|
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
Synthetic surfaces have done two things, and they are exacerbated in high level races. First of all they have narrowed the gap between dirt and turf horses as in a sense they've created an evening factor of talent in that both types of horses may handle this third surface. Where the dirt horses were " faster " at each level than their grass counterparts we now see these two divisions being brought together. So, the turf horses, in a sense, are " better " on the synthetic surfaces and the dirt horses are " worse. "
The second thing they have done, essentially because of the first, is they have marginalized high level racing. The supposed good dirt horses aren't as good and the supposed good turf horses are seemingly better. In a sense this has created an interesting new division.....but it has clearly destroyed the former theoretical high level some of these races inhabited. Take, for instance, the two biggest Grade 1s on Polytrack in 2007, the Spinster at Keeneland and the Pacific Classic at Del Mar. Panty Raid is a nice horse, but she is certainly below the field she beat on Polytrack on the dirt. If you disagree with this feel free to revisit the Alabama Stakes. And then there's Student Council. His dirt form, while not awful, was certainly not superior to a number that finished behind him on Polytrack. Thus, these races are meaningless as " dirt " races and can only be rated as tests of synthetic ability. Now, this may not necessarily be a wholly bad thing, but it is certainly a new thing.......and no winner of the Santa Anita Handicap, as long as Santa Anita is a synthetic track, can ever be truly compared to the past winners of this race.
But, if you like Polytrack, whether for gambling reasons or some other reason I can't fathom, then you have plenty of opportunities to enjoy it. And, if you don't, then find a track with dirt. But, it goes without saying that these races are no longer the races they were in the past, whether you believe it's for better or worse.
|