Cannon Shell |
01-06-2008 07:31 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
That's a good point. How about Turfway? Do you think they were more careful, perhaps, the first year of polytrack as opposed to the previous winter?
|
Though this may sound like an interesting theory, it can no way be possible due to the fact that the state vets may not know what they are looking at anyway. If you were to get real picky at Turfway in the winter there would be 3 horse fields. There have been many occasions that horses I have run have never been checked prerace and it wasnt until recently that they even took horses out of the stalls to check them.
The whole issue of comparing breakdowns vs. injury rates is muddled by the fact that breakdowns are a whole lot more complicated than just track surface. Track surfaces rarely are the primary reason why a horse breaks down but a poor surface can make an underlying injury more apt to become a major one.
Last year at the FG, which has a good surface, there were all kinds of feet and shin issues early in the meet, though horses werent breaking down from them. That is an example where the injury rate had increased dramatically but raw data doesnt show it because they werent life threatening injuries.
Bid makes a lot of good points but simply comparing fatal breakdowns is not accurate way of measuring overall safety.
That being said, it is a disgrace that the track at Santa Anita was improperly installed but not at all surprising considering Magna and it's strong executive leadership.
|