Finally! An Honest Article and Honest Comments on Track Surfaces!

[andymays]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/55903/officials-track-consistency-maintenance-key

Excerpt:

As people rush to takes sides in the great dirt-versus-synthetic racetrack surface debate, Dr. Mick Peterson and Santa Anita Park track superintendent Richard Tedesco suggested consistency and maintenance trump type of surface.

Excerpt:

When asked which surface he would prefer—dirt or synthetic—for horse safety, Tedesco said he might prefer the “ultimate dirt track,” but he’s not sure one exists. Tedesco for years worked on dirt surfaces and has overseen the evolution of Santa Anita’s synthetic surface.

Excerpt:

While moisture can radically change a dirt surface, temperature is the key to synthetic surfaces, Peterson said. He cited research on two different synthetic tracks; one would change dramatically when the temperature hit 100 degrees, while the other showed more gradual change over a wider temperature change.

Excerpt:

Ferraro complimented Peterson’s work and said: “But we’re five to seven years too late. We should have started all this monitoring before we started changing all the tracks

Excerpt:

In the case of synthetic tracks, Peterson noted the wax and polymers used in them will change over time, as will the length of the fibers as they break down from use. The sand in various areas of the track also wears differently. That finding is prompting Arlington Park and Keeneland to occasionally switch the inside half of the track with the outside half, something Peterson likened to rotating tires.

[Tom]

So all the other ones you have posted have been dishonest?

[Deepsix]

lol Really. This is the ONLY ONE that he's posted that has shown any balance. Ha!

[andymays]

So all the other ones you have posted have been dishonest?


I'll post the articles and you decide! ;)

In all seriousness I think the guys quoted in the article spoke the truth without an agenda. It is rare to see an article that addresses both sides of the issue well. I think this one did.

You have to remember that for the first two years the synthetic advocates went mostly unchallenged. In 2009 many people like myself started questioning the veracity of the infomercials that sold us synthetic surfaces. Most of the articles challenging the merits are the ones I have posted over the last year or so.

The only thing I would add to the article is to make fun of my favorite track Del Mar. What do people think happens when on a 90+ degree day, when the track surface temperature is over 110 degrees, and they water it? :D

[andymays]

lol Really. This is the ONLY ONE that he's posted that has shown any balance. Ha!


Why would I post an article I disagree with or that I think is making false claims? :rolleyes:

[Deepsix]

Hey, you do what you do. It was evident to me that for months your mission was to get up each morning and search the internet for posts to dump on SA. SoCAL, CHRB, DMR, Synthetics, etc. etc. AND I suppose you must have done that because you believed what you believed. That didn't mean your posts were without your obvious bias, nor that they are always correct.

Hey, press on and enjoy. You've got a forum and a following.

[andymays]

Hey, you do what you do. It was evident to me that for months your mission was to get up each morning and search the internet for posts to dump on SA. SoCAL, CHRB, DMR, Synthetics, etc. etc. AND I suppose you must have done that because you believed what you believed. That didn't mean your posts were without your obvious bias, nor that they are always correct.

Hey, press on and enjoy. You've got a forum and a following.


You know Deepsix, I read the article a couple of more times to make sure and I can't seem to find my name in the article. I have been quoted in a couple of articles but not this one.

Since the article isn't about me what do you think of what was said in the article? Do you have an opinion about the article or just me and what you think my agenda is? ;)

[Deepsix]

Mostly just your agenda. From the article I read very simply that there are problems with BOTH surfaces and that it takes different/specific maint. techniques to make them perform to potential (I followed SA for years of problems with dirt). It is my 'conclusion' that you'll say something to the effect that "BUT synthetics were supposed to require less maint., etc. etc. and it failed to meet its hype. Yeah, thats what was supposed to happen BUT we also know that there is no "perfect dirt", either. I just believe that the energy expended railing against the synthetics is energy wasted.

Nice to see you posted this more balanced article, though. Thanks for that.

[andymays]

Mostly just your agenda. From the article I read very simply that there are problems with BOTH surfaces and that it takes different/specific maint. techniques to make them perform to potential (I followed SA for years of problems with dirt). It is my 'conclusion' that you'll say something to the effect that "BUT synthetics were supposed to require less maint., etc. etc. and it failed to meet its hype. Yeah, thats what was supposed to happen BUT we also know that there is no "perfect dirt", either. I just believe that the energy expended railing against the synthetics is energy wasted.

Nice to see you posted this more balanced article, though. Thanks for that.

