Casner on horse safety

[JustRalph]

https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.co...r-bill-casner/

Somebody remind him that a huge group won’t bet it.

[Inner Dirt]

I quickly learned synthetic tracks and my handicapping style don't mix. Are average field sizes the same on dirt vs synthetic? It mentioned the low accident rate at Golden Gate, but last I checked in there they had a lot of 6 horse fields.

[Jeff P]

I was recently interviewed by a reporter writing an article about the recent horse deaths at Churchill and how players might react to a resulting industry push for artificial surfaces.

The call lasted over an hour.

I mentioned Santa Anita's jump in breakdowns back in 2019 and the things Santa Anita did (pre-race vet inspections/medication reforms, etc.) to turn things around.

A day or two after the call I emailed the reporter a link to an article at USA Today covering how Santa Anita turned things around.

When asked about player reaction to a possible renewed industry push for artificial surfaces:

I told the reporter that when surveyed several years ago one third of players said they were strongly against artificial surfaces.

I said current handle data suggests players bet less on artificial surfaces than natural dirt and turf.

I thought Gulfstream Park makes an interesting test case because they race on all three surfaces - Dirt, Tapeta, and Turf.

After the call I ran year to date 2023 handle numbers 01-01-2023 to 06-04-2023 for Gulfstream Park and emailed them to the reporter who emailed back thanking me for the info:

Gulfstream Park 2023 YTD 01-01-2023 to 06-04-2023

Handle Per Runner by Surface:
$134,063 Turf
$120,071 Dirt
$102,501 Synth

Handle Per Race by Surface:
$1,214,509 Turf
$835,817 Dirt
$796,307 Synth

Avg Field Size by Surface:
9.06 Turf
7.77 Synth
6.96 Dirt


Don't know how much (or if anything) I said makes it into the article.

But to your point Ralph:

The Bloodhorse is owned by the Jockey Club and TOBA.

The industry is very much aware a significant percentage of players bet less on artificial surfaces than natural dirt and turf.


-jp
.

[woodbinepmi]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

I quickly learned synthetic tracks and my handicapping style don't mix. Are average field sizes the same on dirt vs synthetic? It mentioned the low accident rate at Golden Gate, but last I checked in there they had a lot of 6 horse fields.

They were having 6 horse fields before synthetics.

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by woodbinepmi

They were having 6 horse fields before synthetics.

No argument there I just noticed Golden Gate had a very low accident rate
and that could have to do with the short fields and not so much surface.

Jeff P posted average runners, so it looks like at the tracks he studied the synthetic fields were slightly larger than the dirt ones.

[lamboguy]

what a lame response this was. when you add Bute or any other anti-inflammatory medication to any mammal you are going to take away the pain that someone has. you can get temporary relief from the pain, but the problem still exists and will degenerate with time and become worse. in horse racing, someone is asking the horse to expend more energy than he wants to, bigger problems will show up. the legs that the horses walk around in are not big enough for their bodies and are very fragile.

to train up these horses with pain medication in them to help them run faster, or help them with their breathing will always produce a number of bad results no matter what surface or toe grabs a horse is on or wears.

[Al Gobbi]

Twitter

whether racing wants to address it or not, society is much more sympathetic to animals now unlike the 60s or 70s and if these incidents keep continuing to happen the general public and politicians may decide having racing legal isn't worth it anymore.

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by Al Gobbi

https://twitter.com/TimSullivan714/s...62979208101889

whether racing wants to address it or not, society is much more sympathetic to animals now unlike the 60s or 70s and if these incidents keep continuing to happen the general public and politicians may decide having racing legal isn't worth it anymore.

there is a big difference today than 50 or 60 years ago. the price of fast horses has gone way up. some of these top pedigree horses sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars and even many millions. that is the jist of the game now.

jason servis proved that you don't need to have the greatest horse, all you need is the right chemicals at the right times and you can win Kentucky Derby's and $20 million races. his horse was in for maiden $16,000 and MAXIMUM SECURITY became a star. when you took him off the drug program he didn't shine so bright.

[ScottJ]

The article provided interesting information on hoof slide factors (3.5-5.0 inches on dirt versus 1.5 inches on synthetics). First time I have seen this data and this makes the article really valuable.

This had me thinking about how differently tennis is played at the highest level on different surfaces : clay at Roland Garros, grass at Wimbledon, hardcourt at Flushing Meadows. Some tennis players relish a particular style of play. One could expect that some handicapping styles have hidden bias that play differently on one surface versus another. For example, rather than making this a dirt versus synthetic debate, are your handicapping success rates different between turf and dirt?

Unfortunately, the article did not get into details about the soil moisture and composition to compared dirt and synthetic slide conditions; it would be interesting to know how those parameters could be better controlled before throwing all-in with the synthetic surfaces.

