crunk_o Twitter thread about the Santa Anita breakdown problem....

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by deelo

there's been more deaths on turf than dirt which is unusual so clearly something is affecting the track. i'm not sure about the rain thing, plenty of tracks get way more rain.

Wouldn't this "clearly" suggest it is random?

[o_crunk]

Originally Posted by the little guy

Wouldn't this "clearly" suggest it is random?

11 racing fatalities. 6 dirt, 5 turf.

8 training fatalities. 7 dirt, 1 "sudden death".

So 13 dirt, 5 turf.

[cj]

Originally Posted by o_crunk

11 racing fatalities. 6 dirt, 5 turf.

8 training fatalities. 7 dirt, 1 "sudden death".

So 13 dirt, 5 turf.

How much training is done on the turf? Isn't there a seperate dirt training track at SA? Were any on that?

[cutchemist42]

https://twitter.com/GateToWire/statu...814997506?s=19

[ReplayRandall]

My opinion on this problem is Tim Ritvo…..With a dwindling horse population on track, and given marching orders by The Stronach Group to get the horsemen to race their stables as much/quickly as possible, the pressure of this precarious situation with the decline of racing in Cali has led to "not-ready horses" being pushed too quickly to train and then race against healthy quality stock to win purse shares....

Something had to give and unfortunately it's the horses themselves....It has to stop.

[Suff]

Even if its randomness and the track is fine.

There's this problem and its getting worse.

Using any animal in any non-organic way to entertain people is falling out of favor.

Zoo's, Circus's, Aquariums are under fire.

On Sunday PETA twitter got rolled over for bashing Steve Irwin on the anniversary of his death. Animal Treatment is on peoples minds this week especially.

[anotherCAfan]

Originally Posted by cutchemist42

I see pullthepocket is now tweeting that locals in the LA area are saying the LA Times and local radio is now discussing it....this is just getting worse.[/url]

Yes. It was on at least one of the AM radio stations I listen to during the day, and it was on the websites of the LA Times and at least two TV stations.

This is not good, and it's only going to get worse. Publicity will not be positive.

I feel bad for Andy (track superintendent) as he has worked there for many years.

[AskinHaskin]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

But yes, synthetics are significantly safer and American racing's rejection of them is incredibly shortsighted and deadly.

That is just clueless parroting of the pure B.S. spouted only by those with something to gain from others installing synthetic surfaces.


For no study has ever been properly undertaken which does the simple task of allowing for the fact that better horses run at better race tracks which are disproportionately those which can afford to install synthetic surfaces in the first place.


Of course there are going to be more breakdowns per capita at Timonium and Trinity Meadows and Hazel Park over the long, long haul than there will at Keeneland, Woodbine and even Santa Anita.

It simply isn't enough to compare catastrophic breakdowns on synthetics during one or five calendar years to catastrophic breakdowns on dirt during the same period. Everyone knows in advance that once you normalize the data, there will be far more breakdowns at Zia Park than there will be at Woodbine.

The fact that these idiots do no more than just that, and that you take what they say as being significant, tells the rest of us all we need to know about them and about you.

On its best days, synthetic surfaces have served only to relocate the crux of the injuries from one area of the horse to another. And that reality is precisely why most of the racing entities on this continent gave up on the passing fad much like they did with the Tartan surface of yesteryear.

[biggestal99]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

That is just clueless parroting of the pure B.S. spouted only by those with something to gain from others installing synthetic surfaces.


For no study has ever been properly undertaken which does the simple task of allowing for the fact that better horses run at better race tracks which are disproportionately those which can afford to install synthetic surfaces in the first place.


Of course there are going to be more breakdowns per capita at Timonium and Trinity Meadows and Hazel Park over the long, long haul than there will at Keeneland, Woodbine and even Santa Anita.

It simply isn't enough to compare catastrophic breakdowns on synthetics during one or five calendar years to catastrophic breakdowns on dirt during the same period. Everyone knows in advance that once you normalize the data, there will be far more breakdowns at Zia Park than there will be at Woodbine.

The fact that these idiots do no more than just that, and that you take what they say as being significant, tells the rest of us all we need to know about them and about you.

On its best days, synthetic surfaces have served only to relocate the crux of the injuries from one area of the horse to another. And that reality is precisely why most of the racing entities on this continent gave up on the passing fad much like they did with the Tartan surface of yesteryear.

Comn santa Anita has high class horses. Turfway and presque isle Downs do not
Yet year after year after year, they lead the nation in least fatalities that occurred per start

Those are facts.

Allan (facts over opinions)

[Bullet Plane]

According to an NBC article, the track will be closed for 3 days to sort the problem out. Of the 19 deaths, 11 have come in live racing and 8 in workouts. And of the live racing deaths, 6 were on the main track, 5 on the turf.

Hopefully, they will get this sorted out quick.

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

That is just clueless parroting of the pure B.S. spouted only by those with something to gain from others installing synthetic surfaces.


For no study has ever been properly undertaken which does the simple task of allowing for the fact that better horses run at better race tracks which are disproportionately those which can afford to install synthetic surfaces in the first place.


Of course there are going to be more breakdowns per capita at Timonium and Trinity Meadows and Hazel Park over the long, long haul than there will at Keeneland, Woodbine and even Santa Anita.

It simply isn't enough to compare catastrophic breakdowns on synthetics during one or five calendar years to catastrophic breakdowns on dirt during the same period. Everyone knows in advance that once you normalize the data, there will be far more breakdowns at Zia Park than there will be at Woodbine.

For all of your "everyone knows" and "clueless parroting", I see you quoting the evidence from exactly zero studies. Show us some proof there are twice as many breakdowns at Zia as at Santa Anita.

