Rush to Resurface

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Well, the latest from Turfway Park is that the incidents of \"catostrophic breakdowns\" have been on the rise. That term is code for \"The horse didn\'t make it.\" When did the the powers that be in this country decide that summer racing on that surface in Europe was essentially the same as winter and year round racing here?[/color][/b]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/82379.html

[Bull]

I am not a track superintendant, so I could be wrong..... but I find it really odd that Turfway needed to \"restructure\" the composition of the polytrack in the first place. Trainers saying that the new poly tends to create..... \"potentially hazardous conditions for horses and jockeys, especially during wet and colder weather\", pretty much stops the train at the tracks for me. The only kind of weather you are going to have in Northern Kentucky in the winter is \"wet and colder\". Wasn\'t the whole point of the polytrack to reduce breakdowns and create a safer, more raceable surface in extreme conditions? The old polytrack seemed to be doing its job. Why tinker with it at all? They needed to speed the track up??? I guess there weren\'t enough horses winning on the lead LOL. We wonder why the drug problems, \"after the bell\" wagering problems, and takeout issues continue to go unresolved. Look at what the higher ups are spending their time doing. There are so many things in racing that need fixing, why are people wasting their time on something that was not broken.


-Bull

[fkach]

\"Why tinker with it at all? They needed to speed the track up??? I guess there weren\'t enough horses winning on the lead LOL.\"

IMO, running style and other preferences should be given at least some consideration. Perhaps there are alternatives that can be explored besides Poly that also increase safety without changing the game too much.  

The value of a stallion is tied to how its offspring perform on the track.

The value of a yearling is tied to its potential to earn and prove itself on the track.

If Polytrack tends to favor more even paced runners with higher degrees of stamina and horses that have also shown a preference for the turf (which IMO is the case), one would suspect that some sires would produce more horses that like poly over dirt and vice versa.

Even if some breeders, owners, and others don\'t realize it yet, the values of many horses are already probably starting to shift because of the recent surface changes and different styles of horses that are winning as a result.

As the number of important opportunities on dirt shrinks, the number of opportunities to earn black type and large sums of money on dirt falls also. So do the corresponding values. On the flip side, poly sires (actually possibly turf sires) are probably rising in value.

Had poly remained a second string circuit phenomenon, I don\'t there would have been a major impact. However, it won\'t be long until the SA Derby, SA Handicap, Pacific Classic, Del Mar Handicap etc.... are all being run on artificial surfaces.

What is the value of a horse that earned it\'s Grade 1 on poly but can\'t lift a hoof on dirt?  What is the value of its sire?

What is the value of a dirt horse that can\'t lift a hoof on poly now that it\'s about to lose dozens of chances to earn Grade 1 status or large purses in CA?  What is the value of its sire?

[bobphilo]

Amazing how those that say we are rushing to convert to Poly are themselves rushing to judgment based on some wrong comparisons and very insignificant figures.

Lets look at the numbers correctly. During the 2004-5 winter meet at Turfway there were 24 catastrophic breakdowns on the old surface. After the installation of Polytrack for the 2005-6 winter meet the number of catastrophic breakdowns dropped to only 3.
During the last winter meet the number of such breakdowns slightly increased by 2 to a total of 5 after track management monkeyed with the surface to make it more dirt-like in it's speed favoring properties.

The conclusion is clearly that Poly greatly reduced catastrophic breakdowns compared to dirt in winter racing and later attempts to alter the surface slightly reduced the tracks safety.

Bob

[bobphilo]

Chuckles_the_Clown2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When did the the powers that be
> in this country decide that summer racing on that
> surface in Europe was essentially the same as
> winter and year round racing here?

Wrong Chuckles. Polytack, designed as an all weather surface, is used primarily for winter racing in northern England (where it has had great success), whose winters are colder and wetter than in Kentucky.

Bob

[miff]

Ultimately the breakdown issue will become secondary as to whether or not all tracks go Poly.It\'s early, but there is strong evidence that the offspring of certain top sires are throwing runners that are not performing at par on Poly.It seemed, early on, that turf runners were adapting better to poly. Most of the guys gambling poly (that I know) use turf to poly as an automatic inclusion.

