Arlington Polytrack coming under sharp criticism

[Valuist]

Lead story in todays Daily Herald, third biggest paper in the state of Illinois:

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=341879

Of course, Arlington management is just burying their head in the sand (or Poly). The idiot Arnold who runs the place had zero racetrack experience when he was named track President. Nice going, CDI.

[tzipi]

Lead story in todays Daily Herald, third biggest paper in the state of Illinois:

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=341879

Of course, Arlington management is just burying their head in the sand (or Poly). The idiot Arnold who runs the place had zero racetrack experience when he was named track President. Nice going, CDI.

It is true as it says in the article,when horses and jocks hit the fake stuff they do come to a complete stop. Looks brutal.

[DJofSD]

Racing officals will study this latest claim and give it futher consideration at some unstated time in the future.

[illinoisbred]

I've never understood why they hired Arnold-he's completely ignorant when it comes to racing. Polytrack has proven to be an experiment in progress with tragic consequences to both equine and man. I hope they sent the maintenance crew to a training seminar-they surely need it!

[DarrenClarke]

Just when you thought racetrack executives couldn't be any dumber, along comes Roy Arnold to lower the bar once again! Not only is he ignoring the jockeys claims, he actually thinks polytrack is moving the game in the right direction. I read a story back in May that said the jockeys were afraid to fall off because the landing was so hard. I guess it took the paralyzation of one of the nations top jocks and a promising 24 year old for this info to become newsworthy.

[andymays]

Well, another day and another article critical of synthetic surfaces.

The synthetic geeks will brush it off like all the other evidence.

The stuff wears out for the millionth time. What's not to understand?

It loses it's cushion from when it was installed. What's not to understand?

You can totally replace the material every two years or accept the consequences.

I believe many Racing Executives and Racing Officials have personal investments in the various synthetic surfaces. Keenland is the only one that discloses their relationship to polytrack on their website (to their credit).

I posted this on another thread to point out how delicate this stuff is (if it violates a duplicate post rule then by all means take it down). Del Mar has to use special water to water it so it doesn't degrade. How silly is that? What happens when the ocean fog rolls in at night?


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

Even rain water compromises it. That's something for an all weather surface. :bang:

[DJofSD]

The synthetic geeks will brush it off like all the other evidence.
You mean like Teflon? (Hint. Hint. There's a moniker there to be used.)

[Tom]

Hmmmmm.

Teflon Don
Poly Anna?

[sandpit]

Just when you thought racetrack executives couldn't be any dumber, along comes Roy Arnold to lower the bar once again! Not only is he ignoring the jockeys claims, he actually thinks polytrack is moving the game in the right direction. I read a story back in May that said the jockeys were afraid to fall off because the landing was so hard. I guess it took the paralyzation of one of the nations top jocks and a promising 24 year old for this info to become newsworthy.

Arnold was hired for one reason: because his boss, Duchossois, loved his military background. All CDI employees below him are required to address him as "Colonel"...that's fine if he was still in the service, but a bunch of racetrack employees are a far cry from a batallion of soldiers. A friend of mine interviewed for a job at Arlington with the Colonel, and the takeaway was that the Colonel has no clue about racing...not surprising, but sad for the sport.

[Bruddah]

Arnold was hired for one reason: because his boss, Duchossois, loved his military background. All CDI employees below him are required to address him as "Colonel"...that's fine if he was still in the service, but a bunch of racetrack employees are a far cry from a batallion of soldiers. A friend of mine interviewed for a job at Arlington with the Colonel, and the takeaway was that the Colonel has no clue about racing...not surprising, but sad for the sport.

I agree with your post. Unfortunately, whether it's Casinos, Racinos or just plain Thoroughbred Tracks, the trend is to place someone's inbred relative or friend at the top. It's called dummying down the management. Same program "The Boys" in Las Vegas have used for years.

