A few years ago they ran the \"Hialeah at Gulfstream\" meet. Looks like we may be running a \"Santa Anita at Hollywood\" meet here soon.
http://www.drf.com/news/article/91081.html
Even the biggest advocates of the Synthetic Surface would have to admit the California Officials who mandated in their vote this immediately be put in and the Track Officials who are installing must have been directors in the movie \"Dumb and Dumber\". And since there is an Entertainment Industry strike going on maybe some Hollywood Directors are filing in for part-time help as track maintenance crews. Or maybe they are using the same crew who re-designed Gulfstream Park. Who knows??
The meet will open in 7 days. Opening Day (Dec 26th) at Santa Anita each year features some of the best horses in the world. Track Officials I am sure will be running to jockey\'s after every race in a scene similar to the movie Marathon Man when Dustin Hoffman was sitting in the Dentist chair and kept hearing the words,
\"Is it Safe\"?
You, me and every other handicapper and horse owner is essentially Hoffman in this case. Bet your money and run your horses at your own risk.
Santa Anita Track Officials will be shining the bright lamp and holding the drill when you answer...............
If it wasn\'t so obvious that rushing to do this at some of the most important tracks in America was brain dead, it wouldn\'t be so bad. If this was some obscure desperate track, the industry would have learned something and the risk would have made some sense.
I can\'t imagine a worse source of data than some obscure desperate track. If that\'s were where all the synthetic data were coming from, the poly-haters would be screaming. There is just no pleasing those set in not changing their ways.
While far from obscure, actually most of the tracks that have gone synthetic were desperate - desperate to reduce catastrophic injuries, and in this they have largely succeeded.
Fortunately we have a large and differing cross-sample of data from tracks that needed to change. Here is a large comprehensive and objective report from the Bloodhorse showing all views. A report that would have been impossible with data from some obscure track. I find the comments from the people who actually ride the surface - the jockeys - particularly enlightening.
http://www.bloodhorse.com/pdf/synthetic_surfaces_special_report_120807.pdf
Bob
Bob,
Once again the point is being completely missed from the \"Don\'t criticize Polytrack cult\". The quote below is taken from page 10 of the report you linked, the one with the nice picture.
\"All synthetic surface tracks have extensive drainage systems\"
OK but in the case of Santa Anita it doesn\'t work.
The report boasts there are 800 horses in training out west. Training where, not at Santa Anita. The meet opens in five days and they still do not know if they have a safe race track or a race track at all.
You do not do a new product roll out without a proper testing and implementation program.
Unless of course you run a Race Track in California..................
>I can\'t imagine a worse source of data than some obscure desperate track. If that\'s were where all the synthetic data were coming from, the poly-haters would be screaming. There is just no pleasing those set in not changing their ways.<
This is simply not true.
There was nothing wrong with testing it out at Woodbine, Turfway and other tracks like that for a few years. I never heard a single complaint about using second tier tracks as the testing ground. That includes people that are against it in general. It was borderline insane to test it out SA, HOL, DMR and KEE because there was no more upside from testing it there than elsewhere but much larger downside of a variety of types if it failed.
>While far from obscure, actually most of the tracks that have gone synthetic were desperate - desperate to reduce catastrophic injuries, and in this they have largely succeeded.<
Catastrophic break down rates need to be improved upon, but you don\'t have to start with and risk the preeminent tracks and meets in America to work towards that goal. That\'s what made it so obviously stupid.
In addition, aside from the problem of actually having a meet and being able to train out in CA now, the evidence on long term safety is still accumulating.
How dare you refer to Woodbine as a second tier track.
Frank
The entries are drawn for Opening Day and the Card looks outstanding. Hopefully they have worked all the kinks out and can have a successful meet.
Clearly there were very few trainers shying away from the entry box. With 14 horses entered in the last three races two of them Stakes and one a Grade One, should make for some interesting Late Pick Three Tickets.
