parsixfarms |
06-27-2009 08:45 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_fat_man
Why are the BEL turf courses so saturated with water? Why won't they absorb and dry like normal grass does? Why is the BEL turf SOFT when MTH is FIRM? Something indigenous to the Elmont region?:rolleyes:
This is all BS. It's ****in grass, they're horses and they've been running over wet grass and dirt throughout their history. NYRA just needs to let them run on it and stop making an issue out of the trivial.
|
I'm not an agronomist and I haven't walked the Belmont turf courses. I don't believe it's any secret think that the turf courses at Belmont and Saratoga probably don't drain as well as NYRA would like and would be priorities for NYRA if it had funds for significant capital improvements for their tracks. Given its past financial difficulties, the problems with the turf courses can probably best be chalked up to the problems associated with deferred maintenance.
As for the issue as to why they aren't using the courses, it's in NYRA's financial interest to use the courses as much as possible when safe. Just compare the pick-4 handle this week ($494K) to last week's ($250K), when the races came off and NYRA had to pay over $100K on the pic-4 guarantee. I don't understand why you can't seem to grasp that these are long meets and constant use of the courses puts a strain on them. A few years ago at Saratoga (2006), they beat the sh** out of the course, and by the end of the meet, there were so many holes on the courses that they weren't safe (and they had to cancel turf races even though the weather was dry). If these were short meets or they had a single course with multiple paths, like Gulfstream or Colonial, they might not have to take as many races off the turf. But they don't, and we have to accept it, for now.
|