You don't have to know nuthin 'bout no Horses or gamblin'. Can you say laying a foundation for skimming? :eek:

[Jasonm921]

There is no changing the minds of th synthetic backers. They have invested so much money in this that they can't turn back. They rather deny, deny, deny than admit they were wrong. How many jockeys were seriously hurt this year on synthetics?

[Zman179]

Arnold was hired for one reason: because his boss, Duchossois, loved his military background. All CDI employees below him are required to address him as "Colonel"...that's fine if he was still in the service, but a bunch of racetrack employees are a far cry from a batallion of soldiers. A friend of mine interviewed for a job at Arlington with the Colonel, and the takeaway was that the Colonel has no clue about racing...not surprising, but sad for the sport.

Klinke was a colonel too. So what does that say?

[FenceBored]

Klinke was a colonel too. So what does that say?

So was Jim Bowie, what does that say?

[Tom]

Original or crispy? :p

[gm10]

It's a valid point. It makes sense.

Although I heard that 3 jockey's have died on the dirt in the last 12 months vs 0 on the polytrack.

[Valuist]

There is no changing the minds of th synthetic backers. They have invested so much money in this that they can't turn back. They rather deny, deny, deny than admit they were wrong. How many jockeys were seriously hurt this year on synthetics?

Both Rene Douglas and Michael Straight were paralyzed after falls on Arlington's Polytrack.

[Show Me the Wire]

It's a valid point. It makes sense.

Although I heard that 3 jockey's have died on the dirt in the last 12 months vs 0 on the polytrack.

That is the crux. The only reason we know the jocks complaining about the surface being hard, becuase they survived the fall. The surface involved in the deaths of three jockeys must have been harder and less forgiving.

I am not being flippant, but the paralyzed jocks at AP are still alive. If the surface was dirt, more than likely would have ended up like the three jockeys that fell on the dirt surfaces.

[FenceBored]

That is the crux. The only reason we know the jocks complaining about the surface being hard, becuase they survived the fall. The surface involved in the deaths of three jockeys must have been harder and less forgiving.

I am not being flippant, but the paralyzed jocks at AP are still alive. If the surface was dirt, more than likely would have ended up like the three jockeys that fell on the dirt surfaces.

Three died on dirt? The guy in Oklahoma whose horse bolted into the rail and whose head hit the rail as he flipped into the infield (death not involving the dirt at all) is one. What are the details on the other two?

[Steve R]

It's a valid point. It makes sense.

Although I heard that 3 jockey's have died on the dirt in the last 12 months vs 0 on the polytrack.
There are about 400 tracks and training centers listed in the DRF American Racing Manual. How many have an AWS? A dozen? Maybe a few more. Maybe a few less. What you heard is irrelevant. And can you confirm the accuracy of what you heard?

[Show Me the Wire]

Three died on dirt? The guy in Oklahoma whose horse bolted into the rail and whose head hit the rail as he flipped into the infield (death not involving the dirt at all) is one. What are the details on the other two?

The horse hit the rail, I didn't see any reports stating the jockey hit his head on the rail. Could be though.

Los Alamitos in California, Dec. 25, 2008, 36-year-old jockey Sam Thompson Jr. died five days after he was thrown following a race. Los Alamitos is a dirt track and sadly this accident was in the last 12 months.

We have to askl gm10 to confirm the third one.

So far no jockey fatatliteis on a aws, thankfully, even with some terrible break sowns.

[Show Me the Wire]

This interesting quote is contained in the article regarding a report done on So.Cal. synthetic tracks.