Good Luck to everybody. Hope your Holidays so far have been enjoyable and Merry Christmas to those share that faith.
This was a fairly prescient call if I do say so myself.
http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=42998
CHRB Chairman Richard Shapiros last comments remind me of the guys who built the Titanic.
Tickets on that ship were marketed as \"Unsinkable\"...............
Silver Charm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This was a fairly prescient call if I do say so
> myself.
>
> http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=42998
>
> CHRB Chairman Richard Shapiros last comments
> remind me of the guys who built the Titanic.
>
> Tickets on that ship were marketed as
> \"Unsinkable\"...............
Silver,
this wasn\'t hard to predict (even for us guys who enjoy SOME synth racing). I wrote the following back in August:
Michael D. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the \'08 BC will be run on synth at SA, then all
> dirt races will have to be taken with a grain of
> salt.
>
> this synth experiment, which has been an
> unqualified success so far, is going to run into
> major problems in the not so distant future. they
> have taken it way too far.
By the way, Michael, the way Thompson looked last night, the boys in the back room may have found their candidate. Which complicates things a bit.
If Thompson had any passion at all, he might make a pretty good candidate. He acts like a guy that\'s frustrated with the direction of the country, but only partially interested in having any power. It\'s almost as if he was talked into running and contributing to the discussion, but he would rather be doing something else. Other than the passion thing, he\'s the only major player I don\'t dislike a lot for some reason. (I love Paul because I\'m a huge fan of sound money and banking, the Austrian school of economics, Ludwig von Mises etc... and he\'s the only one with a clue on those subjects, but he\'s not viable)
I thought McCain did a good job on Meet the Press this morning defending his positions on the war. He has to win NH though.
After looking at the Iowa data, I think it\'s likely Huckabee is going nowhere fast. I read that In Iowa he got only 14% of the non-evangelical vote and has now gotten no bounce in NH. There aren\'t enough evangelicals to give him the nomination, just enough to hurt anyone that can\'t get many of them.
IMO, anything that throws the nomination further in chaos helps Rudy because he is geared up for the later states and needs for no one to break out from the pack between now and then to still be in a position to win. If Romney, Huckabee, and McCain split NH and SC, that would help Rudy. If one of them wins both, it might put him away for good.
The one thing I am certain of is that none of the others like Romney and it\'s personal, not just politics.
This is really a great race. Too bad it isn\'t a great race between great candidates. It\'s a non winner of 2 lifetime among equally matched bums)
fkach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is really a great race. Too bad it isn\'t a
> great race between great candidates. It\'s a non
> winner of 2 lifetime among equally matched bums.
And too bad that like most Presidential elections of recent years, it
will not be a contest of divergent ideologies. Yes Michael D, the issues
are of course trade, taxes, Iraq,energy, health care, etc but sadly all candidates
who want to have any chance of holding a national office find themselves
centrifugally thrown towards a middle ground which the American
electorate finds palatable, resulting in, ultimately, the preservation of the
status quo.
Since the ideological differences among candidates will be barely perceptible,
the election to me comes to the character of the candidate. That explains my
character assassination of Rudy, which as Michael pointed out, was partially
ripped from the tabloids, although I prefer the New York Post (25 cents) and the
Village Voice (free) to the Daily News (50 cents).
(...and I forgot to mention RuGu\'s poorly concealed and utterly unprofessional
dalliance with his press secretary, Christine Lategano).
Bottom line on Rudy for me: He\'s done a miserable job with his own personal
life and his own family, why should I trust him with the future of my family and
our country?
Observation: Going back to the first year of George W. Bush\'s second term,2005,
you had the administration\'s mishandling of Katrina, you had the administrative
embarrassment over Bush\'s Weapons of Mass Deception, you had VP Cheney\'s
Halliburton continuing to profit from the ever increasing spillage of blood and
loss of life in the middle east. You had some of our traditional world allies
distancing themselves from the United States. You had a President
who seemed intellectually poorly prepared for some of the problems facing him.
You had an administration headed for record lows in terms of approval ratings.
Almost unbelievable that after all that, the Republicans have a decent chance
to return to the White House in January 09. Unbelievable that as the election
draws closer the Democratic Party will be increasingly fractionalized as
Hillary and Obama crank up the rhetoric.
I do not know what the alleged benefits of the primary system are, but my
opinion is that the Democratic Party, seeing how badly the Bush
misAdministration was tanking, would have selected a candidate then and there,
late in 05 early in 06,and began to rally around that candidate, to begin to
develop an agenda, to build some momentum for 2008...
richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> fkach Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > This is really a great race. Too bad it isn\'t a
> > great race between great candidates. It\'s a non
> > winner of 2 lifetime among equally matched
> bums.
>
> And too bad that like most Presidential elections
> of recent years, it
> will not be a contest of divergent ideologies. Yes
> Michael D, the issues
> are of course trade, taxes, Iraq,energy, health
> care, etc but sadly all candidates
> who want to have any chance of holding a national
> office find themselves
> centrifugally thrown towards a middle ground which
> the American
> electorate finds palatable, resulting in,
> ultimately, the preservation of the
> status quo.
>
> Since the ideological differences among candidates
> will be barely perceptible,
> the election to me comes to the character of the
> candidate. That explains my
> character assassination of Rudy, which as Michael
> pointed out, was partially
> ripped from the tabloids, although I prefer the
> New York Post (25 cents) and the
> Village Voice (free) to the Daily News (50
> cents).
>
> (...and I forgot to mention RuGu\'s poorly
> concealed and utterly unprofessional
> dalliance with his press secretary, Christine
> Lategano).
>
> Bottom line on Rudy for me: He\'s done a miserable
> job with his own personal
> life and his own family, why should I trust him
> with the future of my family and
> our country?
>
> Observation: Going back to the first year of
> George W. Bush\'s second term,2005,
> you had the administration\'s mishandling of
> Katrina, you had the administrative
> embarrassment over Bush\'s Weapons of Mass
> Deception, you had VP Cheney\'s
> Halliburton continuing to profit from the ever
> increasing spillage of blood and
> loss of life in the middle east. You had some of
> our traditional world allies
> distancing themselves from the United States. You
> had a President
> who seemed intellectually poorly prepared for some
> of the problems facing him.
> You had an administration headed for record lows
> in terms of approval ratings.
>
> Almost unbelievable that after all that, the
> Republicans have a decent chance
> to return to the White House in January 09.
> Unbelievable that as the election
> draws closer the Democratic Party will be
> increasingly fractionalized as
> Hillary and Obama crank up the rhetoric.
>
> I do not know what the alleged benefits of the
> primary system are, but my
> opinion is that the Democratic Party, seeing how
> badly the Bush
> misAdministration was tanking, would have selected
> a candidate then and there,
> late in 05 early in 06,and began to rally around
> that candidate, to begin to
> develop an agenda, to build some momentum for
> 2008...
fair enough Richie. you make some good points.
I like the sports section of the News. truth is, that rag, in today\'s society, might be a better political baromoter than CSPAN.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> By the way, Michael, the way Thompson looked last
> night, the boys in the back room may have found
> their candidate. Which complicates things a bit.
he was very uninspiring tonight.
it\'s wide open.
can\'t fault the 10-1 grab on McCain though. he\'s still 3-1.
Richie-- one more point, and the one that matters the most to me. Under Guliani, the city was in court (by memory) 22 times for freedom of speech cases. They lost 21 and tied one. That ain\'t the guy I want having insanely expanded Presidential powers.
Hey Jerry,
Just for grins and giggles, how does that compare to any other mayor of new york historically? Just curious, and nothing else.......
NC Tony
Tony-- I\'ve only been paying attention since Ed Koch (who used to live in my building before he moved to Gracie Mansion), and I\'m not saying he was the worst mayor we\'ve had (Dinkins by a pole). But in terms of being an autocrat and a meglomaniac, Guliani was in a class by himself. He was always in big time conflict with someone, always trying to shut someone down, especially those who disagreed with him (hence the First Amendment fights), always bad mouthing someone. It\'s been much quieter around here since he\'s gone.
And don\'t get me started about his claim that what he did for 2 months AFTER 9/11 makes him some kind of expert on terrorism. If he ever got to the general election (which he won\'t), he would get ripped apart on that one.
My favorite Rudy/1st Amendment story is the one about the bus ads. Rudy is a big-time credit hog, and New York Magazine played on this nicely in bus ads that said \"New York Magazine: Perhaps the only good thing in New York that Rudy hasn\'t taken credit for.\" This thin-skinned autocrat had the city sue NYM, on the pretense that he had not signed on for any \"endorsement\" of the magazine. It just shows you how small, petty and humorless this guy is. No one who understands written English would have interpreted that ad as an \"endorsement\". On the contrary, Rudy suing the magazine essentially proved their point.
RG\'s approval rating in New York City on 9/10/01 was somewhere between 40%-
50%, somewhere near 10% among African Americans.
Gaffegate-- RG\'s campaign workers wearing Yankee caps in NH, in the middle of
Red Sox Nation. Doh!!
Favorite RG campaign moment-- taking the cell phone call from Judy Nathan at
the NRA meeting.
Do not vote for RG until you have \"Googled\" -- Alan Placa, Russell Harding.
And I hadn\'t realized that the infamous downtown Manhattan prison facility, the
Tombs, had been renamed in Bernie Kerik\'s honor. When Kerik was indicted in
2006, Mayor Mike Bloomberg ordered that Kerik\'s name be removed from the
facility, sparing Bernie the embarrassment of possibly being incarcerated in a
jail bearing his name.
I\'m not huge a Rudy fan and I didn\'t follow the local politics much at the time. But as a lifetime NYer, I\'d have to think it\'s extremely difficult to accomplish anything worthwhile in this town without making a lot of enemies. That goes double if it involves making fiscally responsible cuts of any sort.
I really can\'t judge someone by how popular he is at the end of his term. It depends on why he is unpopular.
I think if we ever elected a super strong president (not suggesting Rudy is that man) that dealt with the economic realities and demographics of our country and fixed social security and medicare for the long term, he would be the most unpopular president in our history at that time and make more enemies than you could imagine. Of course, he would be national hero a few decades from now for showing that kind of courage.
Bloomberg has an approval rating around 70%. And he\'s a guy who won his office in a very close election.
I was talking in general terms.
You would know better than I whether Bloomberg has taken on a lot of vested interests for the long term good of the city during his time as mayor.
It works both ways.
If you happen to have a good economy through most of your term and don\'t need to do anything tough (but right), you could easily be wildly popular because of favorable conditions that have little to do with your leadership.
I always judge politicans by their actions and not their popularity. Of course, I have my own opinion about the right things to do and tend to be a much longer term thinker than the average person. I\'m also a very strong fiscal conservative, hard money, anti-Federal Reserve guy. If I was charge I\'d be assassinated. ;-)
Jerry,
In all sincerity, I have no dog in this fight. Guiliani took down my Uncle whose last name began with an A and had the same last name as two pretty famous baseball players (brothers) in the 70\'s. I can PM you more details some day.
In any event, I was just curious, as to how he compared to others. I am not a big fan of throwing out one sided factoids like that, and not know if 21 cases is high low or par.
I doubt Guiliani runs either. It\'s my opinion we will have an African American or Woman president or both before we ever have an Italian American president.
NC Tony
Tony;
From Wikipedia. The entries for Koch, Dinkins & Bloomberg do not cite any first amendment cases of note. For a former federal prosecutor, he seemed to have little understanding of our constitution and its comforts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayoralty_of_Rudy_Giuliani
Litigants filed several civil liberties violations lawsuits against the mayor or the city. Giuliani\'s administration lost 22 of 26 cases. [83]
Some of the court cases which found the Giuliani administration to have violated First Amendment rights included actions barring public events from their previous location at the City Hall steps, not allowing taxi drivers to assemble for a protest, not allowing city workers to speak to the press without permission, barring church members from delivering an AIDS education program in a park, denying a permit for a march to object to police brutality, issuing summons and seizing literature of three workers collecting signatures to get a candidate on the presidential ballot, imposing strict licensing restrictions on sidewalk artists that were struck down by a court of appeals as a violation of artists\' rights, using a 1926 cabaret law to ban dancing in bars and clubs, imposing an excessive daily fee on street musicians, imposing varying city fees for newsstand owners based on the content they sold, a case against Time Warner Cable, and an incident in which Giuliani ordered an ad for New York magazine that featured his image taken down from city buses.[84][85] The ad featured a copy of the magazine with the caption, \"Possibly the only good thing Rudy hasn\'t taken credit for\".[86] The next year, the group awarded the Muzzle to Giuliani again for his actions against the Brooklyn Museum exhibit.[87]
Giuliani and his administration encountered accusations of blocking free speech arising from a lawsuit brought by Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church for removing the homeless from the church\'s steps against the church\'s will, and during his 1993 campaign, when he criticized incumbent Mayor Dinkins for allowing Louis Farrakhan to speak in the city. After being criticized for impinging on freedom of speech, he backed down from his criticism of Dinkins.[17]
In 2000, Mayor Giuliani received a \"Muzzle Award\" from the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression in Charlottesville, Virginia. The Muzzles are \"awarded as a means to draw national attention to abridgments of free speech.\"[88] This was Giuliani\'s third such award, including an unprecedented first awarding of a \"Lifetime Muzzle Award,\" which noted he had \"stifled speech and press to so unprecedented a degree, and in so many and varied forms, that simply keeping up with the city\'s censorious activity has proved a challenge for defenders of free expression.\"[84]
More than 35 successful lawsuits were brought against Giuliani and his administration for blocking free speech. In his book Speaking Freely, First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams said Giuliani had an \"insistence on doing the one thing that the First Amendment most clearly forbids: using the power of government to restrict or punish speech critical of government itself.\"
To paraphrase Dylan, fkach, if you and your African clawed frog see Rudy coming you\'d both better run. Again, via wikipedia:
Ferret Ban
Giuliani vetoed a bill legalizing the ownership of ferrets as pets in the city, saying that legalizing ferrets was akin to legalizing tigers. He sent a memorandum, \"Talking Points Against the Legalization of Ferrets,\" to City Council members saying that ferrets should be banned just as pythons and lions are in the city. Councilman A. Gifford Miller said afterwards that Giuliani\'s \"administration has gone out of its way to invent a ridiculous policy.\"[103] The editor of Modern Ferret magazine testified that ferrets are domesticated animals who do not live in wild and whose natural habitat is within people\'s homes. She argued that no case of ferrets transferring rabies to humans ever occurred, and the legalization bill would require ferrets to be vaccinated against rabies as dogs are. She later wrote that at the public hearings proposing to ban ferrets, no citizen or veterinarian ever spoke against ferrets, only representatives from the Department of Health, City Council, and Mayor Giuliani himself.[104]
David Guthartz, founder of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Ferrets, called a radio show Giuliani was hosting to complain about the citywide ban. Giuliani responded:
\"There is something deranged about you. ... The excessive concern you have for ferrets is something you should examine with a therapist. ... There is something really, really very sad about you. ... This excessive concern with little weasels is a sickness. ... You should go consult a psychologist. ... Your compulsion about—your excessive concern with it is a sign that there is something wrong in your personality. ... You have a sickness, and I know it\'s hard for you to accept that. ... You need help.\"[105]
Well done. The quote from the Jefferson people is pretty funny.
It is itnteresting that nobody outside NY really knows who this guy is. You have to think this stuff would come up in the unlikely event he ever got to the general.
Tony-- I came up with the Van Arsdales, the Kings, and the Petries, the latter being the only one I could see any way to stick an \"A\" in front of.
The better one played for the Astro\'s....and his nickname sounds like Astro\'s....
NC Tony
I misread it, thought you said basketball.
Probably not the Aarons.
Aspromonte? (We looked it up).
Thats it....
NC Tony
I knew who you were talking about immediately, but was going to twist your horns and ask you if it was the Alou brothers
I can recommend a great pool hall in Beil-Bien that\'s perfect until things settle down from the election ... Rudy could make the ticket IMO - not impossible . New Hampshire (No. Mass) is a lark from either side now although this time Mac could consolidate his win and woo the independents .
One thing I clearly missed about the republican primary race is the fact that independents and even democrats can actually vote in some of the republican primaries. That appears to be having a very positive impact on McCain\'s chances because the things that more conservative republicans tend to dislike about McCain are things that democrats actually like.
Again-- the main reason McCain was always the favorite to win was by default.
A guy who used to work here had an expression: Larry Bird good looking. From a distance Bird looked okay, but the closer you got...
None of the Republican nominees other than McCain could stand up to any kind of scrutiny from the usual Republican voters. Romney not only has the Mormon thing, he has flip flopped on BIG Republican issues. Huckabee has a lot going for him (and is the likely Vice Presidential candidate), but his resume is lacking, especially in foreign policy. And Guliani-- aside from the isues already raised here, and Kerik, and the NY firefighters and cops and 9/11 widows following him around to explain that he was no hero at all on 9/11, and his anti-party positions on abortion and gays, three marriages, and keeping secret his client list since he left office, and not attending the meetings of the 9/11 Commission and getting asked to leave (or quitting, depending on who you believe)...
The one guy who actually could derail McCain in the unlikely event he ever gets any traction is Thompson. He\'s completely by-the-book in his positions, acts and looks the part, and if he ever gets going the big money from the party establishment will come pouring in. I took a little of him at 22-1 as a saver.
There\'s a pretty good story on Guliani in the 1/7 New Yorker for anyone who wants an overview.
The bottom line if that you clearly made a great bet and I should stick to horses. ;-)
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> None of the Republican nominees other than McCain
> could stand up to any kind of scrutiny from the
> usual Republican voters. Romney not only has the
> Mormon thing, he has flip flopped on BIG
> Republican issues.
the biggest issue tonight was the economy.
this is wide open.
McCain\'s weaknesses are on immigration, among the religious right, and on taxes. Those are actually strengths among some independents and democrats who are also participating in some of these republican primaries. I think Romney has actually won every primary among \"registered republicans\".
Iowa, New Hampshire and Michigan were the three states where Romney had the best shot, and he needed to win at least two to have a strong chance going forward. Michigan was the state where the economy was going to be most important (until the general, by which time we\'ll be in a recession).
The most interesting two things that happened on the Republican side yesterday were a) Romney splitting the evangelical vote with Huckabee, and b) Huckabee saying the Constitution should be changed where it conflicts with the Bible. That may work in a Republican South Carolina primary, but will come back to haunt him later. As it should.
Florida will be the single most important (though not necessarily conclusive)primary.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The most interesting two things that happened on
> the Republican side yesterday were a) Romney
> splitting the evangelical vote with Huckabee, and
> b) Huckabee saying the Constitution should be
> changed where it conflicts with the Bible. That
> may work in a Republican South Carolina primary,
> but will come back to haunt him later. As it
> should.
Huck might be realizing that he was a one hit wonder. Now he is working on
increasing the size of his flock for an inevitable entry into the world of major
league Religion, where he might find more wealth, power and influence than he
would have as Prez.