View Full Version : Oak Tree back at Santa - Pro Ride remains in place for now
Interestingly, Stronach mentions that they may replace the Pro Ride with another synthetic surface. I personally hope that they keep the Pro-Ride, it's fair, consistent, safe and seems to make the horses competitive when they ship out to dirt tracks. I reckon even the horsemen might see it that way if the alternative is yet another synthetic surface ;).
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/57587/oak-tree-to-remain-at-santa-anita-in-2010?source=rss
The_Knight_Sky
06-23-2010, 09:12 AM
I personally hope that they keep the Pro-Ride, it's fair, consistent,
safe and seems to make the horses competitive when they ship out to dirt tracks.
But it doesn't play like a traditional dirt track.
Horsemen need to change their training methods.
Riders need to ride differently.
Breeders need to breed a different kind of horse.
Is that traditional main track racing ?
It is worthless when it rains.
Fingal
06-23-2010, 10:49 AM
Doesn't matter what they have, it's the drainage system. Considering both Hollywood Park & Santa Anita had Cushion Track, & Hollywood had no problems with rain while SA turned into a swamp, it might have been the drainage. When SA went to Pro-ride & they still had swamps when it rained, by process of elimination it wasn't the material, it was the drainage. The question should always be- what was done differently with the installation at Santa Anita & why ?
Pro-ride is fine. I wouldn't be surprised if they pulled out the Pro Ride, replaced the drainage system & put it back in again.
xfile
06-23-2010, 11:25 AM
Anyone have the actual statistics showing breakdowns b4 and after installation of synthetics? I mean if it is actually saving a lot of horses then we should probably not wish for traditional dirt to return.
But it doesn't play like a traditional dirt track.
Horsemen need to change their training methods.
Riders need to ride differently.
Breeders need to breed a different kind of horse.
Is that traditional main track racing ?
People say that but yet the best synthetic horses appear to be doing well enough on the dirt. It's not like the synthetic-to-dirt winners hadn't been winning on the synthetic (Zenyatta, Lookin At Lucky and Blind Luck being the prime examples this year).
BluegrassProf
06-23-2010, 01:30 PM
I personally hope that they keep the Pro-Ride, it's fair, consistent, safe and seems to make the horses competitive when they ship out to dirt tracks. I reckon even the horsemen might see it that way if the alternative is yet another synthetic surface ;)Woot! Just about as consistent as you! ;)
Perhaps you could stand up there next to Frank when he tries to throw yet another half-tested faux surface at his horsemen's feet - he's gonna need a cheerleader or two...
FenceBored
06-23-2010, 01:31 PM
People say that but yet the best synthetic horses appear to be doing well enough on the dirt. It's not like the synthetic-to-dirt winners hadn't been winning on the synthetic (Zenyatta, Lookin At Lucky and Blind Luck being the prime examples this year).
You're our own Mars Blackmon.
BhHONpmlxPc
Spalding No!
06-23-2010, 01:50 PM
I personally hope that they keep the Pro-Ride, it's fair, consistent, safe and seems to make the horses competitive when they ship out to dirt tracks.
In terms of top level racing, it's a perfect surface because it keeps out-of-state horses from shipping into your track and gives your local horses a reason to ship out.
Woot! Just about as consistent as you! ;)
Perhaps you could stand up there next to Frank when he tries to throw yet another half-tested faux surface at his horsemen's feet - he's gonna need a cheerleader or two...
Yep we agree, and he knows the same all too well imo.
In terms of top level racing, it's a perfect surface because it keeps out-of-state horses from shipping into your track and gives your local horses a reason to ship out.
Ship out ... and win. That is indeed one of the perks of it at the moment. I would love to race top juveniles in California at the moment. Nobody from out of state takes you on, and when you go and meet them instead, you win anyway. Perfect.
Spalding No!
06-23-2010, 05:10 PM
Ship out ... and win. That is indeed one of the perks of it at the moment. I would love to race top juveniles in California at the moment. Nobody from out of state takes you on, and when you go and meet them instead, you win anyway. Perfect.
Yeah, but winning at Oaklawn and Lone Star won't get you any Eclipse Awards.
Robert Goren
06-23-2010, 05:11 PM
We don't know if the synthetics are safer or not. The statistics are flawed. What we do know is that most betters prefer dirt. That is reason enough to go back to dirt.
We don't know if the synthetics are safer or not. The statistics are flawed. What we do know is that most betters prefer dirt. That is reason enough to go back to dirt.
Sorry but I strongly disagree with just giving people what they want. The world does not progress by just giving people what they want. There was a case for going synthetic (safety and increasing field sizes), and that case should be (objectively) reviewed before just giving people what they prefer. Now, you need responsible people in charge for that to work, and whether they have those in SoCal or not, that I can't answer.