It has been a propaganda war from the start and the synthetic advocates had HRTV and TVG helping them out for the first two years. By my calculations I have another 8 months to even things out. ;)

The article is good in that they speak the some truths about both surfaces and you can tell from the quotes that the people talking aren't trying to sell anyone anything. I was skeptical when I saw the meeting scheduled because up until now these meetings were dominated by Rick Arthur and Craig Fravel who both love synthetic surfaces.

:ThmbUp: to the Author of the article and Mick Peterson and Richard Tedesco.

By the way Tedesco was hired by Del Mar because of so many complaints last year about the surface by just about everyone.

[rwwupl]

Hey, you do what you do. It was evident to me that for months your mission was to get up each morning and search the internet for posts to dump on SA. SoCAL, CHRB, DMR, Synthetics, etc. etc. AND I suppose you must have done that because you believed what you believed. That didn't mean your posts were without your obvious bias, nor that they are always correct.

Hey, press on and enjoy. You've got a forum and a following.


I like to see Andy post, and You must also like it because you seem to be ready with a comment or two that is not favorable right away.

You have not given much information or ideas of your own but it is not hard to see that you are an opponent and disagree with most of Andy's opinions. thats all right, but if you dis agree with the article that has been posted...lets hear it... but attacking the messenger makes one think you might have an agenda yourself. :)

Thanks Andy and keep up the good work, people will decide for themselves where they stand. :ThmbUp:

[Deepsix]

From what I have observed you (rwwupl) are kind of a cheerleader for Andy, and he for you. I get the impression that you guys know one another (both from socal and spouse similar views) and probably correspond off line concerning topics/responses. Am I correct? I get that impression, anyway. You talk of me being quick to reply BUT absent my occasional comments you are noticeably always there to reinforce his posts, and he yours. Maybe just a strange coincidence, but maybe not. <smile>

[Tom]

From all I have seen, it not so much the artificial surfaces that are the problem as it is the tracks that have no clue how to maintain them.

Take the two obvious moron tracks of all time - Del Mar and Santa Anita out of the picture, and artificial tracks look pretty decent. The people that run the two biggest jokes of racetracks are the root cause of their problems.

[rwwupl]

From what I have observed you (rwwupl) are kind of a cheerleader for Andy, and he for you. I get the impression that you guys know one another (both from socal and spouse similar views) and probably correspond off line concerning topics/responses. Am I correct? I get that impression, anyway. You talk of me being quick to reply BUT absent my occasional comments you are noticeably always there to reinforce his posts, and he yours. Maybe just a strange coincidence, but maybe not. <smile>



And what are we to conclude from that? Do you have something to offer about what was said in the article?...or do you just want to put in your two cents about character assassination or what... because you disagree.

What would you like everyone to know? ..And why?

Anyone who knows me knows I post what I believe... and I do not apologize for that...By the way, what do you believe? I can only guess.

[Robert Goren]

From all I have seen, it not so much the artificial surfaces that are the problem as it is the tracks that have no clue how to maintain them.

Take the two obvious moron tracks of all time - Del Mar and Santa Anita out of the picture, and artificial tracks look pretty decent. The people that run the two biggest jokes of racetracks are the root cause of their problems.:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[Charlie D]

Good article with interesting statements.

:ThmbUp: to all involved in it.

[Igeteven]

From what I have observed you (rwwupl) are kind of a cheerleader for Andy, and he for you. I get the impression that you guys know one another (both from socal and spouse similar views) and probably correspond off line concerning topics/responses. Am I correct? I get that impression, anyway. You talk of me being quick to reply BUT absent my occasional comments you are noticeably always there to reinforce his posts, and he yours. Maybe just a strange coincidence, but maybe not. <smile>

Deepsix

I have a question too,

1. Are you a player?

if so, how much do you play, everyday, every other day, weekends,????

I want to tell you this, Andy and rwwupl, Play everyday, watch every race


So put up your credentials and tell us what you do. Write or say or produce nothing or play the game.



Lester

[johnhannibalsmith]

Deepsix

I have a question too,

1. Are you a player?

...
Lester

#2 ?

[Igeteven]

#2 ?

You bet your life on that, I am a PLAYER

[andymays]

From all I have seen, it not so much the artificial surfaces that are the problem as it is the tracks that have no clue how to maintain them.

Take the two obvious moron tracks of all time - Del Mar and Santa Anita out of the picture, and artificial tracks look pretty decent. The people that run the two biggest jokes of racetracks are the root cause of their problems.


