Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Deepsix
It, the past few years, has been interesting to view from a distance. The energy expended by those who resisted synthetic surfaces from the beginning, those who have relentlessly pursued an effort to ensure that they fail, those who's every day seems to be consumed by efforts to undo, to reverse, to discourage others from wagering on synthetics, has certainly had a greater impact than those who quietly adapted to the change.
Just how good/bad the surface actually is, how many unfulfilled expectations of less maint. and greater consistency/safety that had been promised, ---- it doesn't really matter at this point. Those who resisted have won.
Might things have been different under the same set of conditions.... sure. Absent the ponderous anti-synthetic movement we might very well have had a different result. Synthetic surfaces are wagered on every day and there are actually some players making money betting them. Will Arlington and Keeneland endure the weight? Time will tell.
|
I'd say it was just the opposite for the first two years. The propaganda from the con artists who sold that junk was overwhelming. 70% of trainers want it gone for a reason.
