Slower doesn't mean safer

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

In general, the rock-hard, lightening fast tracks are more dangerous. This is a generalization and it's not always true, but for the most part, all things being equal, a track that's a little slower is usually safer. That's not a big secret.

Certainly in theory and common belief....

And yet - if anything - the opposite proves true the more you observe it on paper.

[randallscott35]

Your Drossel example is a poor one. Slow horses run slow times. He didn't get hurt b/c he's slow.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Your Drossel example is a poor one. Slow horses run slow times. He didn't get hurt b/c he's slow.

I think he ran about four seconds (24 lengths) slower than Jazil and 2 seconds (12 lengths) slower than Da Tara.

The winner is slow - but so was the racetrack.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I think he ran about four seconds (24 lengths) slower than Jazil and 2 seconds (12 lengths) slower than Da Tara.

The winner is slow - but so was the racetrack.

Again, he's slow. The race track was fine on Belmont day. Guess what Commendable was slow too....Surprising to me you would use lengths beaten as anything since we all know the track is not the same every Belmont day. You are better than that.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Just to clarify, the speed of the track is not the only factor in determining safety. There are other factors too. The consistency of the track is very important. If you have holes in the track or if you have soft spots in the track, the track will be dangerous even if it's not very fast.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Just to clarify, the speed of the track is not the only factor in determining safety. There are other factors too. The consistency of the track is very important. If you have holes in the track or if you have soft spots in the track, the track will be dangerous even if it's not very fast.

True enough I suppose.

Maybe when the tracks are a little faster than par they're more consistant - I don't know.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Again, he's slow.

Mineshaft in his prime wouldn't have run a final time even close to Jazil's Belmont over the track.

Mineshaft is not slow - but the track was that day.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Mineshaft in his prime wouldn't have run a final time even close to Jazil's Belmont over the track.

Mineshaft is not slow - but the track was that day.

Interesting comeback. Dumb. But interesting.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

What was it that was wrong that last summer they had dirt at Del Mar? I think it was called "cuppy." Was sort of a killing field.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Certainly in theory and common belief....

And yet - if anything - the opposite proves true the more you observe it on paper.

I can come up with plenty of examples of horses that got hurt as a direct result of a hard, sealed track. Back in 2005, they sealed the track a day or two before Big Cap day. Both Declan's Moon and Rock Hard Ten got hurt that day.

I don't know if any of the horses you mentioned actually got hurt on the day you alluded to. I'm not saying they didn't. I'm saying we don't know one way or the other.

Anyway, a few examples and anecdotes don't really prove anything one way or another. There will still be injuries even on a really safe track. You'll just have less injuries.

Horses obviously need some cushion. If they didn't, the tracks wouldn't have to spend all this money. They could just pave the tracks and the horses could run on cement.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Anyway, a few examples and anecdotes don't really prove anything one way or another. There will still be injuries even on a really safe track. You'll just have less injuries.

I'm talking about observations over many years at many different tracks involving many different horses.

It doesn't matter either way to me though.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I'm talking about observations over many years at many different tracks involving many different horses.

It doesn't matter either way to me though.

You know that it would obviously be dangerous for horses to run on cement. Why would it be dangerous? It would be dangerous because it is way too hard. That may be an extreme example but the point is that the horses need some cushion. How much cushion? I don't know exactly but when horses start running 6 furlongs in 1:07 and change, I would say that you're getting to the point where there's not enough cushion.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I don't know exactly but when horses start running 6 furlongs in 1:07 and change, I would say that you're getting to the point where there's not enough cushion.

Majesticperfection seems to beg to differ at the moment, and that race card hasn't exactly come back with horses limping to the bench -- in fact, they practically swept Saratoga Sunday.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Majesticperfection seems to beg to differ at the moment, and that race card hasn't exactly come back with horses limping to the bench -- in fact, they practically swept Saratoga Sunday.

Tracks are never so dangerous that most of the horses get hurt on a card. If 10% were getting hurt, that would be a really dangerous track. I don't know if the track at Prairie Meadows was dangerous or not, but knowing that some horses came back fine is hardly evidence that the track was safe.

You can ask any trainer and they will all tell you that they get more injuries when the track is too hard whether it's grass or dirt.

[Cannon Shell]

Any comparison of tracks from years past and now are pretty much not valid based on the difference in how horses are trained/raced. Perhaps if horses ran more often they wouldnt be as frail as they are when every race is "spaced" to try to produce max efforts.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I would say that you're getting to the point where there's not enough cushion.

I have doubts more cushion is better.

Slower tracks are probably a little tougher and more stressful to run on - obviously a track has to provide some level of cushion — much more so than a concrete road for instance.