[ScottJ]

Originally Posted by Al Gobbi

https://twitter.com/TimSullivan714/s...62979208101889

whether racing wants to address it or not, society is much more sympathetic to animals now unlike the 60s or 70s and if these incidents keep continuing to happen the general public and politicians may decide having racing legal isn't worth it anymore.

I would be surprised if attitudes towards animals have changed at all.

Rather than only having the evening news with Cronkite and the morning paper over a coffee, there are many more air-minutes and column-inches to fill. There are a thousand-fold more media distribution outlets.

Stories which did not warrant the limited space of the earlier decades now find publication as "breaking news".

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by ScottJ

I would be surprised if attitudes towards animals have changed at all.

Rather than only having the evening news with Cronkite and the morning paper over a coffee, there are many more air-minutes and column-inches to fill. There are a thousand-fold more media distribution outlets.

Stories which did not warrant the limited space of the earlier decades now find publication as "breaking news".

Attitudes definitely HAVE changed. Fifty years ago you didn't hear people refer to animals as their children. But the main thing is that we're even further removed from a world where many people farm or own livestock and make their living that way. If you own a "work animal" you know they get hurt, they have to be put down. If you own a farm, animals are a commodity. Those times are in the distant past for most Americans, and they don't look at the injury or death of an animal as part of a "business" or a normal part of the gambling or entertainment industry.

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

I was recently interviewed by a reporter writing an article about the recent horse deaths at Churchill and how players might react to a resulting industry push for artificial surfaces.

The call lasted over an hour.

I mentioned Santa Anita's jump in breakdowns back in 2019 and the things Santa Anita did (pre-race vet inspections/medication reforms, etc.) to turn things around.

A day or two after the call I emailed the reporter a link to an article at USA Today covering how Santa Anita turned things around.

When asked about player reaction to a possible renewed industry push for artificial surfaces:

I told the reporter that when surveyed several years ago one third of players said they were strongly against artificial surfaces.

I said current handle data suggests players bet less on artificial surfaces than natural dirt and turf.

I thought Gulfstream Park makes an interesting test case because they race on all three surfaces - Dirt, Tapeta, and Turf.

After the call I ran year to date 2023 handle numbers 01-01-2023 to 06-04-2023 for Gulfstream Park and emailed them to the reporter who emailed back thanking me for the info:

Gulfstream Park 2023 YTD 01-01-2023 to 06-04-2023

Handle Per Runner by Surface:
$134,063 Turf
$120,071 Dirt
$102,501 Synth

Handle Per Race by Surface:
$1,214,509 Turf
$835,817 Dirt
$796,307 Synth

Avg Field Size by Surface:
9.06 Turf
7.77 Synth
6.96 Dirt


Don't know how much (or if anything) I said makes it into the article.

But to your point Ralph:

The Bloodhorse is owned by the Jockey Club and TOBA.

The industry is very much aware a significant percentage of players bet less on artificial surfaces than natural dirt and turf.


-jp
.

the only thing that has changed at Churchill Downs is that a MSW purse is now $120,000. that is the reason why there are more breakdowns.

[Robert Fischer]

I've found more success on synth by looking at past performances for trips against the flow vs. with the flow vs. made-a-move-against-the-flow, first and foremost. Then, fairly standard trip handicapping and replay watching.

I have less success [on synth, than dirt] just breaking down 'today's' race from projected trips, pace and speed figures etc...

[kyle r]

Originally Posted by Al Gobbi

https://twitter.com/TimSullivan714/s...62979208101889

whether racing wants to address it or not, society is much more sympathetic to animals now unlike the 60s or 70s and if these incidents keep continuing to happen the general public and politicians may decide having racing legal isn't worth it anymore.

Anybody who still sees “society” or “democracy” or the “will of the people,” or even markets, as the driver of events and change is living in a fantasy land.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Al Gobbi

https://twitter.com/TimSullivan714/s...62979208101889

whether racing wants to address it or not, society is much more sympathetic to animals now unlike the 60s or 70s and if these incidents keep continuing to happen the general public and politicians may decide having racing legal isn't worth it anymore.

Here's the problem with his view.

The industry isn't viable as it is. A lot of tracks are currently dependent on money from casinos to support purses and maintenance. Despite that extra money, most owners are still losing money, very good trainers are dropping out, and other than the computer guys, players are dropping out and betting less.

The industry would not survive very long if it took a significant hit to handle.

So to the extent the data suggests horse players on a net basis would bet less on synthetics, a major overhaul in that direction would be suicidal.

IMO, the correct approach is try to make the existing surfaces safer and to accumulate the kind of very detailed medication, training, track safety and injury data that would allow for better rules to be put in place to reduce injuries and deaths further.

How to make the game a more attractive gambling proposition and reverse the secular decline is another problem when the take is too high, there's not a lot of free cash for investment or take reduction, and political problems prevent rapid change.