Spalding No!
06-23-2010, 05:22 PM
Sorry but I strongly disagree with just giving people what they want. The world does not progress by just giving people what they want. There was a case for going synthetic (safety and increasing field sizes), and that case should be (objectively) reviewed before just giving people what they prefer. Now, you need responsible people in charge for that to work, and whether they have those in SoCal or not, that I can't answer.
Shouldn't they have reviewed them before they installed them?
FenceBored
06-23-2010, 05:24 PM
Sorry but I strongly disagree with just giving people what they want. The world does not progress by just giving people what they want. There was a case for going synthetic (safety and increasing field sizes), and that case should be reviewed before just giving people what they prefer. Now, you need responsible people in charge for that to work, and whether they have those in SoCal or not, that I can't answer.
I see. You want "responsible people" in charge who will give us what "progress" demands.
Shouldn't they have reviewed them before they installed them?
They thought they had a case and made a decision. If it turns out to be less safe, or field sizes have decreased, it clearly didn't work. But that needs to be studied first imo.
Robert Goren
06-23-2010, 05:33 PM
Sorry but I strongly disagree with just giving people what they want. The world does not progress by just giving people what they want. There was a case for going synthetic (safety and increasing field sizes), and that case should be (objectively) reviewed before just giving people what they prefer. Now, you need responsible people in charge for that to work, and whether they have those in SoCal or not, that I can't answer.Right now the industry can not afford to be too high and mighty with its customers.
I see. You want "responsible people" in charge who will give us what "progress" demands.
A system and luck.
Right now the industry can not afford to be too high and mighty with its customers.
Not sure, I often think that a crisis is the best time for people with vision and courage. Whether those people are on the racing boards in California or New Jersey in 2010, only time will tell.
Ship out ... and win. That is indeed one of the perks of it at the moment. I would love to race top juveniles in California at the moment. Nobody from out of state takes you on, and when you go and meet them instead, you win anyway. Perfect.
Supporting data?
Supporting data?
I posted this last year around the BC, I will give you an updated version tomorrow.
Bobzilla
06-23-2010, 06:12 PM
Sorry but I strongly disagree with just the giving people what they want. The world does not progress by just giving people what they want. There was a case for going synthetic (safety and increasing field sizes), and that case should be (objectively) reviewed before just giving people what they prefer. Now, you need responsible people in charge for that to work, and whether they have those in SoCal or not, that I can't answer.
Isn't identifying the stength of demand for a product part of the formula for a successful business/industry? I think there was a case for adequate due diligence on the part of west coast racing officials prior to making a decision that Crist described at the time as being "wildly premature". I'm not convinced it was ever "objectively" reviewed.
Isn't identifying the stength of demand for a product part of the formula for a successful business/industry? I think there was a case for adequate due diligence on the part of west coast racing officials prior to making a decision that Crist described at the time as being "wildly premature". I'm not convinced it was ever "objectively" reviewed.
I think there was a very high demand for safety and higher field sizes 3-4-5 years ago, and the synthetic promised to meet those demands.
Whether it was wildly premature or not, whether the DD wasn't taken seriously ... don't know. All I know is that it's done more than OK for such a new product. Some hiccups at Santa but also two BC's with 0 breakdowns and a horse that finally captured the public imagination again. Hollywood and Golden Gate are ticking along, Del Mar may still need some tinkering, I suppose, it takes longer if you have less racing days.
BluegrassProf
06-23-2010, 06:43 PM
Sorry but I strongly disagree with just giving people what they want. The world does not progress by just giving people what they want.Rightio! It obviously progresses by others giving you what they damned well know you want, whether you know it or not! I'd certainly hate to think that what bettors, spectators, jockeys, and horseman think they want might get in the way of progress and the Stronach Express.
Like I said, man: hop on up there! Frankie needs all the support he can muster! :ThmbUp:
*(Seriously, "I disagree with giving people what they want" is the bestest, most entertainingest post I've read here in a while...bigtime thumbs up...)
exiles
06-23-2010, 07:35 PM
In terms of top level racing, it's a perfect surface because it keeps out-of-state horses from shipping into your track and gives your local horses a reason to ship out.
It also will keep CA racing in the MINORS FOR EVER
carlonr
06-23-2010, 11:51 PM
Anyone have the actual statistics showing breakdowns b4 and after installation of synthetics? I mean if it is actually saving a lot of horses then we should probably not wish for traditional dirt to return.
