Is San Anita past its issues

[cj]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

weird seeing what seems from afar as a vague possible correlation between a slower/deeper track at Santa Anita and the successful decrease in breakdowns

they even kept it deep and slow for those 2yo in-training sales, to the dismay of some of the sales participants...

so it apparently is believed to be a correlation




and then I'm tuning into the big event weekend at the big east coast meet, and the track is lightning-fast and I'm seeing record times and speed favoring track conditions?


The more stuff I hear and read, and the less I know.

Personally think it is more due to the lack of rain than the deep track though I guess it couldn't hurt.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

weird seeing what seems from afar as a vague possible correlation between a slower/deeper track at Santa Anita and the successful decrease in breakdowns

they even kept it deep and slow for those 2yo in-training sales, to the dismay of some of the sales participants...

so it apparently is believed to be a correlation




and then I'm tuning into the big event weekend at the big east coast meet, and the track is lightning-fast and I'm seeing record times and speed favoring track conditions?


The more stuff I hear and read, and the less I know.

It is not the track. Don't know why people aren't listening when the best in the business from track maintenance to trainers say it's not the track.

[clicknow]

somebody who lives by that track said they went over there when they were digging it up and that it *smelled* really really bad. And that the layer under it was extremely compacted.

What would cause it to smell so bad? I'm thinking that underlayer that is very compacted, not *percolating* well.

If that is the case, track might also be too hard w/not enough give underneath.

I mean, I was at Oaklawn when they redid their track. There was no *smell*. We get a LOT of rain here, way more than most people are used to, and the dirt did not smell.

[Afleet]

wish the powers that be would make the right call and move the BC

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

It is not the track. Don't know why people aren't listening when the best in the business from track maintenance to trainers say it's not the track.

I don't know anything about it 'being the track', or not being the track (much less, why people 'aren't listening').


Only mentioning the correlation, that Santa Anita happens to believe exists.

[elhelmete]

Originally Posted by clicknow

somebody who lives by that track said they went over there when they were digging it up and that it *smelled* really really bad. And that the layer under it was extremely compacted.

What would cause it to smell so bad? I'm thinking that underlayer that is very compacted, not *percolating* well.

If that is the case, track might also be too hard w/not enough give underneath.

I mean, I was at Oaklawn when they redid their track. There was no *smell*. We get a LOT of rain here, way more than most people are used to, and the dirt did not smell.

"someone who lives by the track" sounds like a great set of credentials.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by clicknow

somebody who lives by that track said they went over there when they were digging it up and that it *smelled* really really bad. And that the layer under it was extremely compacted.

What would cause it to smell so bad? I'm thinking that underlayer that is very compacted, not *percolating* well.

If that is the case, track might also be too hard w/not enough give underneath.

I mean, I was at Oaklawn when they redid their track. There was no *smell*. We get a LOT of rain here, way more than most people are used to, and the dirt did not smell.

Well, I would imagine one reason that a track would smell is that horses take craps on it.

[bob60566]

Not good #28

https://www.latimes.com/sports/more/...609-story.html

The Breeders’ Cup committee will meet on June 27 to possibly discuss the issue.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Well, I would imagine one reason that a track would smell is that horses take craps on it.

Made my day!

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by elhelmete

"someone who lives by the track" sounds like a great set of credentials.

Perhaps you missed the context here. Eye witness human being with olafactory senses, most people do possess the ability to smell.

There was no smell when I was watching them dig up Oaklawn. The fact that someone would remark on a god-awful smell while they were digging up SA was something that interested me.

You need not know anything about racing in order to discern that.

And yes, horses poop on the track. When you get enough rain, it mixes and percolates down thru the other layers, this is the entire basis of a septic system for those of you who don't know. Track surfaces are engineered to allow all that thru.

SO my idea that the SA track is not percolating properly is not at all off-base. The eye witness "smell" thing caught my attention, and then when he mentioned the extremely compacted underneath clinched it. As a matter of fact, I would put money on that being a big part of the problem.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by bob60566

Not good #28

https://www.latimes.com/sports/more/...609-story.html

The Breeders’ Cup committee will meet on June 27 to possibly discuss the issue.

Good. God knows I am as a big an advocate for California racing as anyone, but they need to get the BC out of here this year.

Even if they manage to keep the track open, the narrative and publicity of the BC will be displaced by reports about "unsafe" Santa Anita.

Just move it to Churchill. I am sure that track can hold it on a few months notice.

[Redboard]

Originally Posted by Afleet

wish the powers that be would make the right call and move the BC

Why's that? Churchill downs has had more breakdown than SA since May 1st.

Dennis Moore, the old Track Superintendent, is back and in a few weeks they will have two months to work on the surface without any racing or training to screw up their schedule.

[Afleet]

Originally Posted by Redboard

Why's that? Churchill downs has had more breakdown than SA since May 1st.

Dennis Moore, the old Track Superintendent, is back and in a few weeks they will have two months to work on the surface without any racing or training to screw up their schedule.

so your argument is that it is normal to have 28 deaths in one meet? When has CD have 28 equine fatalities in one meet?

[elhelmete]

Originally Posted by clicknow

Perhaps you missed the context here. Eye witness human being with olafactory senses, most people do possess the ability to smell.

There was no smell when I was watching them dig up Oaklawn. The fact that someone would remark on a god-awful smell while they were digging up SA was something that interested me.

You need not know anything about racing in order to discern that.

And yes, horses poop on the track. When you get enough rain, it mixes and percolates down thru the other layers, this is the entire basis of a septic system for those of you who don't know. Track surfaces are engineered to allow all that thru.

SO my idea that the SA track is not percolating properly is not at all off-base. The eye witness "smell" thing caught my attention, and then when he mentioned the extremely compacted underneath clinched it. As a matter of fact, I would put money on that being a big part of the problem.

Weak logic. A racetrack base is not like a septic tank. Arkansas is not California.
I could fo on and in about the weak anecdotal stuff here and implied corellation but hockey is on soon.
None of this is meant to poo poo the loss of equine life. Bbut like the drunk and his keys, the answer isnt always the easiest place to look.

[elhelmete]

Originally Posted by Afleet

so your argument is that it is normal to have 28 deaths in one meet? When has CD have 28 equine fatalities in one meet?

You have to look at per start numbers. More than a couple places have had rates like SA. Aqueduct for one.