Santa Anita gets 2008 Breeders Cup

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

What drives me nuts is that everyone automatically assumes "Dirt = bad, Polytrack = good" when it comes to horses' health. And while, yes, it's proven that artificial surfaces are easier on the horses, I don't see a ton of breakdowns in NY racing, and I think it's because the dirt tracks are much deeper than they are anywhere else. I just feel that any track that has a lot of injuries or breakdowns goes "Oh, that's it, we've gotta get polytrack" and takes the easy way out rather than actually using some brainpower and figuring out how to improve the dirt surface.

The bottom line is that, like it or not, the betting public's needs and wants come before the horses' safety. I'm sorry, you might not like hearing it, but it's the cold reality of a gambling-driven sport. If everyone suddenly stopped betting polytrack races, the tracks would have to either figure out a way to make it play more like dirt, or rip it up all together. Do I think it should be that way? Ideally, no. Am I advocating ripping up all polytrack? No. But if you think the wave of tracks moving to artificial surfaces isn't partly or wholly influenced by the fact that people still bet Turfway and Keeneland when they switched, I think you're delusional.

The issue is not necessarily "Dirt = bad, Polytrack = good," but rather Polytrack is better when it comes to the horses' health, which you concede. As for breakdowns, keep in mind that what you see in the afternoon is only a portion of the problem. I've experienced more injuries in the morning with our horses than any injuries in the afternoon, and the majority of horsemen attest to the fact that the horses do better over synthetic surfaces.

As for the second bolded portion of your post, I admire your honesty, no matter how wrong-headed and uncaring for the horse that I think the statement is. At the end of the day, the market is speaking about whether it likes the racing - and both Keeneland and Hollywood have seen dramatic increases in handle, despite the number of people I hear saying that they are "boycotting" racing over these surfaces.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

At the end of the day, the market is speaking about whether it likes the racing - and both Keeneland and Hollywood have seen dramatic increases in handle.

I can tell you're not a bettor---that's for sure.

Bettors like competitive races with full fields---and when you can card them, handle will absolutely thrive. It doesn't matter if the races are run over dirt, turf, poly-track, cotton balls or broken glass.

Horseman are supporting this surface strongly---Eastern trainers sent strings West for HP, and interest to run at KEE has increased greatly.

IMO, Artifical dirt surfaces are great ideas for mid-level and cheap racetracks in weather sensative parts of the country.

Once again though---when horseman stop over-medicating horses, and when commerical breeders start breeding for soundness....I think the people who say they care so much about the welfare of the horse might be taken more seriously.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I can tell you're not a bettor---that's for sure.

No, you can't.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

It doesn't matter if the races are run over dirt, turf, poly-track, cotton balls or broken glass.

Cotton balls? Too funny...

[The Bid]

F polytrack