[bello]

This really does bring up a fascinating point with data that I imagine someone must have.

What is the on track breakdown rate by track.

Do the minor league tracks have a larger % of breakdowns than the major leagues?

Just because a horse is slower and in the minors, does that mean they are infirm and ready to implode?

Maybe the over-achievers in the Major Leagues are more apt to break down.

I would love to see real facts as well as opinions.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

That is just clueless parroting of the pure B.S. spouted only by those with something to gain from others installing synthetic surfaces.


For no study has ever been properly undertaken which does the simple task of allowing for the fact that better horses run at better race tracks which are disproportionately those which can afford to install synthetic surfaces in the first place.


Of course there are going to be more breakdowns per capita at Timonium and Trinity Meadows and Hazel Park over the long, long haul than there will at Keeneland, Woodbine and even Santa Anita.

It simply isn't enough to compare catastrophic breakdowns on synthetics during one or five calendar years to catastrophic breakdowns on dirt during the same period. Everyone knows in advance that once you normalize the data, there will be far more breakdowns at Zia Park than there will be at Woodbine.

The fact that these idiots do no more than just that, and that you take what they say as being significant, tells the rest of us all we need to know about them and about you.

On its best days, synthetic surfaces have served only to relocate the crux of the injuries from one area of the horse to another. And that reality is precisely why most of the racing entities on this continent gave up on the passing fad much like they did with the Tartan surface of yesteryear.

Askin, the synthetics consistently reduced fatalities AT THE SAME RACETRACK over the previous dirt track.

[Suff]

https://www.peta.org/media/news-rele...ita-racetrack/


PETA HAS CANCELED A PLANNED PROTEST AT SANTA ANITA RACETRACK FOLLOWING A MEETING WITH TRACK REPRESENTATIVES WHO PLEDGED TO TAKE DEFINITIVE STEPS, INCLUDING EXTENDING THE REVIEW OF MEDICATION RECORDS OF HORSES WHO ARE IN TRAINING—AND NOT JUST BEFORE RACES. RESEARCH SPONSORED BY THE CALIFORNIA HORSE RACING BOARD SHOWS WHY HORSES BREAK DOWN, AND THE FAULT LIES WITH THE TRAINERS AND VETERINARIANS WHO DRUG HORSES WITH A COCKTAIL OF ANTI-INFLAMMATORIES, PAINKILLERS, SEDATIVES, AND MORE TO KEEP THEM RUNNING WHEN THEY SHOULD BE RECUPERATING. THIS MASKS SORENESS AND INJURY—AND INJURED HORSES ARE VULNERABLE TO BROKEN BONES. HORSES WHO REQUIRE MEDICATION SHOULD NOT BE ANYWHERE NEAR A TRACK. PETA BELIEVES THAT THERE ARE INNUMERABLE PROBLEMS WITH HORSE RACING, BUT AT A BARE MINIMUM, ALL MEDICATIONS SHOULD BE BANNED FOR AT LEAST A WEEK BEFORE A HORSE RACES OR TRAINS, WHICH WOULD EFFECTIVELY STOP LAME ANIMALS FROM BEING ABLE TO RUN. PETA WILL CONTINUE TO MEET WITH SANTA ANITA OFFICIALS IN THE COMING DAYS.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Suff

https://www.peta.org/media/news-rele...ita-racetrack/


PETA HAS CANCELED A PLANNED PROTEST AT SANTA ANITA RACETRACK FOLLOWING A MEETING WITH TRACK REPRESENTATIVES WHO PLEDGED TO TAKE DEFINITIVE STEPS, INCLUDING EXTENDING THE REVIEW OF MEDICATION RECORDS OF HORSES WHO ARE IN TRAINING—AND NOT JUST BEFORE RACES. RESEARCH SPONSORED BY THE CALIFORNIA HORSE RACING BOARD SHOWS WHY HORSES BREAK DOWN, AND THE FAULT LIES WITH THE TRAINERS AND VETERINARIANS WHO DRUG HORSES WITH A COCKTAIL OF ANTI-INFLAMMATORIES, PAINKILLERS, SEDATIVES, AND MORE TO KEEP THEM RUNNING WHEN THEY SHOULD BE RECUPERATING. THIS MASKS SORENESS AND INJURY—AND INJURED HORSES ARE VULNERABLE TO BROKEN BONES. HORSES WHO REQUIRE MEDICATION SHOULD NOT BE ANYWHERE NEAR A TRACK. PETA BELIEVES THAT THERE ARE INNUMERABLE PROBLEMS WITH HORSE RACING, BUT AT A BARE MINIMUM, ALL MEDICATIONS SHOULD BE BANNED FOR AT LEAST A WEEK BEFORE A HORSE RACES OR TRAINS, WHICH WOULD EFFECTIVELY STOP LAME ANIMALS FROM BEING ABLE TO RUN. PETA WILL CONTINUE TO MEET WITH SANTA ANITA OFFICIALS IN THE COMING DAYS.

One way to understand why racing's position on Lasix is so terrible is to clear your mind of sny of your knowledge about horse racing and then re-read this statement.

How does PETA's argument sound to an ordinary person who pays no or little attention to horse racing? Of course horses have to be sound. Of course we can't be running them when they are injured or sick. Etc.

Now, as a practical matter, there's no way racing could exist under the rules proposed by PETA (which, of course, is a feature and not a bug to PETA). But it is still a powerful argument. I suspect if PETA put this rule into a ballot initiative, they could pass it in California.

Racing has to care about this. It is going to need to meet PETA halfway or breakdowns will eventually result in the banning of the sport.