artifical or "allweather" surfaces

[jpops757]

With all the controversy. Which surface is the prefered? Cusion and Poly have more controversy around them. Proride looks like a savior at SA . We hear very little about tapeta. Does any of the trainers and horsemen that have no vested interest give a thumbs up.

[The Bid]

From the Los Angeles Times

The actual numbers documenting the success of synthetic tracks are elusive, and controversial.

Rick Arthur, equine medical director for the CHRB, sends along numbers that show marked declines in racing and training deaths at all California tracks since they have gone synthetic. Arthur's numbers say that, during the 2004 and '05 seasons (before synthetics), the fatality rate was "1 in 445 starts on all surfaces combined at the majors (Bay Meadows, Golden Gate Fields, Hollywood Park, Santa Anita, Oak Tree Racing Assn. at Santa Anita and Del Mar). In '07, the rate was 1 in 913 starts on synthetic surfaces."

But Len Shulman, a writer for the Blood-Horse magazine and a frequent guest on Roger Stein's racing radio show, used different numbers on a recent broadcast, numbers he said came from the CHRB's own website and, if accurate, would make synthetic tracks the biggest folly since the Edsel.

He said Hollywood Park lost 19 horses in '03, then 25 in '04, another 20 each in '05 and '06 and, in '07 after a synthetic track had been put in, lost 20. He said Del Mar, during its terrible summer of '06 on dirt, lost 19 horses and, on its new Polytrack in '07, lost 18.

Those numbers, no longer on the CHRB website, were disputed by Shapiro. He said that Shulman was mixing apples and oranges and maybe a few bananas and went on the air to tell him so. Shulman fired back, falling only slightly short of calling Shapiro a liar.

Stein, in racing for 30 years as a trainer and broadcaster, says, "This is exactly what racing didn't need. Horse racing is its own worst enemy. Always has been."

How about dirt.

[ELA]

I think the verdict is still out on all of these surfaces.

Eric

[The Bid]

It certainly is Eric. Its interesting to see the CHRB remove the numbers from their website after they get called out. The truth should be told, they are really skewing the injuries and fatalities.

[sumitas]

I do know this. Keeneland was deluged the week of the Breeders Cup. They raced as usual and their all weather surface acted as if there was little or no rain. You remember the BC at Monmouth.

You be the judge.

[VOL JACK]

Originally Posted by sumitas

I do know this. Keeneland was deluged the week of the Breeders Cup. They raced as usual and their all weather surface acted as if there was little or no rain. You remember the BC at Monmouth.

You be the judge.

Only you and the brass at KEE think that is a good surface.
Agreed that monmouth is also a biased joke.
I just can't handicap races when in every race the entire field is in a line, across the track, at the top of the stretch.
KEE is also very quick to take races off the turf, I guess because they have such a long meet.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

What did I miss? They raced as usual also didn't they? Sure the track was sloppy, but they raced. You seem to be forgetting that when Santa Anita was deluged a few weeks back they certainly didn't race as usual. I seem to remember them cancelling a lot. Their all weather surface definitely did not act as if there was little or no rain.

You be the judge.

Most people feel training a horse on Syn tracks is safer, more affordable, and more available. Racing on the stuff appears to be a work in progress in So Cal.
IF racing and racetracks had invested in modernizing their existing dirt surfaces, I think the sport would have been better served.

Don't give up on Syn. Surfaces yet better things are or will be coming as they learn how to make it work for racing in different climates.

The issue should be evaluated by extrapliculating the Delta between investing millions to mordernize dirt vs. spending millions to change over to syn surfaces. That is the true answer to the issue.

[jpops757]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Most people feel training a horse on Syn tracks is safer, more affordable, and more available. Racing on the stuff appears to be a work in progress in So Cal.
IF racing and racetracks had invested in modernizing their existing dirt surfaces, I think the sport would have been better served.

Don't give up on Syn. Surfaces yet better things are or will be coming as they learn how to make it work for racing in different climates.

The issue should be evaluated by extrapliculating the Delta between investing millions to mordernize dirt vs. spending millions to change over to syn surfaces. That is the true answer to the issue.

It appears you have got it right. Wonder how many of the people that toot the horn for poly,cushion and tapeta also have a vested interest?

[Antitrust32]

the Safetrack that the OBS races were run over seemed ok to me compared to polysmack and cushion.