Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Main Forum > The Paddock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-04-2017, 03:36 PM
pointman's Avatar
pointman pointman is offline
Saratoga
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 15,693
Default

While this sounds good, makes sense in attracting more turf races to the Big A and I am certainly for more turf racing, this smells to me of an ulterior motive coming from the Cuomo administration to get Aqueduct prepared for a period to renovate Belmont so that Cuomo can complete his land grab of Aqueduct racetrack permanently. It is hard for me to believe that they would spend this money for about 8 weeks a year.

I hope I am wrong, but this is New York, the land of corrupt politicians. Where Cuomo has any involvement there is always an undisclosed ulterior motive and nothing can be taken at face value.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-04-2017, 04:15 PM
pmayjr's Avatar
pmayjr pmayjr is offline
Fairgrounds
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canterbury Park- 3rd Floor Clubhouse
Posts: 1,603
Default

I thought the discussion was for the inner to become a synthetic/tapeta/poly track? Which I was in favor for.

Reason being: I was hoping to get all those NY-bred turfers who clearly don't like dirt out of the barns in the winter, as turfers seem to handle synthetic surfaces as good (if not better) as dirt horses too.

Even if you guys hate synthetic surfaces (many of you have continually flamed me for it in the past), I know you guys would rather play 8-9 horse synthetic races than 5 horse dirt fields.
__________________
Facebook- Peter May Jr.
Twitter- @pmayjr
You wouldn't be ballin' if your name was Spauldin'
If y'all fresh to death, then I'm deceased...

Last edited by pmayjr : 05-04-2017 at 05:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-04-2017, 05:01 PM
cakes44's Avatar
cakes44 cakes44 is offline
The Curragh
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmayjr View Post
I thought the discussion was for the inner to become a synthetic/tapeta/poly track? Which I was in favor for.

Reason being: I was hoping to get all those NY-bred turfers who clearly don't like dirt out of the barns in the winter, as turfers seem to handle synthetic surfaces as good (if not better) as dirt horses too.

Even if you guys hate synthetic surfaces (many of you have continually flamed me for it in the past), I know you guys would rather play 8-9 horses synthetic races than 5 horse dirt fields.
Yes please.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-04-2017, 06:38 PM
pointman's Avatar
pointman pointman is offline
Saratoga
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 15,693
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmayjr View Post
I thought the discussion was for the inner to become a synthetic/tapeta/poly track? Which I was in favor for.

Reason being: I was hoping to get all those NY-bred turfers who clearly don't like dirt out of the barns in the winter, as turfers seem to handle synthetic surfaces as good (if not better) as dirt horses too.

Even if you guys hate synthetic surfaces (many of you have continually flamed me for it in the past), I know you guys would rather play 8-9 horse synthetic races than 5 horse dirt fields.
I am pretty sure that putting in a synthetic surface is much more expensive than a dirt surface, even a dirt surface that is altered for winter racing.

I seriously doubt NYRA would make that investment when Cuomo has made it pretty clear that his long term goal is to modify Belmont to accommodate winter racing so he can take the land at Aqueduct for some ridiculous project he can toot his horn in advertising that he consistently wastes NY taxpayer money with.

I too would welcome a synthetic track at the Big A.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.