Keeneland Synthetic

[Sysonby]

Actually, if you read the whole thing, it pretty much is a ringing endorsement. Seriously, their handles are up with synthetic, which is what has been reported at pretty much every place they put in synthetic, why would they change? Also, re safety of horses and riders with synthetic, there is statistical information kept by, among others, the Jockey Club that indicates pretty clearly that synthetic is safer. This is not just someone's opinion.

Take a look at the rate that horse deaths have gone up at Santa Anita since they went back to dirt. If people like the sport, we should be trying not to turn off the public by disgraceful safety records.

[letswastemoney]

The reason field sizes go up in synthetic races is that dirt horses have no choice but to run in synthetic races and turf horses will fill up the fields.

[rrpic6]

I'm glad they are keeping Polytrack. The Presque Isle meet ends a few weeks before the Keeneland fall meet. Those shippers are overlooked every year, some really take to the similar surface and many win at large odds.

RR

[Not4Love]

Originally Posted by Sysonby

Actually, if you read the whole thing, it pretty much is a ringing endorsement. Seriously, their handles are up with synthetic, which is what has been reported at pretty much every place they put in synthetic, why would they change? Also, re safety of horses and riders with synthetic, there is statistical information kept by, among others, the Jockey Club that indicates pretty clearly that synthetic is safer. This is not just someone's opinion.

Take a look at the rate that horse deaths have gone up at Santa Anita since they went back to dirt. If people like the sport, we should be trying not to turn off the public by disgraceful safety records.

I disagree that it is safer for the jockeys. Remember ? Renee Douglas, Michael straight, Julie bremo, Bonnie Castaneda, and another rider paralyised in northern California. All these riders suffered career ending injuries on the synthetic . The horses don't break down because they don't "put out" like they do on a "natural surface. Take a look at how horses gallop out after a race on poly. They can't Waite to pull up.

[Al Gobbi]

Originally Posted by letswastemoney

The reason field sizes go up in synthetic races is that dirt horses have no choice but to run in synthetic races and turf horses will fill up the fields.

Prior to the Poly they would rarely come off turf. Now all it takes is a little bit of rain and they come off (except the stakes).

[Hosshead]

Health of the Jockeys.
What about the jockeys (and horses) breathing bits of plastic ?

[Valuist]

I guarantee Rene Douglas will tell you Poly isn't safer than real dirt. And like was mentioned earlier, breathing those fibers in cannot be good for either the riders or horses.

It makes sense for Turfway to have it, so they can run thru the winter. But that's about it. Its ridiculous to have it at summer tracks like Del Mar and Arlington.

[Sysonby]

Putting in link to three years of data from the Equine Injury Database

http://www.jockeyclub.com/pdfs/suppl...tables_eid.pdf

These are the stats

[Sysonby]

More stats, this time Santa Anita because it switched to synthetic and switched back to dirt so you can see the change in injury rate

http://www.jockeyclub.com/pdfs/eid/SantaAnita.pdf

[classhandicapper]

I'm not a huge fan of synthetic racing because it complicates my life as a gambler and I'm not as good on it, but I think the evidence is pretty strong that it's safer for the horses (and jockeys as a result) and there is a place for it in the sport.

It's not even as bad for handicapping purposes as it was in the beginning. Most of the tracks aren't nearly as slow and bad for speed as a few of them were initially.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Sysonby

More stats, this time Santa Anita because it switched to synthetic and switched back to dirt so you can see the change in injury rate

http://www.jockeyclub.com/pdfs/eid/SantaAnita.pdf

Seems to not specifically mention that Santa Anita's increased fatality rate could be due to most of those horses having raced the previous 8 months on plastic and rubber tracks. Horses use different muscles and their bodies are conditioned to run a certain way on plastic....when they switch to the dirt and then break down, i'd pretty much say that the constant switching in surfaces is the culprit and not necessarily the dirt.

How can we know if these stats would all be the same if Dmr and Hollywood had the same exact surface as SA?

[Sysonby]

We don't, and your point about switching surfaces is a good one. That is a risk factor.

However, the sheer breadth of the evidence on synthetics vs dirt re catastrophic breakdowns is very difficult to deny. We're not talking about a small study based on a few starts, this is a four year study based on tens of thousands of starts.

I am also not saying that dirt surfaces can't be made safer for the horses and thus the jockeys. I think more work needs to be done in that regard and there are definitely dirt surfaces now that are safer than others.

[Sysonby]

One last point in relation to Santa Anita, as the new injury rates when they switched back to dirt are actually in line or even a little lower than their previous injury rates on dirt, this would suggest that switching surface is not the major factor at play here.

[burnsy]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I'm not a huge fan of synthetic racing because it complicates my life as a gambler and I'm not as good on it, but I think the evidence is pretty strong that it's safer for the horses (and jockeys as a result) and there is a place for it in the sport.

It's not even as bad for handicapping purposes as it was in the beginning. Most of the tracks aren't nearly as slow and bad for speed as a few of them were initially.

I agree 100%, but i still avoid them. i don't understand how the handle does not suffer. i know alot of other people that won't bet the poly tracks. when keenland is open i bet the grass races and very few poly races if at all. many races end up with a mad scramble to the wire with horses winning you could never like in a million years. many of the stakes races are meaningless when horses move on to other tracks. racing is always dangerous and dirt racing is faster so its even more so...but i'm glad there are always dirt tracks running just the same. Del Mar is another one. i have not made a bet there in like 2 years.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Sysonby

One last point in relation to Santa Anita, as the new injury rates when they switched back to dirt are actually in line or even a little lower than their previous injury rates on dirt, this would suggest that switching surface is not the major factor at play here.

A lot of it has to do with compromised horses getting past the morning vet checks. Perfectly sound horses don't break down too often, its mostly the ones who have underlying problems....these tracks need to do a better job at not letting the unsound ones race....of course, since its an owners and trainers game and not a tracks or bettors game, its easier said than done.