to rush out and install polytrack for the safety of the horses.

[DeanT]

I doubt with what has happened in SoCal that the management at Philly Park is getting ready to rush out and install polytrack for the safety of the horses.
Even if it ever shows outright that it helps horses the Philly Park management would not be rushiing out to install it.

[Show Me the Wire]

The alleged NUMBER ONE REASON for installing synthetics in SoCal was SAFETY. How has that panned out?

I doubt with what has happened in SoCal that the management at Philly Park is getting ready to rush out and install polytrack for the safety of the horses.


How has it panned out is the legitimate question. The answer is we don't know yet.

I too doubt that Philly Park will rush to install poly.

He is implying dirt is safer than So.Cal aws by his specific example. But you can't point to one track in particular, to prove a general statement as andymays is doing with Saratoga.

Also, the safety factor may vary among aws. Some surfaces may be safer than others within the aws category.

[cj]

Even if it ever shows outright that it helps horses the Philly Park management would not be rushiing out to install it.

No way to know since it certainly has not been shown. If it was as good as advertised, it would have expanded greatly by now in my opinion.

[cj]

How has it panned out is the legitimate question. The answer is we don't know yet.

I too doubt that Philly Park will rush to install poly.

He is implying dirt is safer than So.Cal aws by his specific example. But you can't point to one track in particular, to prove a general statement as andymays is doing with Saratoga.

I agree, we don't know yet. But we do know it isn't the miracle cure it was purported to be in the beginning...or has everyone forgotten about that already?

[andymays]

How has it panned out is the legitimate question. The answer is we don't know yet.

I too doubt that Philly Park will rush to install poly.

He is implying dirt is safer than So.Cal aws by his specific example. But you can't point to one track in particular, to prove a general statement as andymays is doing with Saratoga.


Where did I say dirt is safer overall. There are individual examples of one being safer than the other like Saratoga vs. Del Mar.

The new bases are what is important!

Synthetic surfaces wear out. Again what is there not to understand about that?

[andymays]

I agree, we don't know yet. But we do know it isn't the miracle cure it was purported to be in the beginning...or has everyone forgotten about that already?

They forget about the same things written and quoted in threads last week let alone remembering the synthetic infomercial talking points from 2007! :D

[Show Me the Wire]

I agree, we don't know yet. But we do know it isn't the miracle cure it was purported to be in the beginning...or has everyone forgotten about that already?

I don't know any miracle cure for racing unsound horses, except for not racing them.

I do remember aws was pushed as a surface that would lead to increase starts for indivdual horses. Have starts increased on the whole for individual horses? Can anyone with their db confirm or prove this theory false?

Also, as I stated before there may be a safety difference among the aws. I especially am leaning this way due to the lack of maintenance being carried on at Hollywood per andymays. If the surface is not replaced properly, I think you would compromise any safety factor of the aws and are racing on a bastardized surface.

[Show Me the Wire]

Where did I say dirt is safer overall. There are individual examples of one being safer than the other like Saratoga vs. Del Mar.

The new bases are what is important!

Synthetic surfaces wear out. Again what is there not to understand about that?

So do dirt surfaces. What am I missing here. Replacement of dirt surfaces is routine maintenace. I asked you before are you under the impression dirt surfaces are not replaced?

[andymays]

So do dirt surfaces. What am I missing here. Replacement of dirt surfaces is routine maintenace. I asked you before are you under the impression dirt surfaces are not replaced?


You are missing the fact that the synthetic fibers turn to dust. They are not the same consistency as when they were first installed. The fibers are ground up and degraded from maintenance, usage, and weather.

This is getting a little silly. :D :) ;)

[Show Me the Wire]

You are missing the fact that the synthetic fibers turn to dust. They are not the same consistency as when they were first installed. The fibers are ground up and degraded from maintenance, usage, and weather.

This is getting a little silly. :D :) ;)

You are missing the fact dirt surfaces erode. So dirt erodes and the base deteriorates and the aws deteriorates. And yes you denying the deterioration of dirt tracks is on the silly side.

[andymays]

You are missing the fact dirt surfaces erode. So dirt erodes and the base deteriorates and the aws deteriorates. And yes you denying the deterioration of dirt tracks is on the silly side.