Contact Craig Dado @ Del Mar
andymays
06-24-2010, 07:32 AM
Carl,
you can believe the statistics from 2008 onward but prior to 2008 the statistics are not accurate. This is something most people on the ground know and that's why so many Trainers are against sythetic surfaces. The tracks that have them like to use Rick Arthurs statistics to promote their surfaces but when Dr. Arthur cites specific breakdown numbers on dirt prior to 2008 he is misleading the public (lying). Some people can't accept that they were lied to but here is the proof in writing. I have permission to post the entire email but I don't want to give away some of the personal email addresses that are listed. I suppose I can xxxx them out if people want to see the whole thing or I can PM it to you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is an email excerpt from 2008 from Richard Shapiro (CHRB) to several people including Rick Arthur and several officials at the CHRB. It was sent to rwwupl who is the HANA west coast representative.
Excerpt:
Historically, it appears that the fatality numbers contained in the CHRB annual report did not properly or accurately report exactly where the death occurred. What they apparently did was account for when the fatality occurred, and if a fatality occurred say in January, it would be attributed to the operating track at that time. I think the assumption was that since racing was occurring at a particular time the operating track is most likely where the fatality happened. No one again apparently focused on this until we had different type of tracks and the increasing gross number of fatalities became a hot issue. You will also see that the numbers didn’t also differentiate between Turf, Dirt, and in some cases illness, sudden death, etc.
There is a footnote that explains this, but it seems many people did not read that note. When Lenny Shulman cited his numbers, he clearly was not understanding the problem here, and frankly, how poor the record keeping addressed this issue. I too was initially confused and when I realized how useless these numbers were for what we wanted to know, advocated we do things differently and properly as soon as possible.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is another article you may find interesting because it addresses breakdowns and fatalities along with some information about Dr. Arthur and his role in compiling those statistics.
The only error in the article is when Pricci mentions older surfaces with 10 year old bases. It was supposed to be decades old bases of 30 or more years.
http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog.php/John-Pricci/comments/02132010-as-dirt-track-looms-santa-anita-synthetics-issue-rages-on/
carlonr
06-24-2010, 09:52 PM
The report I'm referring to was for each individual track by year. I'll see if I can obtain a copy.
andymays
06-24-2010, 09:58 PM
The report I'm referring to was for each individual track by year. I'll see if I can obtain a copy.
It's all on the CHRB website. The statistics from 2008 onward are accurate the ones prior are not.
PaceAdvantage
06-25-2010, 04:41 PM
Sorry but I strongly disagree with just giving people what they want. The world does not progress by just giving people what they want. There was a case for going synthetic (safety and increasing field sizes), and that case should be (objectively) reviewed before just giving people what they prefer. that to work, and whether they have those in SoCal or not, that I can't answer.Well, we know all about field size...Hollywood cancels cards because they can't fill races. Strike one of two.
Safety? Inconclusive at best, deliberately fudged data at worse...Strike two, you're out...change it back...
When Europe switches all of their turf courses to synthetics due to safety reasons, then I'll sit up and take notice. Hell, they don't even have to switch over completely...just run a high profile race over the stuff for once... :lol:
Stillriledup
06-25-2010, 07:13 PM
Plastic is evil.
Well, we know all about field size...Hollywood cancels cards because they can't fill races. Strike one of two.
Safety? Inconclusive at best, deliberately fudged data at worse...Strike two, you're out...change it back...
When Europe switches all of their turf courses to synthetics due to safety reasons, then I'll sit up and take notice. Hell, they don't even have to switch over completely...just run a high profile race over the stuff for once... :lol:
They won't because turf is safer than synthetics. They only have synthetic to be able to have year-round flat racing.
PaceAdvantage
06-26-2010, 04:27 PM
They won't because turf is safer than synthetics.Curious to see the statistics that back up this claim...I would think some European racing authority and/or horse advocacy group is the source for your claim?
Jasonm921
06-27-2010, 12:58 AM
It was a knee Jerk reaction from the boys in Sacramento...now the tracks are left footin' the bill.
Fager Fan
06-27-2010, 03:02 AM
People say that but yet the best synthetic horses appear to be doing well enough on the dirt. It's not like the synthetic-to-dirt winners hadn't been winning on the synthetic (Zenyatta, Lookin At Lucky and Blind Luck being the prime examples this year).
Who cares if horses who are based on synthetic usually run well on a traditional surface? That's the biggest no-brainer on the planet -- they were BRED to run on one of the traditional surfaces, so of course they're going to do better usually on one of those surfaces.
The fact is that not all horses bred for the traditional surfaces like synthetics, so you're not going to draw in dirt horses to risk running over a surface they may not like. They'll choose to go elsewhere. And you definitely shouldn't run the BC over anything but traditional surfaces until such time as there is a synthetic division that has been bred for and has top synthetics horses who are deserving of champion status.
