Turfway Stigma

[pmayjr]

From a live racing perspective, I think you guys are right. I went to Turfway last December, the day after Keeneland's Handicapping contest. My flight was out of Cincy, so Turfway wasn't too far from the airport. Walking through it, the place looked tacky... really tacky. It was clean, but still really tacky. So in terms of watching live racing there, I bet that would be no fun.

But I love betting the place when I'm at Canterbury in the fall and winter. I'm a longshot bettor, and the best chance IMO to get those is betting really ****ty claiming races. Mountaineer, Evangeline, Turfway, Sam Houston, Chuck-town, etc etc etc. Those places are always really good for hitting bombs. So that's why I like those tracks.

One other thing- I don't think they'd tear the place down, or sell it for it's property value since they installed poly-track. Installing that surface isn't a cheap thing to do. So if they were to sell the place off, why install the new surface? I know a few years ago they had to cancel over a week's worth of racing because the track was so beat up (due to really bad wetaher conditions), but still why bother spending the extra $$$ if you're gonna sell it?

You have to keep in mind that Turfway is going to be used as a "testing" or "experimental" track for Keeneland.

And many guys will bet neither.
How do you bet a track where no established speed figures or par times can accurately be made?
Even at Woodbine already the grass horses are winning on it.
I wouldn't bet a quarter at either place on the polytrack. At keeneland only grass will get my action, and I suspect that they will card plenty of grass to insure that they don't get completely killed if handle slips.

[Scurlogue Champ]

Originally Posted by oracle80

And many guys will bet neither.
How do you bet a track where no established speed figures or par times can accurately be made?
Even at Woodbine already the grass horses are winning on it.
I wouldn't bet a quarter at either place on the polytrack. At keeneland only grass will get my action, and I suspect that they will card plenty of grass to insure that they don't get completely killed if handle slips.

Honestly, I wish we had more pure grass meets here in the States. Our excuse for one is that dismal affair at Kentucky Downs.

Why not go to that instead of the poly-track? You don't have to run 5 days a week, just run 2 days and then take a week or two off like in England.

But I know that won't ever happen.

Originally Posted by moodwalker

Honestly, I wish we had more pure grass meets here in the States. Our excuse for one is that dismal affair at Kentucky Downs.

Why not go to that instead of the poly-track? You don't have to run 5 days a week, just run 2 days and then take a week or two off like in England.

But I know that won't ever happen.

Because noone would make money on that idea Moodwalker. Therefore noone woud ever push to market that idea.
Deeper safer dirt tracks are the answer.
Wait until Cali installs it and everyone flocks away.

[Scurlogue Champ]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Because noone would make money on that idea Moodwalker. Therefore noone woud ever push to market that idea.
Deeper safer dirt tracks are the answer.
Wait until Cali installs it and everyone flocks away.

I know that, Oracle. It is just something I would like to see. I don't think there is some conspiracy, or expect that to ever happen.

I agree that a safer dirt surface would be the best route to take, because dirt racing isn't going to stop in America.

The polytrack thing will go bust in my opinion.

Personally, I don't care what they ask those cheap horses to run over. But I don't think it is a solution.

Originally Posted by moodwalker

I know that, Oracle. It is just something I would like to see. I don't think there is some conspiracy, or expect that to ever happen.

I agree that a safer dirt surface would be the best route to take, because dirt racing isn't going to stop in America.

The polytrack thing will go bust in my opinion.

Personally, I don't care what they ask those cheap horses to run over. But I don't think it is a solution.

They will soon find that the tracks who don't install it will have average starters per race increase dramatically.
People who pay good cash to buy and breed horses with dirt pedigrees are not simply going to give up and accept racing on synthetic.
What they will do is ship to a place where dirt racing still exists, and try the horse there.
Already O Neill says he will not be training Lava Man on the synthetic surface at Hollywood. He wants the horse to have the best shot he can have in the classic.
I'm wondering if Stronach isn't being pretty clever here. SA is not required to install it at their upcoming meet. After that meet ends next year, Hollywood and Del mar will be running meets on Polytrack the rest of the year, and state law or no state law, watch how fast the the politicians agree to let him install a safer dirt surface if handle gets crushed at the other two places and the state's cut of the pie takes a hit.

[Scurlogue Champ]

Originally Posted by oracle80

And many guys will bet neither.
How do you bet a track where no established speed figures or par times can accurately be made?
Even at Woodbine already the grass horses are winning on it.
I wouldn't bet a quarter at either place on the polytrack. At keeneland only grass will get my action, and I suspect that they will card plenty of grass to insure that they don't get completely killed if handle slips.

I won't bet a single race at Turfway this year, just like last year.

And I haven't bet a race at Woodbine since the Atto Mile last year with Leroidesanimaux.

Only places that I put real money into when wagering is NYRA and Churchill/Keeneland. And maybe a little Australia when I see some huge value.