I never denied that dirt needs to be added from time to time. That's common sense.

Again, the synthetic geeks made all the fantastic claims so let me ask you again:

Is it easier to maintain?

Is it less expensive to maintain?

Are there less biases?

Is it safer?

Do we have bigger fields because of the cushion track?


How do you weigh the cost vs. the benefit to California. 40 million for what? None of the claims can be validated. In fact some of the claims are just the opposite. ;)

[FenceBored]

I think that if you want to have these sorts of death march threads you really need to do it for all tracks, you should not be allowed to pick and choose just because of the surface and your agenda. How about someone actially compile a list of all breakdowns at all the Thoroughbred Tracks in North America with name of horse, date and trainer (a very key data element). That might actually be useful and shed a hell of a lot more light on this subject matter instead of regurgitating the same five sentences every few posts.

Well, outside of the track based reporting system that got started (is it?) 2 years ago, the only one I can think of that's doing what you suggest is For Inesperado (http://forinesperado.blogspot.com/). The problem with there, as you can see by looking at the site, is that the followup on horses who are vanned off is limited by not having official ties to the individual tracks. And if you can't do followup (and can't learn of horses who finish the race but are euthanized after having a nontreatable injury detected sometime later at the barn), then you're not going to have a full and accurate database. And if the database isn't full or accurate, how would that be any different that these threads? An awful lot of time wasted without having something 100% solid to show for it.

The main issue with the major track based reporting system, so far, is that the raw data is being kept private. Yes, there was a preliminary report released that didn't give breakouts on a track by track or class level basis. That will hopefully come later as they develop a longer baseline. Then there's the question of participation. Not every track is on board with the data reporting system. For example, I remember there was talk at the start of the program that since they already had reporting requirements to the CHRB with a different report format including different data elements California tracks weren't interested in signing onto the project. If the CA tracks aren't involved, then roughly half the synthetic tracks in the US aren't included in the system. Are the Canadians involved? A robust system that covers some tracks is better than a non-robust system that tries to cover all tracks, but the greater the participation level the better. And the more transparent the process the better.

[Show Me the Wire]

I already answered those questions. No need to circle back to make the same argument.

Also, dirt is not just added to. At tracks like Hawthorne, that are subject to climate changes and/or where standard breds run the entire cushion is removed from the track. Standardbreds need to race on the hard underlayers. The cushion top has to be replaced, usually, but not always, it is a mix of the old cushion and new material.


In So. Cal. I don't know what they did to refurbish their dirt, but I doubt it is just adding to the present cushion. I would have to think they had to remove it and remix it. So what is the difference, if you have to do the similar things with aws?

[andymays]

I already answered those questions. No need to circle back to make the same argument.

Also, dirt is not just added to. At tracks like Hawthorne, that are subject to climate changes and/or where standard breds run the entire cushion is removed from the track. Standardbreds need to race on the hard underlayers. The cushion top has to be replaced, usually, but not always, it is a mix of the old cushion and new material.


In So. Cal. I don't know what they did to refurbish their dirt, but I doubt it is just adding to the present cushion. I would have to think they had to remove it and remix it. So what is the difference, if you have to do the similar things with aws?


If you're now arguing that its basically the same as dirt but costs a lot more then why have it?

[FenceBored]

You are missing the fact dirt surfaces erode. So dirt erodes and the base deteriorates and the aws deteriorates. And yes you denying the deterioration of dirt tracks is on the silly side.

Nobody who has seen the huge piles of material on the backside of a dirt track waiting to be added as needed could deny the deterioration/erosion of dirt tracks.

However, one of the selling points of the AWS was the lower upkeep costs, since the initial installation cost was so high. Sort of like a geothermal heat pump salesman telling you that the lowered energy (gas/electric) bills over time will more than make up for the enormous cost of installing the underground pipes. If he's right about the ongoing maintaince costs, it might be a good deal. If he's wrong, you're out a lot of money and the bills are going to keep rolling in. At that point you've got to weigh the costs of staying with the new system, or moving to a more traditional one.

