Quote:
Originally Posted by pmayjr
In all seriousness, how did bettors get dicked over when tracks went to poly? Please explain.
Also, Doug whines about the place he handicaps for a newspaper? He's an expert on a place that has synthetic (Presque Isle).
I've seen him whine about how much the Cal tracks spent on poly, so he questioned why they're giving up on it for the expense it took to put it in. Those are his tweets from yesterday.
But also, be honest- Do you bet Del Mar? Arlington? Keeneland? Woodbine? Dubai? I bet you devote plenty of your wagering $$$ to those tracks (and don't say "only the turf races")
|
Not sure what Doug was going for with that CA comment. How was California supposed to see the synthetic initiative through when 1 of the 4 major ovals closed, 1 had a faulty product and 1 now needs to be replaced?
Hollywood utilized their OK Cushion surface through to the end of the track's life; Del Mar explained that after 7 years the Poly is falling apart (issue Polytrack has had at WO and TP) and would have needed to be replaced anyway even if they weren't shooting for BC; Santa Anita's Pro-Ride was improperly mixed and installed and wouldn't drain properly necessitating cancellations; Golden Gate's Tapeta (the best of the synths) is staying.
The CA synthetic push was a rush to judgement mistake by Richard Shapiro and the CHRB and most of the purported attributes of synthetic have turned out to be false. It was a pig in a poke.