Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ArlJim78
It looks to be just a slap at US racing.
as far as the drugs issue, okay yes thats a valid one that we have to deal with, and maybe we aren't the example for the world. but the event that prompted his comment was the breakdown of a European horse, so I don't get the tie in to drugs.
and as far as the surface goes, advocating polytrack for all future BC's, can he actually be making the leap that using polytrack for the BC will guarantee no breakdowns will occurr? is he implying that there are no breakdowns over there on polytrack? and is polytrack safer than turf? if so why don't they run all the big european races on poly for safety? if its like he says and polytrack "separates the men from the boys" then why don't they lead the way?
as most people know on here I think polytrack might be safer in the long run, but a breakdown can occur anytime on any surface.
why should we take these comments seriously? I'm guessing he would have had nothing to say had George pulled off an upset and won the thing.
|
Jim,
It
is a slap at US racing.. and one well-meant. And deserved. We're an embarassment on the International front in regards to our allowing tons of pharmaceutical enhancements in our horses, not to mention hidden foal surgeries and steroids in our sales yearlings/2yo's, etc.. It's a system totally skewed to greed that's hastened the deterioration of the quality of the racing and is undermining of the integrity of the breed.
And they do lead the way and don't need to run their races on polytrack... They're running on turf except at the all-weather/all-season locales. The comments should be taken seriously because they reflect the contempt that's out there for what is an increasingly inferior product on track in this country. That's fueled by increasingly fragile horses that are babied by the training community due to the need of the owners to feed right back into the perverted financial machine of the breeding side. It's a vicious circle.