You don't get it. The onus is on the synthetic lovers to prove that synthetic tracks are safer than dirt. Because that was the synthetics' one main selling point, and there's no conclusive study that says they've done their job. There was a radical change to the racing landscape made, ostensibly to improve safety, and unless you can prove to me that that's happened, you lose your "we love synthetics because we care about horseys" argument. You've posted eight times in the last two hours and still don't have one statistic saying that synthetic = safer, and I'm the one making generalized statements?
|