[Show Me the Wire]

FenceBored:

The lower maintenance was related to the actual day to day costs. I am sure there had to be discussons between the vendor and the track about the longevity of the material before it needed to be replaced. I was not and I am not privy to those discussions.

If the matrial failed to last the warranty period then Hollywood Park would have recourse against cushion track's manufacturer. Since Hollywood Park is not pursuing warranty work it seems Hollywood received what it paid for and knowingly accpeted the responsibility to refurbish the cushion track as needed every two years, which Hollywood Park is not doing according to andymays.

I agree there is a cost/benefit analysis, but if there is not enough money to do bi-annual refurbishing there certainly is not enough money to install dirt with its different infrastructure. However, that is a different issue than the soundness versus surface issue.

andymays:

I am not arguing that its basically the same as dirt. I am stressing that all surfaces need to be replaced and because something needs to be refurbished does not automatically make it a poor choice or decision. As I wrote above Hollywood Park had to be informed of the life expectancy of the surface material. Maybe for their specific climate and usage they should have opted for a different aws product.

The poor decision by the racing board was leaving the choice of product up to the individual tracks, whom were more concerned with cutting maintenance costs and not the legitimate safety issue which drove the passing of the mandate.

[andymays]

Santa Anita sued Cushion Track after their disaster over a year ago. I don't even know if they are still in business. So the warranty not so much.

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/national-news/2008/May/29/Santa-Anita-sues-Cushion-Track-over-surface-issues.aspx

Santa Anita sues Cushion Track over surface issues


Excerpt:

The Los Angeles Turf Club Inc., the operator of Santa Anita Park, has filed a federal lawsuit against Cushion Track Footing seeking restitution for the troubled surface that led to the cancellation of 11 live dates in the 2007-’08 winter/spring meeting due to drainage issues.

Santa Anita is seeking $5.225-million to cover the original cost of 19,375 tons of the Cushion Track surface, which was installed in the summer of 2007; $1.369-million in repair costs after drainage problems arose; and $1.831-million for further repairs performed by the Australian-based synthetic surface manufacturer Pro-Ride after Cushion Track Footing allegedly was unwilling and/or unable to resolve defects in the surface.

The lawsuit also cites additional damages, in an amount that would be determined in a jury trial, from the loss of racing dates.

[Show Me the Wire]

I know Santa Anita sued, that is why I alluded to Hollywood's failure to seek warranty redress. It shows Hollywood got what it bargained for.

Santa Anita sued due to the drainage issues and not surface deteriotion. Two different issues entirely.

[andymays]

I know Santa Anita sued, that is why I alluded to Hollywood's failure to seek warranty redress. It shows Hollywood got what it bargained for.

Santa Anita sued due to the drainage issues and not surface deteriotion. Two different issues entirely.



http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/national-news/2008/January/15/Santa-Anita-chooses-to-alter-Cushion-Track-with-binder.aspx

Excerpt:

After considering switching back to a conventional dirt track, officials with Santa Anita Park have decided to add polymer and fiber to the existing Cushion Track surface with the hope of overcoming extreme drainage issues that forced the cancellation of three live racing dates.

By the admission of manufacturer Cushion Track Footings, the surface at Santa Anita has been a significant blunder. In creating a blend customized to withstand temperatures exceeding 100 degrees, Cushion Track Footings apparently compromised the surface's ability to drain properly, said Paul Harper, the company's technical director.

[andymays]

So you were saying that the advantages of synthetic surfaces other than being better in the rain are:

[Show Me the Wire]

The push behind aws was for safety. A properly installed aws had a side benefit (not the main benefit) of avoiding sealed, sloppy or muddy tracks due to rain. Protecting the track from rain is not an important issue in So.Cal. except maybe for the winter Santa Anita meet.

As you pointed out after a careful consideration Santa Anita thought it was more prudent to remain with an aws, instead of dirt. So aws must have a postive as Sant Anita retained it after thoughtful consideration.

So your question would be better answered by Santa Anita, because they opted for an aws, instead of dirt. Santa Anita must have seen some benefit unkown to outsiders like us.

[andymays]

The push behind aws was for safety. A properly installed aws had a side benefit (not the main benefit) of avoiding sealed, sloppy or muddy tracks due to rain. Protecting the track from rain is not an important issue in So.Cal. except maybe for the winter Santa Anita meet.