As for the safety of synthetic tracks, he points to a recently released study by the California Horse Racing Board that concluded fatal breakdowns have been reduced by 40 percent since the state mandated tracks switch from dirt to synthetic three years ago.
"It is what it is, which is a pretty dramatic falloff, contrary to what some trainers think," said Dr. Rick Arthur, equine medical director for the California racing board, in a recent New York Times report. "When racehorses are at their best, I am absolutely convinced that they are safer on the synthetics then they are on the dirt."[bolding added]

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=341879&src=110

Also, it is very difficult to attribute Rene Douglas's injury to the track itself. First, his horse had its heels clipped causing the horse to fall and throwing Douglas over its head. The horse itself fell on top of Douglas crushing him. The horse had to be dragged off Douglas. Douglas injuries are typical of being crushed by a heavy weight.

[andymays]

This interesting quote is contained in the article regarding a report done on So.Cal. synthetic tracks.

As for the safety of synthetic tracks, he points to a recently released study by the California Horse Racing Board that concluded fatal breakdowns have been reduced by 40 percent since the state mandated tracks switch from dirt to synthetic three years ago."It is what it is, which is a pretty dramatic falloff, contrary to what some trainers think," said Dr. Rick Arthur, equine medical director for the California racing board, in a recent New York Times report. "When racehorses are at their best, I am absolutely convinced that they are safer on the synthetics then they are on the dirt."[bolding added]

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=341879&src=110

Also, it is very difficult to attribute Rene Douglas's injury to the track itself. First, his horse had its heels clipped causing the horse to fall and throwing Douglas over its head. The horse itself fell on top of Douglas crushing him. The horse had to be dragged off Douglas. Douglas injuries are typical of being crushed by a heavy weight.


For the millionth time lets go over it again.

Dr. Rick Arthur is comparing 2007 and 2008 with new bases and new material to the worst years of dirt racing with 40 and 50 year old bases. Why wouldn't he compare the the years when they kept statistics when the base was newer? There were several years when the fatality rate was less than what happened this year.

Dr Rick Arthur is a synthetic advocate. Earlier in the year when Del Mar started Joe Harper said they are 70% safer than dirt and Rick Arthur said they are 40% safer than dirt.

Back Leg Injuries Tied to Synthetic Tracks
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/52317/back-leg-injuries-tied-to-synthetic-tracks?source=rss

Excerpt:

"This actually confirms that there are additional hind-end injuries on synthetic surfaces, which is what trainers have been telling us," said Dr. Rick Arthur, the CHRB's equine medical director.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SMTW, I really don't know what to tell you if you can't figure out that comparing the first two years of synthetic surfaces to the worst years on dirt with 40 year old bases is an invalid comparison.

Del Mar 2007 was different from Del Mar 2009.

http://www.nctimes.com/sports/columnists/nahill/article_1c54cc9e-4cc1-5dbb-a9c7-de2ca01c6406.html

Excerpt:

Bill Casner, co-owner of WinStar Farm and Colonel John, loved Del Mar's track in 2007.

"The first year it was slow but safe," Casner said. "It was pretty good last year. This year it sounds like a herd of buffalo down there on the track."


Arlington 2007 was different from Arlington 2009. Same for Hollywood and the same for all of them.

Honesly SMTW how many times do we have to go over this. It wears out. What don't you understand about that? What don't you understand about the new base vs. old base thing?

Why would you think that Rick Arthur is objective when he has been advocating for synthetic surfaces from the start? Anyone making comparisons by comparing the first two years of synthetics with the worst years of dirt cannot be taken seriously. I have asked the CHRB repeatedly to disclose whether or not Rick Arthur has taken money from any synthetic manufacturer in the form of gifts, stock options, or any personal financial incentive for his advocacy and have yet to been answered. Take that for what you will.

People manipulate statistics and yes even lie to suit their agenda. If this was the Climategate deal you'd be on board with me wouldn't you? With some people the end justifies the means and the same thing applies with synthetic surfaces!

Please cut and past this post and keep it so you can refer back to it in the next synthetic thread that comes up.

[FenceBored]

This interesting quote is contained in the article regarding a report done on So.Cal. synthetic tracks.