That is one of the problems but at the bottom of the thread starter they basically say what I've been saying for a long time and that is synthetic surfaces wear out with weather, usage, and maintenance.

Excerpt:

In the case of synthetic tracks, Peterson noted the wax and polymers used in them will change over time, as will the length of the fibers as they break down from use. The sand in various areas of the track also wears differently. That finding is prompting Arlington Park and Keeneland to occasionally switch the inside half of the track with the outside half, something Peterson likened to rotating tires.

Del Mar 2007 was nothing like Del Mar 2009 and Arlington 2007 was nothing like Arlington 2009. In about the third year all 19 tons need to be replaced for the surface to play to specifications. Adding wax and stuff from used vacuum cleaner bags every meet isn't enough. ;)

[andymays]

From what I have observed you (rwwupl) are kind of a cheerleader for Andy, and he for you. I get the impression that you guys know one another (both from socal and spouse similar views) and probably correspond off line concerning topics/responses. Am I correct? I get that impression, anyway. You talk of me being quick to reply BUT absent my occasional comments you are noticeably always there to reinforce his posts, and he yours. Maybe just a strange coincidence, but maybe not. <smile>


So you are keeping track of everyone on the board who agrees with one another so you can what? What does that mean?

Neither one of us need the other to reinforce our posts but if we agree on something or disagree on something isn't that what we're doing on a message board? :eek:

You make it seem like something dishonest is going on. :D

My point in an earlier reply to you was to get the thread back on track about the article. Every time posters feel the need to make it about the person who starts the thread or who agrees with who the thread goes nowhere but the toilet. I've been guilty of doing the same thing in the past. Who does that benefit? Nobody.

[FenceBored]

From all I have seen, it not so much the artificial surfaces that are the problem as it is the tracks that have no clue how to maintain them.

Take the two obvious moron tracks of all time - Del Mar and Santa Anita out of the picture, and artificial tracks look pretty decent. The people that run the two biggest jokes of racetracks are the root cause of their problems.

Is it that the other tracks are better, or just that they don't get the press?

Since Polytrack's installation at Arlington, fatal injuries for horses have remained in the average range, according to Daily Racing Form numbers. In 2007, there were 14 racing fatalities, two of those on turf, and three during training besides the 14. In 2008, there were 15 racing fatalities, four of those on turf, and seven in training. This year there were 12 racing and four training fatalities.
-- http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=341879

Southern California is the focus because the data and the market there combine in such a way as to make it possible for it to be the focus.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I think it's pretty obvious,that if both surfaces have their issues,you would have to opt for one that isn't high maintenance like synthetic is turning out to be,and one that players and trainers enjoy by no small margin.

As for Andy spinning things=that's BS.A dedicated player that loves his home tracks fighting against a surface who the advocates of cannot even call wet when it rains?!!What a snake that AndyMays.:cool:

[andicap]

The last post talked about fatalities, but for the most part trainers in Calif. hate synthetics -- at least it's my understanding -- because their horses are suffering many more hind-region type injuries, not necessarily because of breakdowns. So those Arlington fatality figures don't mean much in that context.

What about Woodbine and Keeneland? I haven't seen a lot of information on those tracks -- but then again I don't keep up with the trades like I used to. Still, I don't seem to read about trainers griping about hind injuries at Keeneland like they do in southern California.

Could it be the weather? Keeneland in April and Oct. -- not many extremes unlike Arlington in the summer (real hot) and even SoCal. with the heat and the winter rains. Also they are limited meets so the surface is less apt to wear out.

Northern California also has more moderate weather conditions -- a little wet but the temps are generally on the mild side -- and I've seen more praise for the Tapata surface there. Is is the surface or the conditions?

Now Woodbine remains a total mystery to me as to rear -end injuries, weather extremes, etc. And what about Presque isle in Erie, Pa.?

Bottom line: So many variables, its almost impossible to sort them out because of the lack of scientifically control test conditions. Something, of course, they should have done BEFORE they experimented on horses and handicappers.

[FenceBored]

The last post talked about fatalities, but for the most part trainers in Calif. hate synthetics -- at least it's my understanding -- because their horses are suffering many more hind-region type injuries, not necessarily because of breakdowns. So those Arlington fatality figures don't mean much in that context.

What about Woodbine and Keeneland? I haven't seen a lot of information on those tracks -- but then again I don't keep up with the trades like I used to. Still, I don't seem to read about trainers griping about hind injuries at Keeneland like they do in southern California.