As you pointed out after a careful consideration Santa Anita thought it was more prudent to remain with an aws, instead of dirt. So aws must have a postive as Sant Anita retained it after thoughtful consideration.

So your question would be better answered by Santa Anita, because they opted for an aws, instead of dirt. Santa Anita must have seen some benefit unkown to outsiders like us.


It was done with good intentions. That I agree with.

What people still don't know though is how much if any commissions, stock options, and other personal financial incentives were paid to Racing Officials and Racing Executives. Somebody needs to ask.

The proper way to go would have been to change the base at Santa Anita and put in a new dirt surface. They should have put the synthetic on the training track. They could have put a sythetic in at Golden Gate and waited a few years to see how it went. The rush to mandate this stuff was a mistake.

[Igeteven]

S Cal Tracks don't pay any attention to anyone, They have killed the game in S. Cal

[cj]

The push behind aws was for safety. A properly installed aws had a side benefit (not the main benefit) of avoiding sealed, sloppy or muddy tracks due to rain. Protecting the track from rain is not an important issue in So.Cal. except maybe for the winter Santa Anita meet.

As you pointed out after a careful consideration Santa Anita thought it was more prudent to remain with an aws, instead of dirt. So aws must have a postive as Sant Anita retained it after thoughtful consideration.

So your question would be better answered by Santa Anita, because they opted for an aws, instead of dirt. Santa Anita must have seen some benefit unkown to outsiders like us.

I think it is as simple as Santa Anita didn't want to spend the money to replace the surface again. There probably is no benefit. There are no horses, so fields aren't going to get bigger. Breakdowns aren't eliminated on dirt, just like AWS, so there is no upside there. The only positive I can see is they didn't want to spend more money they can't afford.

[toussaud]

I think it is as simple as Santa Anita didn't want to spend the money to replace the surface again. There probably is no benefit. There are no horses, so fields aren't going to get bigger. Breakdowns aren't eliminated on dirt, just like AWS, so there is no upside there. The only positive I can see is they didn't want to spend more money they can't afford.
I don't buy this.

there is no benefit? have you checked oaklawn's, gulfstream and fair grounds handle (all up) compared to santa anita's?

handicappers are speaking with their dollars. they prefer dirt.

that's at least ONE benefit.

[Robert Goren]

Some trainers are going run some horse til they break down. Maybe poly adds a race or two to their careers ( or maybe not). The point is that they are going break down no matter what the surface is. It is just a matter of when. JMO

[andymays]

The ownership is still up in the air. I depends which group gets it. I know the group led by Arnold Zelcher will probably go back to dirt if they get it.

[cj]

I don't buy this.

there is no benefit? have you checked oaklawn's, gulfstream and fair grounds handle (all up) compared to santa anita's?

handicappers are speaking with their dollars. they prefer dirt.

that's at least ONE benefit.

It isn't a fair comparison. Those places run races with bigger fields. What is fair is to say the expected increase in field size in California because of synthetics has failed to materialize. The handle wouldn't suddenly shoot up in California because dirt was installed. The fields would still suck.

[andymays]

It isn't a fair comparison. Those places run races with bigger fields. What is fair is to say the expected increase in field size in California because of synthetics has failed to materialize. The handle wouldn't suddenly shoot up in California because dirt was installed. The fields would still suck.

The purses are too low for most levels. Raising them would help but it aint gonna happen. They've been lowering them all year.

Look for them to raise the take by the end of February or sooner. 1% on WPS and 2% on exotics. :ThmbDown:

[cj]

How is raising purses going to help? There are no horses. To raise purses, people have to bet more outside of racinos and that just isn't going to happen with a parade of short fields and cheap maidens most days.

The answer would be to cut back on days and total races to increase purses, but the horsemen will never allow that even though it could save them.

[andymays]

How is raising purses going to help? There are no horses. To raise purses, people have to bet more outside of racinos and that just isn't going to happen with a parade of short fields and cheap maidens most days.

The answer would be to cut back on days and total races to increase purses, but the horsemen will never allow that even though it could save them.