As for the safety of synthetic tracks, he points to a recently released study by the California Horse Racing Board that concluded fatal breakdowns have been reduced by 40 percent since the state mandated tracks switch from dirt to synthetic three years ago.
"It is what it is, which is a pretty dramatic falloff, contrary to what some trainers think," said Dr. Rick Arthur, equine medical director for the California racing board, in a recent New York Times report. "When racehorses are at their best, I am absolutely convinced that they are safer on the synthetics then they are on the dirt."[bolding added]

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=341879&src=110



You said yourself that the data's not in. Doesn't it bother you that the person in charge of data collection and analysis has already stated what the conclusions are? Where's the healthy scepticism? Where's the scientific detatchment? He's not a researcher, he's a booster.

From the CHRB's Annual Reports (http://chrb.ca.gov/annual_report.htm), annual horse deaths associated with CA racing (all breeds, all venues, all causes) fluctuated in a range of ~230 to ~260 in the reporting years associated with 1996-2004. For the 2005 year they jumped to 320 with 317 in 2006, 301 in 2007 and 306 reported in 2008. Even at the major tracks the total numbers in the 2008 report (185) are still above the averages for the 1996-2004 period (156-185).


Also, it is very difficult to attribute Rene Douglas's injury to the track itself. First, his horse had its heels clipped causing the horse to fall and throwing Douglas over its head. The horse itself fell on top of Douglas crushing him. The horse had to be dragged off Douglas. Douglas injuries are typical of being crushed by a heavy weight.

I agree, Rene's injuries are consistent with the horse falling, then laying on him, regardless of surface.

[Show Me the Wire]

I posted the quote for discussion porposues and not as absolute authority on the matter.

Andymays, I get it, all surfaces have to be reefurbished. Nobody expects fibers, to last for ever and not disintegrate. I guess you don't get that because a surface needs refurbishing is not a reason to label a surface a failure.

The refurbishing argument is meaningless regarding failure or success, as all track surfaces have to be periodically refurbished.

Now, if you prove the base is deteriorating in two years that is a very big problem. i would expect the base to last decades as the old crushed limestone bases did.

Are you you saying the base itself is failing too?

[andymays]

I posted the quote for discussion porposues and not as absolute authority on the matter.

Andymays, I get it, all surfaces have to be reefurbished. Nobody expects fibers, to last for ever and not disintegrate. I guess you don't get that because a surface needs refurbishing is not a reason to label a surface a failure.

The refurbishing argument is meaningless regarding failure or success, as all track surfaces have to be periodically refurbished.


Synthetic surfaces don't need to be just refurbished they need to be replaced. All 19 tons of the material. Take Del Mar 2007 vs. Del Mar 2008 vs. Del Mar 2009. Injuries and fatalities went way up after two years. It's pretty obvious. ;)

[Show Me the Wire]

Synthetic surfaces don't need to be just refurbished they need to be replaced. All 19 tons of the material. Take Del Mar 2007 vs. Del Mar 2008 vs. Del Mar 2009. Injuries and fatalities went way up after two years. It's pretty obvious. ;)

A matter of semantics. just like your use of the word maintenance. I have pointed out before many tracks remove the entire cushion and replace it for the meet.

The refurbish/replacement argument is meaningless regarding assessing failure or success of the surface. Longevity of the fibers is a side issue of proper maintenance.

However, the longevity of the base and its structural integrity are legitimate issues to assess failure or success.

[andymays]

A matter of semantics. just like your use of the word maintenance. I have pointed out before many tracks remove the entire cushion and replace it for the meet.

The refurbish/replacement argument is meaningless regarding assessing failure or success of the surface. Longevity of the fibers is a side issue of proper maintenance.

However, the longevity of the base and its structural integrity are legitimate issues to assess failure or success.


Here we go again. The maintenace causes it to break down. Every time the machines go over it to level it out it grinds up a little more.

Let me ask you something. What do you think happens to the wax they add when it gets hot. Summer at Del Mar? Summer at Arlington? How about the special water Del Mar uses? If it was an enclosed Track the special water might work. Can't you see how ridiculous the whole thing is?

