Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Nice editorial (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38964)

Dahoss 10-21-2010 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 709308)
FTFY.

Another fine deflection.

Indian Charlie 10-21-2010 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 709310)
We're the main country for dirt racing, and we are wedded to it and refuse to change. Other countries run on a horses natural surface, turf. So it goes.

So, dirt isn't natural to horses?

Therefore, why bother and just run over shredded tires and condoms?

That makes sense.

Indian Charlie 10-21-2010 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dahoss (Post 709314)
Another fine deflection.

Yeah, she's never answered a question honestly and completely lacks integrity when trying to defend her POV.

Cannon Shell 10-21-2010 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 709310)
We're the main country for dirt racing, and we are wedded to it and refuse to change. Other countries run on a horses natural surface, turf. So it goes.

Why is turf referred to as 'natural' like dirt is all manufactured? When people make these kinds of statements about 'other coutntries' they seem to forget that the scope of racing is so much larger in the US and the climates so much different that racing the majority of races on the turf is totally impractical.

And the breakdown rates ion synthetic are statistically insignifigant compared to the prior surfaces (mostly because the records werent kept so comparing is difficult)

Simply using breakdown rates to say that a track is/isn't safe or is safer is folly as it ignores the vast amount of influences beyond surface that cause horses to breakdown.

Danzig 10-21-2010 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 709310)
We're the main country for dirt racing, and we are wedded to it and refuse to change. Other countries run on a horses natural surface, turf. So it goes.

i think the fact that synthetic tracks have been installed means we aren't refusing to try, or to change.
however, how long does one stick with an experiment before deciding it's not working?
cali racing went into a decline, it continues to decline. the majority of horsemen have become vocal about the tracks being an issue. when the new tracks were first installed, you saw trainers ship in. that has dropped dramatically since people have decided those awt's just aren't what they want to deal with. field sizes there continue to shrink, with several days cancelled this year due to lack of entrants.

i don't see turfway changing back-in their case it seems the awt is working for them.

as for us going to all turf, turf tracks wouldn't hold up to the amount of racing we require.

Antitrust32 10-21-2010 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie (Post 709330)
Yeah, she's never answered a question honestly and completely lacks integrity when trying to defend her POV.

"Be impeccable with your word. Speak with integrity."

MaTH716 10-21-2010 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chucklestheclown (Post 709295)
I have to admit I did not read the editorial (really an opinion piece) until just now. It is not about synthetics, except as a metaphor, IMO. Did you read it yet?

My comments were not related in any way to the article. I was purely responding to the questions/comments of Riot.

Riot 10-21-2010 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dahoss (Post 709314)
Another fine deflection.

Deflection of what? Spit it out. I addressed G1's run on synthetic.

Riot 10-21-2010 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie (Post 709329)
So, dirt isn't natural to horses?

Therefore, why bother and just run over shredded tires and condoms?

That makes sense.

No, a manufactured track of dirt: drainage, a base, a manufactured cushion - isn't as "natural" as turf.

Riot 10-21-2010 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie (Post 709330)
Yeah, she's never answered a question honestly and completely lacks integrity when trying to defend her POV.

Not evident, but nice try.

hockey2315 10-21-2010 10:34 AM

Turf courses don't have drainage?

Dahoss 10-21-2010 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 709433)
Deflection of what? Spit it out. I addressed G1's run on synthetic.

You're a smart guy, figure it out. I'm not wasting anymore time on disingenuous posters.

Riot 10-21-2010 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dahoss (Post 709441)
You're a smart guy, figure it out. I'm not wasting anymore time on disingenuous posters.

Nice straw man. Isn't working.

Riot 10-21-2010 10:52 AM

Quote:

We developed our own type of dirt speedball horse to suit, too.
I think that's why many dismiss any surface other than dirt out of hand. The above is what we are used to, the racing we in America know.

Dahoss 10-21-2010 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 709443)
Nice straw man. Isn't working.

Keep spinning dude.

Riot 10-21-2010 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 709348)
i think the fact that synthetic tracks have been installed means we aren't refusing to try, or to change.
however, how long does one stick with an experiment before deciding it's not working?
cali racing went into a decline, it continues to decline. the majority of horsemen have become vocal about the tracks being an issue. when the new tracks were first installed, you saw trainers ship in. that has dropped dramatically since people have decided those awt's just aren't what they want to deal with. field sizes there continue to shrink, with several days cancelled this year due to lack of entrants.

i don't see turfway changing back-in their case it seems the awt is working for them.

as for us going to all turf, turf tracks wouldn't hold up to the amount of racing we require.

I agree with all you say. It would take a tremendous amount of land to install a great turf track facility in the US (a track would need multiple gallops, training areas, etc) and hold up to our use. It would be cool to see, though.

Coach Pants 10-21-2010 11:01 AM

Quote:

We don't need synthetics either for daily racing because horse injury rates don't matter.
Consistent hysterics.

Riot 10-21-2010 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach Pants (Post 709453)
Consistent hysterics.

Yeah, "hysterical". Sure :D

Riot 10-21-2010 11:24 AM

Quote:

Why is turf referred to as 'natural' like dirt is all manufactured?
Well, I answered this already, but self-deleted it by accident. Sorry.

Horses were designed to work on turf - hooves, legs, tendons, muscles, eyes, breathing, gut. Where do horses live on dirt?

Certainly turf courses are graded, grass types selected, drainage, divots replaced, etc. (less so with the centuries-old type tracks in Europe) But a dirt track is completely manufactured from scratch - drainage, base, and a mixture of soils (clay, loam, sand) specifically composed to a recipe (soils that may not even be local)

Quote:

When people make these kinds of statements about 'other coutntries' they seem to forget that the scope of racing is so much larger in the US and the climates so much different that racing the majority of races on the turf is totally impractical.
:zz: I'm not forgetting. It is what it is in the US. Horse racing started primarily in the upper east, was imported from England and adapted to what we have here. We even developed the speedball specialist to run on our different type of track (dirt)

Quote:

And the breakdown rates ion synthetic are statistically insignifigant compared to the prior surfaces (mostly because the records werent kept so comparing is difficult)
That's something you just made up. It is not true. Go on PubMed, there's plenty there.

Quote:

Simply using breakdown rates to say that a track is/isn't safe or is safer is folly as it ignores the vast amount of influences beyond surface that cause horses to breakdown.
I agree. That's why I hate to see, when any horse breaks down on a synthetic track, the predictable few who sarcastically say, "I thought those surfaces were supposed to be safe?"

Pedigree Ann 10-21-2010 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 709103)

Getting SA back to dirt will be a really revealing project (in a good way), to see what a dirt track created in this day and age can be. Many said the old dirt tracks should just be torn up and have the base redone, then the cushion replaced, rather than go to synthetic. I never could find a good description of what the SA old base looked like as they took it out (how badly it was torn up, holes, etc)

.

As I said (in my posts at the time, which I haven't time to go looking for), if the tracks had spent more time and effort and maintaining their dirt courses, the drive for synthetics would have gone nowhere. Instead of which, they took their dirt for granted and let it get hard and uneven, leading to the injury problems that fueled the chorus for replacement with synthetics out west.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.