Two main issues will be what the big breeding outfits(mainly Kentucky)think and how the whales that are betting millions react to poly over time.Early indications at the windows suggest that Poly meets have not shown any material handle declines.

I still feel strongly that a carefully maintained dirt surface along with the elimination of over medicated lame-o\'s will substantially reduce breakdowns.Poly is nothing more than a management cop out for failing to do the necessary re surface maintenance and drugs.

Mike

[ditz]

In my post I thought  a Polytrack might be a better option somewhere down the road..Regardles of what is written I do not believe the surface at Aqueduct is highly maintained as it once was and how it should be. Maybe if it was then changing the surface would not be an issue..There are many,many morning breakdowns that some are just not aware of.Horses,exercise riders and jockeys,lives are at risk,as this week just proved.Along with over medicated horses.Its my opinion that NYRA should call it a day,and let someone else take the reins,someone that hopefully will put the horses best interests first.Right now they are fighting over who owns the land,I think they should be meeting to see how to keep our jockeys,horses,etc.etc. safe.I think most  would like to get back to what this forum is really about , handicapping,so you will be happy to know that this will be my last post on this matter. Good Luck Guys....

[ditz]

BraVo Mike...You got it right!!!

[marcus]

makes perfect sense to me - it\'s hard to imagine imo that properly outfitted and maintained dirt and turf tracks would not be ideal for horses to run on ...
 again, and  from my perspective - the upside for the winter track at aqu has been good ,and i\'m keeping an open mind on all of the new surfaces - but we\'ll have to see what happens  . best i can tell so far ,   WO is probably the best model for east coast tracks who are considering a move to a poly/synthetic racing surface  ...

[bobphilo]

With 1200 lb horses pounding the track at over 40 mph on legs not much thicker than a human wrist, what could make more sense than to have a track that greatly reduces the force of impact and converts the deadly thump of impact into an elastic return of energy?
The best maintained track in the world is still more hazardous to horses than Poly. It's a question of the dynamic properties of the composition of the materials and not just maintenance.
Yes, the issues of drugs and breeding must also be addressed but that doesn't mean that that we shouldn't try to save lives until, or when, these issues are addressed. Furthermore, even if horses were sounder and not racing on painkillers there would still be breakdowns, which a synthetic surface could reduce. In any case, taking action towards safer surfaces while dealing with drugs are NOT mutually exclusive. Action on all fronts is needed. To ignore the added safety of Polytrack is like saying that jockeys should not be required to wear helmets because if we solve the drug problem there would be less horses breaking down underneath them.
The motivation of management for installing synthetic surfaces, whether it be economic or public relations, is irrelevant to the fact that it can and has saved lives.
I can fully understand the argument that tracks should not be allowed to use the installation of Polytrack as an excuse to not deal with their juicers, but to oppose racing on a safer surface in the hope that the resulting bad publicity from tragic breakdowns will force management to deal with the drug issue is an poor strategy.

Bob

[miff]

Bob,

I am not a fan of poly racing notwithstanding that it MAY be safer than any dirt track. No one has really fooled with dirt composition as they have with poly.Racing has been conducted on dirt since the beginning. Horses have broken down since the beginning of racing and will continue to do so in the future, even on poly.Horses were not made to race in the first place so the issue of safety for jocks and horses can only be guaranteed by eliminating the game entirely.

To fool with an industry of billions of dollars without guaranteeing the entire elimination of breakdowns is not worth the change imo, and I appreciate yours.Racing is primarily about gambling and poly will do nothing in that regard except maybe drive away many bettors due to the all too often chaotic results.


Mike

[bobphilo]

Mike I respect your position but I have to point out one of the fallacies believed by many who advocate dirt over Ploy racing. Though traditional in the U.S., dirt is not the natural surface so many believe. Dirt tracks bear no resemblance to the natural soil they replace. They are a man-made combination of substances that require huge maintenance to keep from returning to a state of nature. They have a poor ability to absorb impact compared to Polytrack and grass. The only reason it was invented was so racing could be conducted at a volume that would wear out any natural grass course. Though it has synthetic components, Polytrack has properties that are much more favorable to a horses biomechanics and much like grass which is the surface horses evolved to run on.

Perhaps, the best proof of the safety of synthetic tracks is shown by the fact that trainers who are usually very traditional and conservative and were initially skeptical of the surface, are now entering their horses in greater numbers on these tracks (field sizes have increased with Poly), and battling with each other to get workout times to train on the surface – ask the clockers.

Yes, horses have been breaking down since racing began and will continue but that doesn't mean that there aren't ways to reduce them and all the evidence strongly suggests that Poly dos that. There is obviously no way to guarantee that anything will eliminate 100% of breakdowns – that is an unrealistic standard. Yes it is a multi-million dollar sport and it is also losing millions every year – which is why something positive has to be done.

Concerning its effect on betting: it is incorrect to think that Poly will hurt the handle – all the evidence points in the other direction. Even if one cares less about the safety of the horses or the jockeys who ride them, than about the effect on the economics of racing, synthetic tracks make sense. I have no illusions that the motives of the track management that install Poly are strictly for the safety of the horses and riders. They are doing it for good economic reasons that the increasing number of breakdowns are driving people from the sport and hurting the handle. I don't have all the figures before me, but I believe both handle and field sizes have increased in tracks that have installed synthetic surfaces. True, it does add another element of uncertainty to handicapping but this will change as more horses establish Poly form. The more clever handicappers that learn to adjust to the surface will actually have a huge advantage. Furthermore, horses will be more likely to hold form on the kinder surface. If something that saves lives temporarily makes my handicapping more of a challenge, so be it. I will adjust and even benefit from it while I feel better for the horses.

Aside from the obligation to make racing as safe as possible for horses and jockeys, from whom we derive entertainment and (hopefully) profit, we would also do well to embrace changes to save the sport from its current decline.

Bob

[NoCarolinaTony]

WHY NOT RACE ON GRASS?

After all, even the dirt tracks themselves are artificial to the Horse.

NC Tony

[fkach]

Bob,

I don\'t disagree with any of your sentiments, but why the rush?

Shouldn\'t a change of this magnitude be done cautiously?

I think tracks like Woodbine and Turfway were excellent choices as \"long term\" testing grounds for determining things like safety of horses, safety of jockeys, health related issues from kickback, maintenance costs, durability of the surface, weather related issues, impact on betting handle, impact on field sizes, impact on breeding, impact on horse values,  etc.....  

Granted, there is some positive information coming in on breakdowns, but not everything is positive. Also, \"long term\" implies that we may not have many of the answers to these and other questions for 5-10 years.

All that said, I think at a minimum CA and Keeneland rushed.

If I were the owner or trainer of a high quality 3YO that was gearing up for the Derby, there isn\'t a snowball\'s chance in hell I would prep on poly (definitely not his last race before the Derby). If my horse ran either exceptionally well or poorly I would have zero faith that his form on poly would translate into anything valuable to me as far as understanding what his chances were in the Derby.

I see that as a major problem for some of the poly preps unless the Derby also switches to poly.

Some may disagree with my thinking here, but some will agree. I fully expect it to have implications for Derby prep races and all sorts of other races once CA is 100% poly and other major tracks follow. I\'m not sure everyone has thought out all the implications of some of these moves.

[miff]

Bob,

Poly will do nothing re overall decline of racing.FYI 26% of the bettors represent 66% of the handle at the major venues.I know several guys who gamble millions each year and they are no longer betting poly.I\'m sure many will follow.Short term figures  from recent meets are no barometer as to where racing is headed. No less than 7 Wall Street firms got involved in this NYRA franchise thing with all agreeing racing was a poor long and short term investment. Those bidding outside of NYRA are gambling the money on future slot/casino revenue, not racing.One report called racing\" mature, niche like and lacking in corporate and media attention.\" Visa dropped racing and the major networks all declined contracts except for specials here and there. Espn took it and after a very poor BC showing reduced it\'s coverage going forward.

Trainers are flocking to poly for economic reasons since the more starts they get, the more money they make.Like I said, racing is about gambling first and everything else second,thats the economic reality and the outlook is very poor.


Mike