[Show Me the Wire]

Here we go again. The maintenace causes it to break down. Every time the machines go over it to level it out it grinds up a little more.

Let me ask you something. What do you think happens to the wax they add when it gets hot. Summer at Del Mar? Summer at Arlington? How about the special water Del Mar uses? If it was an enclosed Track the special water might work. Can't you see how ridiculous the whole thing is?

So every time the machines go over the dirt like substance they don't ground the dirt like material up or break it down in any way? Let go of this ridiculous maintenance argument. It is a straw argument nothing more or less.

Regarding the wax, I think it would melt or at least soften. That was one of my initial thoughts regarding why they would use wax in a very warm climate.

[andymays]

So every time the machines go over the dirt like substance they don't ground the dirt like material up or break it down in any way? Let go of this ridiculous maintenance argument. It is a straw argument nothing more or less.

Regarding the wax, I think it would melt or at least soften. That was one of my initial thoughts regarding why they would use wax in a very warm climate.


Think of the argument in terms of Climategate vs. Polygate. Polygate is easier to figure out.

This is similar to buying something from an infomercial except betting is involved. Which one of the several claims made by the advocates and the manufacturers have proven to be true. It performs better in the rain and that's about it. Of course rain water helps break down the material that's why Del Mar has a reverse osmosis system. They need special water for the surface. :D

Replace the 19 tons of junk every two years or get rid of it. :ThmbUp:

[Show Me the Wire]

Absolutely correct the surface should be appropriately refurbished/replaced in a timely and responsible manner.

[andymays]

Absolutely correct the surface should be appropriately refurbished/replaced in a timely and responsible manner.


Then once again I have to say................ wait for it..............


Show Me the Wire meet Show Me the Money!

[rokitman]

I've never understood why they hired Arnold-he's completely ignorant when it comes to racing. Polytrack has proven to be an experiment in progress with tragic consequences to both equine and man. I hope they sent the maintenance crew to a training seminar-they surely need it!
He's no Bo Derek, that's for sure.

[Show Me the Wire]

Don't you think the track has the responsibility to upkeep its track and its other capital improvements?

It is part of the cost of doing business. There is no way you are going to convince me or any other rationale person, that Hollywood Park bought the product, thinking the fibers would last for decades, especially with horses' hoofs pounding on it daily, heavy machinery rolling over it daily, in conjunction with water erosion, and changes in climate.

If they don't have the money to adequately maintain the proper mix of material, that is just poor managment. Imagine poor managment at a race track, how odd. :bang:

Put the blame where it belongs, on poor managment and not the surface.

[andymays]

Don't you think the track has the responsibility to upkeep its track and its other capital improvements?

It is part of the cost of doing business. There is no way you are going to convince me or any other rationale person, that Hollywood Park bought the product, thinking the fibers would last for decades, especially with horses' hoofs pounding on it daily, heavy machinery rolling over it daily, in conjunction with water erosion, and changes in climate.

If they don't have the money to adequately maintain the proper mix of material, that is just poor managment. Imagine poor managment at a race track, how odd. :bang:

Put the blame where it belongs, on poor managment and not the surface.


Is it more expensive to maintain a dirt track or a poly track? Do the math. :bang:

[Show Me the Wire]

All I can say is poor managment if they did not make provisions or plan accordingly. It is nothing more and nothing less.

[andymays]

All I can say is poor managment if they did not make provisions or plan accordingly. It is nothing more and nothing less.


Whatever the reason, it is what it is. Maybe we agree on your point.

Remember on thing. The infomercial claimed that with Poly Track we would have happy and healthy horses for years to come. That would cause bigger fields that would lead to bigger handle. That meant more money to maintain or replace the surface when needed. I don't think they counted on the a two year replacement window either. At least the infomercial didn't say that. :eek: