Beyer on Polytrack

[sighthound]

Beyers\' column was awful - he essentially said, \"gambling is more important to me than the safety of horse and jock, screw \'em\"

I don\'t know why some assume all Polytrack surfaces will be the same, run the same.  Even the manufacturer has always said they are not, will not be, based upon unique differences in percentage composition and particular type of material used in individual applications.

[bobphilo]

Just to underscore what sighthound said. Here is a quote from the Bloodhorse article that Bitplayer posted:
"No two Polytrack surfaces are the same, and proponents last year indicated the Turfway surface may have to be tweaked at some point. Trainers indicated, however, the surface is much better than the old dirt surface."

Turfway also has meetings with the jockeys for feedback on how the track is playing. Here\'s another quote from the same article concerning the jock's comments.
\"Some of the fiber was sitting on top of the surface, and it got colder, so it was flying a little more than normal,\" Elliston said. \"The surface was a little looser. We asked them if the surface was unsafe, and they said it wasn\'t. They were just providing feedback.\"

They're the ones risking their lives out there and I put great stock in their comments.

Bob

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Bob, I\'m a big believer in statistics.

I\'m also a very big believer in statistical anomalies.

Who says breakdowns were reduced from 16 to 3 first off? The track or polyturfs manufacturer? Maybe Turfway has an interest in promoting itself as the safe winter haven. I\'m always weary of vested interests. But lets assume we are past vested interests and not involved in \"happy talk\" pertaining to how safe the track is.

What if \"serious breakdowns\" really have decreased from 16 to 3 over the course of that year? What does that really mean? Is one year sufficient to throw all caution to the wind and conclude polyturf is safer than traditional surfaces regardless of the aging process?  

Prudence to me would require more than one year\'s breakdown statistics. And that would apply to any track and any surface, but it applies especially to polyturf.

bobphilo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Chuckles,
>
> My remark about Beyer being the country's "worst
> handicapper" was partly a joke in which Andy
> himself goes along with, though his handicapping
> skills don't quite match his figure making skills.
> I was very serious about how irresponsible of him
> to be against Polytrack despite the fact that he
> believes, and gives example after example of the
> surfaces greater safety. Look at the fact that
> it's endorsed by virtually every trainer or jockey
> who ride on it. Since it's installation at Turfway
> catastrophic breakdowns have dropped from 16 to
> 3.!!! All other evidence points to the same
> conclusion.  How many horse and riders could be
> injured or killed in the 10 or 20 years you
> propose to decide which surface is safer. We have
> to go with what all the data and preponderance of
> evidence shows is safer at this point. I'm all for
> preserving tradition at the "meccas" but the lives
> of horses and riders comes first. In any case, if
> a homogeneity of racing surfaces means a fair and
> uniform racing surface along with a safer racing,
> I'll take it. It's not like predicting the
> variations of horses' abilities and form cycles
> won't present enough handicapping challenges. In
> any case, certain things take priority over some
> handicapper's track bias angles.
>
> Bob
>

[richiebee]

Bob:

   I think we can say that we are all pretty squarely behind anything which enhances the safety of horse and rider, but that can in itself be a slippery slope. When it was proposed that the scale of weights be raised for the good of the jockeys, a few old established trainers opposed it because of their belief that the extra weight would detract from the long term soundness of the horses.

  I agree with Chuckles that there should be no rush to judgment after just one or two years of racing on Polytrack at one venue. The decrease in catastrophic breakdowns is of course encouraging, but not scientific enough. I think the long term future of Polytrack will be that synthetic TRAINING tracks will be constructed at all major racing venues. This will have a two fold beneficial effect: 1) morning training (where most of a horse\'s miles are logged) can be conducted over the allegedly safer synthetic surface and 2) main (dirt) tracks may benefit (may be safer) due to the fact that they are devoted strictly to racing and the occasional workout.

[bobphilo]

Rich and Chuckles,

As someone who has a professional and personal passion for statistcs and research methods I used the Turfway example as only that, an example, but English tracks and training centers which have used the surface for years all report similar results. Abosutely no contradictory findings have been reported.
The probability, or p value, of this being by chance alone are highly remote.
What is also significant is that so many trainers whose concern for their horses is matched only by their conservatisim and reaction to change are overwhelmingly in favor of the surface. Of course, no one expects every track to go Poly overnight, but If I had control of a track, I would opt for what I believed was the better surface and we are seeing track after track make the same decision the more they learn about it. I\'m sure that at the first sign of trouble the tracks will play it safe and bail. I doubt that will happen and progress will continue since at this point the overwhelming evidence is in Polytrack\'s favor.
Lets see what happens in the future. I\'m always ready for surprises.

Bob

[bobphilo]

Something else just occured to me while reading Beyer\'s column. he laments the edge that bias handicappers would lose if racing surfaces became more fair and uniform with Polytrack. Funny how it didn\'t bother him that speed handicappers would lose their advantage when the DRF paid him to make his figures public. I see, it\'s only bad for racing if he doesn\'t personally profit. He has a right to whatever the DRF paid him but for him to then come out against Polytrack because track bias handicappers might lose their edge is pure hypocrisy. I repeat - Shame Andy, shame.

Bob