Quote:
|
Originally Posted by brianwspencer
Of course. And I'm a big proponent of synthetic surfaces. Just saying that there is a difference between how Arlington did theirs and how other tracks did. Arlington had to do something. The two can very well go hand in hand, though Arlington's could very easily be viewed as nothing more than a PR move. To be honest, in their case, I imagine it was quite a bit of both. They didn't want breakdowns any more than anyone else did, but cynically, it was a brilliant PR move...the best they could have made.
I'm not disagreeing with you one bit, and didn't intend for it to sound like I was. I was just noting that the Arlington situation was a bit different than others in that regard.
Was her rhetorical question that tough for you to decipher? "No" is the point she was obviously trying to make....glad to be of service again on things like this for you, tiger.
|
Let me first say that I am a huge fan of Arlington's surface BUT they could have just redid the base and kept dirt, the problem wasn't the dirt, it was the bottom which was like driving on Higgins near the airport.....