My theory and feelings on Polytrack

Originally Posted by pgardn

Are you comparing the New Coke to Polytrack? God bless it man. Find something new. You are chasing your tail. You just constantly reinforce my assertation that you change arguements.

What about your article with sources on the greater % of injuries on Polytrack? That was much more in line with the original post than all your crazy offshoots. Dont always fall back on that crap I know more about the industry. This was not what was originally argued. quit changing paths. Its boring. I have never argued about your overall knowlege of the industry. Never. Thats why I read this board.

I should make a thread

Which is better? New Coke or Poly?

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

I should make a thread

Which is better? New Coke or Poly?

Damn thats a hard one, truly.
I'd have to say new coke, because they saw they screwed up and we enjoyed old coke that much more when it returned.
I hope to say the same thing about dirt racing at all tracks some day.

Ok, one more comment on the breeding industry.....the industry will be fine and will actually flouirsh. If we got rid of dirt tracks and replaced them all with a synthetic surface the only thing would change is the name of the breeding stars. So, With A City replaces Storm Cat, Asi Siempre replaces AP Indy it doesn't matter what surface it is. It only matters which horses can produce offspring that can run on the surface. In fact it may cause less in-breeding in the beginning because people would be forced to change their breeding habits which would be good for the breed.

I have said this 1000 times--a synthetic surface is good for Turfway and Woodbine but I really dont think it is good for Churchill or Saratoga. And I have spoken to just about every top trainer at Keeneland and every top jock at Keeneland this past meet and they seem to like the surface.