A lot of people left because they were lowering them. I dont' know if you remember earlier in the year Mullins brought a bunch of his stock to Sunland where the purses were bigger for the cheaper claimers. Not only were the purses bigger but the daily cost was about half what it was at Santa Anita.

The cost of doing business is too high in California. In my opinion the purses need to be at least 30% higher to build it up. As I said earlier it aint gonna happen.

I wouldn't mind 3 days a week but it causes other problems with the industry in California.

[Sekrah]

Your recall is faulty. Bonnie Brown Eyes started before on Oct. 14 for a tag of 28K, same as the most recent race. A young horse starting twice for 28k claiming price, indicates a soundness problem. A problem that came to light during a race, while being pushed for everything, in order to win.


LOL at this.

I really hope you are kidding.

[Sekrah]

The point is that nobody ever said there aren't breakdowns on dirt. What many said is the breakdowns aren't because of dirt. The alleged NUMBER ONE REASON for installing synthetics in SoCal was SAFETY. How has that panned out?




Bingo.

[andymays]

http://legacy.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080713/news_1s13delmar.html

Excerpt:

The DMTC has installed a reverse osmosis system on site that will provide purified water for use on the track. :eek:

Tap or other unpurified water could contain contaminants that in time would compromise the material. :eek: :rolleyes:

[bisket]

poly tracks are more expensive to maintain, amd what they're spending right now isn't doing the job. i think one of the main weaknesses as far as california racing is concerned is the fact they don't have enough training tracks in relation to the horse population. i think some private training facilities would help, and a training track at each track would help the situation. i know santa anita has a dirt training track, but the others don't. alot of horses train over the tracks every morning during each meet. which probably causes alot of the problems; dirt or poly.

[Show Me the Wire]

I am not kidding in this specific case. Here is the rest from a following post:

The bottom level tag is a pretty good indication of unsoundness, as the connections did not even want to waste one start to assess ability at a higher level or at least to get higher odds on the next start, as it is rumored the Mitchell barn is a betting barn. Hmmm a betting barn missing an opportunity to darken form, could unsoundness be a major factor influencing that decision? I will leave that to your imagination.

Coupled with the wide front legs and choppy stride on race day I feel the barn was worried this horse would come apart, and unfortunately she did.

[Show Me the Wire]

As long as we are highlighting break downs On Fire broke down ,on the turf, a few days ago during his 19th start of the year.

Any surface is problematic depending on the horse racing on it.

[PaceAdvantage]

Any surface is problematic depending on the horse racing on it.Yes, but nobody has been trying to shove turf down our collective throats as a safer replacement for traditional dirt racing, which has been the mainstay of the sport since the beginning.

Therein lies the difference.

When a bully comes along and tells you "it must be this way BECAUSE," and the because part turns out to be invalid for the most part...well...expect some blowback.

[Show Me the Wire]

We don't have enough data to validate or invalidate the safety claim. That has been my consistent position on this matter.

However, I find aws to be more fair and the racing is more entertaining. I am not enthralled watching a horse stagger home in front of a bunch of tired horses exhausted to fatigue running on dirt like substances.

[Zippy Chippy]

Im cringing every time I watch a Hollywood race at this point. I can't stand it. Its heartbreaking. Ruins the day

[Watcher]

Had to retire a horse today after tendon issues at Hollywood.

[FenceBored]

We don't have enough data to validate or invalidate the safety claim. That has been my consistent position on this matter.

However, I find aws to be more fair and the racing is more entertaining. I am not enthralled watching a horse stagger home in front of a bunch of tired horses exhausted to fatigue running on dirt like substances.

Well now, there's the rub. Realistically I agree with you, that we don't have enough data. Scientifically, we don't even have an accurate comparison (dirt track with new state-of-the-art drainage, new base and new cushion). The best we have is the well maintained dirt tracks with elements of varying ages. PR wise, though, the ship has sailed. The PR push for the synthetics in 2006 and early 2007 focussed on the last year dirt/first year synth stats from Turfway (24/3). That created a false impression in too much of the public that synthetics were going to make an 87.5% reduction in fatalities immediately and consistently. Didn't happen, wasn't going to happen, and nobody with a lick of sense (and who wasn't pushing an agenda) would have led people to believe it was.