Could it be the weather? Keeneland in April and Oct. -- not many extremes unlike Arlington in the summer (real hot) and even SoCal. with the heat and the winter rains. Also they are limited meets so the surface is less apt to wear out.

Northern California also has more moderate weather conditions -- a little wet but the temps are generally on the mild side -- and I've seen more praise for the Tapata surface there. Is is the surface or the conditions?

Now Woodbine remains a total mystery to me as to rear -end injuries, weather extremes, etc. And what about Presque isle in Erie, Pa.?

Bottom line: So many variables, its almost impossible to sort them out because of the lack of scientifically control test conditions. Something, of course, they should have done BEFORE they experimented on horses and handicappers.

The point about Arlington was not so much the numbers per se, but the fact that they aren't as talked about. Saying "I don't hear about X from Peoria, therefore X isn't a problem in Peoria" is faulty logic. It could mean that X isn't a problem in Peoria. It could mean that people are lying to you about X in Peoria. It could mean that nobody knows what X is in Peoria, so they aren't talking about X in Peoria. In short, not hearing about X from Peoria only means that you're not hearing about X from Peoria.

[andymays]

The point about Arlington was not so much the numbers per se, but the fact that they aren't as talked about. Saying "I don't hear about X from Peoria, therefore X isn't a problem in Peoria" is faulty logic. It could mean that X isn't a problem in Peoria. It could mean that people are lying to you about X in Peoria. It could mean that nobody knows what X is in Peoria, so they aren't talking about X in Peoria. In short, not hearing about X from Peoria only means that you're not hearing about X from Peoria.


I thought Peoria had something to do with it! :D

Now I know for sure! :D

[Show Me the Wire]

CincyHorseplayer:

The tracks actually, thought they did opt for the surface with less maintainence. As Andy said many times one of the big selling points was AWS would be easier and less expensive to maintain.

[DJofSD]

I think it's pretty obvious,that if both surfaces have their issues,you would have to opt for one that isn't high maintenance like synthetic is turning out to be,and one that players and trainers enjoy by no small margin.

As for Andy spinning things=that's BS.A dedicated player that loves his home tracks fighting against a surface who the advocates of cannot even call wet when it rains?!!What a snake that AndyMays.:cool:

Right on, Cindy!

My personal theory about why we have plastic dirt: management made changes to the usual high level of maintenance for the main track at the southern California tracks. In turn, more problems started to show up including but not limited to fatalities (morning and afternoon). Plastic dirt was seen as a solution because it fit into the typical Havard MBA standard operating procedure: do more with less -- less money, less personal, less water, less time expended doing what used to be spent.

To bad they were sold a bill of goods.

And, now, they're stuck: stuck with a major expense having installed plastic dirt and the ever increasing likelyhood it would have been better and cheaper to let the track maintenance be performed like it always had been. But instead, new and improved was thought to be better. Yes, better for some but not the horse and not the bettor.

[andymays]

CincyHorseplayer:

The tracks actually, thought they did opt for the surface with less maintainence. As Andy said many times one of the big selling points was AWS would be easier and less expensive to maintain.


I'm falling off my chair as I'm replyinggggggggggggggggggggg ;)

[Show Me the Wire]

I'm falling off my chair as I'm replyinggggggggggggggggggggg ;)


What is so funny? I always told you the installation of AWS was about saving money and the side benefit was the safer and kinder surface.

Like everything in this world, money (economics) is the driving force behind decisions.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I know that was the selling point SMTW.But beyond that it has been a mystery AND high maintenance,that surface will never,ever be consistent.There has been so much added and subtracted that it is an unsolveable problem simply because the formula of it's makeup is everchanging.

With a new base,more attentiveness from track vets,and constant attention from everyone under the sun,I bet good old fashioned mother nature produced,God's own dirt never approaches the problems that existed before this all happened.

[Robert Goren]

I have no clue about Arlington's injuries other than that they can not be too bad or else one of the anti-poly posters would be starting a thread on them at least twice a week.;)

[DJofSD]

Absence of evidence is not evidence for absence.

[PaceAdvantage]

Bottom line: So many variables, its almost impossible to sort them out because of the lack of scientifically control test conditions. Something, of course, they should have done BEFORE they experimented on horses and handicappers.And that's all us "synth-haters" have been calling for since the beginning. But no, we were labeled "animal killers" and "jockey maimers" instead.

I've said it before and I'll say it again...andicap...you need to post more around here! :ThmbUp: