Synthetics...is it time?

[cj]

Clearly, there is zero advantage to having a synthetic surface except in the areas where weather causes a lot of cancellations. I imagine it won't be long until they are ripped out most places, especially SoCal, and dirt returns.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Taken directly from the Keeneland website.


Polytrack
A safer solution.

Revolutionary in its design, Polytrack is an entire system, encompassing a specially designed top layer that works in tandem with a unique vertical drainage structure.

The top layer—which comprises silica sand, fibers and recycled materials— provides a soft cushion for the horse and rider. It is covered in a wax coating that allows water to flow freely through the top surface to the sub layers below. The sub layers include porous macadam and dense aggregate rock that provide a solid foundation while vertical drainage pipes carry water away from the track. Together, these elements provide a safer, more consistent racing surface compared to a conventional dirt track.

Keeneland, in conjunction with Martin Collins International, is the North American distributor of Polytrack.

[cj]

Three blind mice (not the stewards) can see that was a lie. There was no proof it was true when written, and certainly there is no proof now.

Just for the record, I can see polytrack, if safe, at Turfway and maybe Woodbine. That is about it of those that have it.

[Greyfox]

I don't mind poly. At one time in California, and especially Santa Anita, the top three early speed horses were the ones to consider closely for the win. Now you have to look at Sustained-Presser and Sustained types more closely than before. But if the experiment hasn't worked, then I have no problems going back to dirt. For whatever reason, the poly turns a lot of players off.

[46zilzal]

Have you ever checked your shoes after stepping on it? Greasy as hell

Think what that does to hooves and airways

[slewis]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

I don't mind poly. At one time in California, and especially Santa Anita, the top three early speed horses were the ones to consider closely for the win. Now you have to look at Sustained-Presser and Sustained types more closely than before. But if the experiment hasn't worked, then I have no problems going back to dirt. For whatever reason, the poly turns a lot of players off.

That's because they make the track that way.... rock hard = fast times= injured horses.....

I posted on another thread that the CHRB should look at Tampa's surface.
The weather is very similar to Southern Cal. and TBD is one of the safest surfaces to train and race on.

Of course you wont see 107.38 for 25k claimers... maybe thats the issue.
But you'll have a horse left 6 months from now (and longer).

(Of course the mindset is probably "how could a minor league track do anything better than we can?")

[DJofSD]

If you believe in hay, oats and water, how can you be in favor of plastic dirt?

[andymays]

Can anyone guess how I voted?

I follow Southern California closely and I've seen first hand how the Racing Officials and Racing Executives have lied about synthetic surfaces particularly in the area of injuries and breakdowns. That sort of thing can't be isolated to California.

Synthetic surfaces are more expensive to maintain!

They may be less safe when it's all said and done because they've only been around a few years. Remember all Tracks with a synthetic surface had new bases installed. I think a dirt surface with a new base is as safe or more safe than a synthetic surface.

Most Horseplayers (Customers) dislike them!

In my opinion Racing Executives like them because they produce a more exciting finish and that's true. They think it will bring more fans to the sport because of the exciting finishes. In my opinion the close finishes and lead changes closer to the wire cause Horseplayers like myself to get aggravated and pissed off more often when we're on the wrong side of those photo's. In that respect I think synthetic surfaces have burned out many Horseplayers.

The other potential problem are the bunched up fields in the stretch. We've seen two bad accidents where Jockey's have been severely injured and both were on synthetic surfaces. With a bunched up field in the stretch there is a greater chance of injury to both Horse and Jockey. Tracks with these surfaces should consider a passing lane in the stretch (rail in the stretch goes inward 5 or 10 feet to make passing anther Horse less dangerous).

[illinoisbred]

Here,s another thought regarding synthetic surfaces.From what I've heard from several Vets,young horses really need a hard or firm surface to train and race on or their leg joints won't close properly.It seems the concussive effect of a dirt surface is very beneficial.Are we going to see more fatal injuries as these youngsters move on from synthetic surfaces to"real" dirt?

[Bobzilla]

Can the tracks even afford to convert back to dirt at this time? I don't know. Many will probably say that they can't afford not to because of potential loss of more business.

Last year when SA was having problems with their version of Cushion track the CHRB granted them the option to convert back to dirt, if they so desired, but they chose to give Pro-Ride a chance. I would guess that there was pressure from Lexington (America's gateway to the International Racing World) to go the Pro-Ride route considering that the BC had already decided to have their big days in SoCa for two years. Track officials actually commented that there was not an abundance of the appropriate dirt anywhere to be found in North America. I guess the newly created Pinnacle Racecouse must have beat them to the last remaining pile of dirt to be found on the continent.

Though I think a change in California could take place, I truly doubt we'll be seeing a change at Keeneland anytime soon. Keeneland and Polytrack are business partners. Furthermore, I strongly suspect that if one were to take the time to review the lists of trustees, Board of Directors and other officials of such organizations as the Jockey Club, Breeders' Cup, the NTRA and Keeneland I would bet that one starts to see some of the same names popping up all over the place; they're all intertwined and with many of them being big players in the world of breeding. I have very little doubt that there are very strong elements within these organizations that are thoroughly commited to seeing the synthetic revolution through to the end. I have also heard that there has been discussion over the last year about the possibility of making changes to the Kenneland facility that would prepare them as a host site for future Breeders' Cups. There has been some resistance to this plan, however, as many feel the changes would detract from the track's historical charm.

[Bruddah]

Originally Posted by Bobzilla

Can the tracks even afford to convert back to dirt at this time? I don't know. Many will probably say that they can't afford not to because of potential loss of more business.

Last year when SA was having problems with their version of Cushion track the CHRB granted them the option to convert back to dirt, if they so desired, but they chose to give Pro-Ride a chance. I would guess that there was pressure from Lexington (America's gateway to the International Racing World) to go the Pro-Ride route considering that the BC had already decided to have their big days in SoCa for two years. Track officials actually commented that there was not an abundance of the appropriate dirt anywhere to be found in North America. I guess the newly created Pinnacle Racecouse must have beat them to the last remaining pile of dirt to be found on the continent.

Though I think a change in California could take place, I truly doubt we'll be seeing a change at Keeneland anytime soon. Keeneland and Polytrack are business partners. Furthermore, I strongly suspect that if one were to take the time to review the lists of trustees, Board of Directors and other officials of such organizations as the Jockey Club, Breeders' Cup, the NTRA and Keeneland I would bet that one starts to see some of the same names popping up all over the place; they're all intertwined and with many of them being big players in the world of breeding. I have very little doubt that there are very strong elements within these organizations that are thoroughly commited to seeing the synthetic revolution through to the end. I have also heard that there has been discussion over the last year about the possibility of making changes to the Kenneland facility that would prepare them as a host site for future Breeders' Cups. There has been some resistance to this plan, however, as many feel the changes would detract from the track's historical charm.

Dang it Bobzilla, your getting a BIG AMEN BRUDDAH! Well written and explained. Simply put, it's nothing more than the attempted Globalization of American Racing. Specifically spear headed by an influential group of "Blue Bloods" to enhance their pockets in the Breeding and selling of the Equine.

[DJofSD]

Originally Posted by illinoisbred

Here,s another thought regarding synthetic surfaces.From what I've heard from several Vets,young horses really need a hard or firm surface to train and race on or their leg joints won't close properly.It seems the concussive effect of a dirt surface is very beneficial.Are we going to see more fatal injuries as these youngsters move on from synthetic surfaces to"real" dirt?

It's not the joints that benefit from proper training over a good surface, it's bone mass/density.

Let me know when the breeders install plastic dirt in the paddocks so the foals are running over it from the early days of their development.

[ezrabrooks]

Originally Posted by slewis

That's because they make the track that way.... rock hard = fast times= injured horses.....

I posted on another thread that the CHRB should look at Tampa's surface.
The weather is very similar to Southern Cal. and TBD is one of the safest surfaces to train and race on.

Of course you wont see 107.38 for 25k claimers... maybe thats the issue.
But you'll have a horse left 6 months from now (and longer).

(Of course the mindset is probably "how could a minor league track do anything better than we can?")

Tampa Bay and So. Cal have similar weather? Tampa Bay has 5-6 times the rain as SoCal.

Ez

[slewis]

Originally Posted by ezrabrooks

Tampa Bay and So. Cal have similar weather? Tampa Bay has 5-6 times the rain as SoCal.

Ez

Do you just sit around and wait for me to post so you can try to refute what I say?

If you're going to jump down my throat on my posts maybe you should be more factual.

The similarity of weather / rainfall in a comparision of two cities in regards to their respective race season should be made during the period of time those meets are run.

So genius, go and compare the rainfall in Tampa during Jan Feb Mar and Apr vs So. Cal.... And temperature too.

Considering I lived in Southern California and visit Florida frequently, I think I have a reasonable idea of the climate.

Next, you can always ADD water to a track, the problem is not losing a track during serious amounts of rain... a problem every track super faces....
Not a major problem when the meet is held in Tampa.... and only an occasional issue during the entire season in So. Cal.

Next I've had the opportunity to actually walk on the TBD surface when we ran in the Tampa Bay Derby....

What the F have you walked on .. your vegetable garden??

[joanied]

I voted....get rid of them...now!!
It's quite obvious, after, what...6 fatal breakdowns recently...synthetics are no safer...
dirt on an excellent cushion...dirt, dirt, dirt!!