Curious to see the statistics that back up this claim...I would think some European racing authority and/or horse advocacy group is the source for your claim?
Sure, have a look on the BHA site, they keep track of breakdowns.
The American counterpart breakdowns were mentioned in that Ground Control article that was posted here a few months ago.
The BHA has the flat turf and A/W breakdown rate at 0.6 per 1000 runners. I believe it's higher than 3 on American dirt and 1.6 on American A/W.
It's probably fair to say that flat American horse racing is at least three times as dangerous to horses than it is in Europe. However, the British have nothing to lecture you on (as would be their natural inclination), since their jumps horses break down at an even higher rate. But the difference for flat races is really shocking.
http://www.britishhorseracing.com/resources/equine-science-and-welfare/injuries-fatalities.asp
http://www.calracing.com/pdf/ground-control.pdf
kenwoodall2
06-27-2010, 01:36 PM
Sure, have a look on the BHA site, they keep track of breakdowns.
The American counterpart breakdowns were mentioned in that Ground Control article that was posted here a few months ago.
The BHA has the flat turf and A/W breakdown rate at 0.6 per 1000 runners. I believe it's higher than 3 on American dirt and 1.6 on American A/W.
It's probably fair to say that flat American horse racing is at least three times as dangerous to horses than it is in Europe. However, the British have nothing to lecture you on (as would be their natural inclination), since their jumps horses break down at an even higher rate. But the difference for flat races is really shocking.
http://www.britishhorseracing.com/resources/equine-science-and-welfare/injuries-fatalities.asp
http://www.calracing.com/pdf/ground-control.pdf
"Flat racing season, which runs from April to October and includes the famous 'Classic' races". Their dirt horses take the winter off and so have time to heal up their microfractures.
"Flat racing season, which runs from April to October and includes the famous 'Classic' races". Their dirt horses take the winter off and so have time to heal up their microfractures.
Their 'dirt' horses (I presume you mean A/W horses) usually stick to the AW and race throughout the year.
BlueShoe
06-27-2010, 03:53 PM
Plastic is evil.
The nitwits running California would seem to agree with you. In the not too distant future plastic bags will be legislated out of use. Instead of putting them in our grocery stores, these jackasses may put them in the rest of our racetracks instead.
PaceAdvantage
06-28-2010, 06:41 PM
The BHA has the flat turf and A/W breakdown rate at 0.6 per 1000 runners. I believe it's higher than 3 on American dirt and 1.6 on American A/W. I believe the 3 number for American dirt is incorrect if you're talking about in general.
andymays
08-06-2010, 10:26 PM
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/58277/santa-anita-track-repair-discussed-at-meeting
Excerpt:
Amid concerns about track safety, horsemen representatives and Santa Anita management met the morning of Aug. 6 to discuss progress on renovation of the Pro-Ride synthetic racing surface that began July 26.
George Haines, Santa Anita's president, confirmed the meeting took place over issues expressed with the repairs so far and said he was "looking forward to further discussions" with horsemen. He said he did not want to comment on the extent of their complaints.
Excerpt:
Zetcher was asked if the main track issue could jeopardize the Oak Tree Racing Association meet, which is to be held at Santa Anita Sept. 29-Oct. 31.
"We felt that this was an appropriate time to have trainers look at the track, with the meet still two months away," he responded. "We just want to be sure that it's OK. If they can get the track ready in time, great. If they can't, then we'll have to look at other options.
"The TOC and CTT are working together on this, and hopefully we can get it resolved," he added.
Haines referred a question about the status of the Oak Tree meet to Sherwood Chillingworth, the racing association's executive vice president. Chillingworth did not return phone calls.
beertapper
08-06-2010, 11:11 PM
It is worthless when it rains.
and that's why it gets an F, imo
what's the over under going to be on racing days lost in the winter / spring meet, +/- 7.5 days ? :lol:
andymays
08-07-2010, 12:03 AM
http://www.drf.com/news/more-woes-main-track-santa-anita
Excerpt:
According to two people familiar with the renovation, who asked not to be named because there has been no official announcement yet about details of the renovation, a mesh sheeting that separates the Pro-Ride material from a layer of gravel at the bottom of the surface has been punctured in some places, allowing gravel to rise ito the upper layers of the surface.
JohnGalt1
08-07-2010, 08:12 AM
My preferences if they convert Santa Anita---
1) Real dirt
2) Tapeta
3) A two week--turf only--vanity meet.
4) I don't care. I will seldom play because of the raise in the take out percentage.
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.