![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
I meant horses bred based on synthetic success. So yes if he waters down the breed it becomes a mistake
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
It was a cheap attempt at patting myself on the back however there is no such thing as "watering the breed down" when it is contracting at a rapid rate. Being that both sides of his pedigree are distinctly grass influenced and he is not exactly by a well regarded or popular sire of sires I'm sure his impact on the breed will be minimal.
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Anyway the debate is now over because Bill Finley has weighed in with a typically arrogant Op-ed piece in TDN that mocks those who are not upset about the demise of synthetic tracks. Being that Finley is almost always wrong in a way that makes PG1985 look like Nostradamus we can now move on with our lives.
I think the track is unfrozen to the point that I actually have to do some work... |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
It adds up. A horse like pioneer of the Nile should only be seeing my tool shed these days. Slopped up slow derby second and marginal shredded tire running success. Maybe pony rides.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Breeding is about genetics, not track surface, not medication. A horse by a "turf sire" or out of a "dirt" mare is more likely to share the physical attributes that their parents had which will drive their ability to preform on certain surfaces but as evidenced in a million cases, it doesn't limit them to success solely on that particular surface. |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yes. They can all throw something that can outperform on a given surface. See boundary and big brown. Still think syn form is useless for breeding purposes
|
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Is European form useless as well because they often run the wrong way on waterlogged bogs which is as foreign to American horses as synthetic surfaces?
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Turf is a real surface. Always has been. Now you are arguing for the sake of it.
|