Grass Ranks Thinning Because of Synthetics

[pick4]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

In Summation is another that immediately jumps to mind. He was done on the dirt and only useful as a turf sprinter and is suddenly winning G1s on the synthetics. There have been a lot of G2 winners too that will probably win G1s soon enough. Just a week or two back a South American turf filly won a G2. I still don't buy that Nashoba's Key is anymore than a turf horse that is winning G1s on synthetics either.

In Summation is another one. I actually bet him that day in the Bing Crosby and he won by a nose. His form changed when he was moved to Clement's barn and he started sprinting him on grass. That was the reason I bet him that day. Notice how Asi Siempre and In Summation won on Polytrack? I can see the turf horse to Polytrack connection. So far the turf to Cushion hasn't been as strong. As far as I know Cushion is only at Hollywood and Santa Anita but it will be replaced at Santa Anita. The BC is at SA for the next two years and it will be a shame if they install Polytrack.

[Cannon Shell]

Not totally disagreeing with anything stated before but the Santa Anita Handicap has been in decline since the advent of the Dubai Classic.

Tell me again what top horses Student Council defeated at Del Mar? That was a terrible group for a race of that stature regardless of surface. Didn't he follow it up with another graded win on dirt?

I find it hard to believe that top class turf races, in the East especially, are effected more by synthetic tracks than by poor scheduling by tracks who ignore other tracks stakes schedules and a few high profile trainers that control a great many of the better turf runners wishes to keep them apart.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Tell me again what top horses Student Council defeated at Del Mar? That was a terrible group for a race of that stature regardless of surface. Didn't he follow it up with another graded win on dirt?

He beat a mighty field in the Hawthorne Gold Cup.

I don't totally disagree with you but the field he beat at Del Mar is better than him on the dirt. And, most that are didn't show up at all.

Frankly, there is no greater example of how ridiculous that surface is than Big Booster. He was running for a quarter on the dirt. Granted, it was John Kimmel, but still.

[pick4]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Not totally disagreeing with anything stated before but the Santa Anita Handicap has been in decline since the advent of the Dubai Classic.

Tell me again what top horses Student Council defeated at Del Mar? That was a terrible group for a race of that stature regardless of surface. Didn't he follow it up with another graded win on dirt?

I find it hard to believe that top class turf races, in the East especially, are effected more by synthetic tracks than by poor scheduling by tracks who ignore other tracks stakes schedules and a few high profile trainers that control a great many of the better turf runners wishes to keep them apart.

He beat an over the top Lava Man and held off the late charge of Awesome Gem who finished 3rd in the BC Classic.Student Council won the G2 Hawthorne Gold Cup in 9/07. Awesome Gem and Student Council both ran in the San Antonio at SA on 2/9/08 and AG was 3rd while SC was 5th.The Pacific Classic was run in 2:07 1/5 which is absurd for a Grade 1 race run on a sunny day and dry track. The Blue Grass of 07 was another ridiculously slow final time. Both races were run on Polytrack.

Didn't these "synthetic surfaces" originate in England?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

He beat a mighty field in the Hawthorne Gold Cup.

I don't totally disagree with you but the field he beat at Del Mar is better than him on the dirt. And, most that are didn't show up at all.

Frankly, there is no greater example of how ridiculous that surface is than Big Booster. He was running for a quarter on the dirt. Granted, it was John Kimmel, but still.

All of you said is probably true but the thread was supposedly about how turf races were suffering because of synthetic tracks and that is hardly the case. The race that Frankels horse is skipping Sat is a 10 horse field where Frankel already has 2 other races not to mention it is far from an important race. Perhaps Frankel would have not pointed his horse to the Big Cap on Dirt but he sure may have. I guess i am getting old but I remember lots of "turf" horses trying the big Cap. Of course they would have used this as a prep too. California is far different than everywhere else in regards to scheduling of races due to the distance from the other major races. But I would maintain that the schedule in the summer and fall in the east and midwest where races of all sorts overlap is a bigger detriment to thin stakes races than synthetic surfaces.

[pick4]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

He beat a mighty field in the Hawthorne Gold Cup.

I don't totally disagree with you but the field he beat at Del Mar is better than him on the dirt. And, most that are didn't show up at all.

Frankly, there is no greater example of how ridiculous that surface is than Big Booster. He was running for a quarter on the dirt. Granted, it was John Kimmel, but still.

I don't save charts for the Chicago circuit and I purchased the 2/9 Form at a newsstand and is probably at a recycling center somewhere in the USA now. Who did he beat in the Hawthorne Gold Cup?

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by pick4

I don't save charts for the Chicago circuit and I purchased the 2/9 Form at a newsstand and is probably at a recycling center somewhere in the USA now. Who did he beat in the Hawthorne Gold Cup?

The mighty Jonesboro and mighty AP Arrow.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

All of you said is probably true but the thread was supposedly about how turf races were suffering because of synthetic tracks and that is hardly the case. The race that Frankels horse is skipping Sat is a 10 horse field where Frankel already has 2 other races not to mention it is far from an important race. Perhaps Frankel would have not pointed his horse to the Big Cap on Dirt but he sure may have. I guess i am getting old but I remember lots of "turf" horses trying the big Cap. Of course they would have used this as a prep too. California is far different than everywhere else in regards to scheduling of races due to the distance from the other major races. But I would maintain that the schedule in the summer and fall in the east and midwest where races of all sorts overlap is a bigger detriment to thin stakes races than synthetic surfaces.

You're right about that. No turf races are really suffering.....unless of course someone is upset that Mott's horse won't be making any overnight races go at Churchill this summer because he's at Arlington. And, as far as Del Mar, their turf stakes are always five or six horse fields anyway.

Plenty of turf horses have tried the SA Handicap. I think Shug said some think that dirt track is kind to turf horses.....though perhaps that was his justification for running Good Reward.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pick4

I don't save charts for the Chicago circuit and I purchased the 2/9 Form at a newsstand and is probably at a recycling center somewhere in the USA now. Who did he beat in the Hawthorne Gold Cup?

Probably nobody. But it was a graded dirt win and the field he beat at Del Mar was still a field full of slow horses and one good horses in decline. The time was a joke but i still maintain that result is far from shocking on either surface. He won the worst running of the race ever but it was going to be the worst running regardless of surface.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by pick4

I don't save charts for the Chicago circuit and I purchased the 2/9 Form at a newsstand and is probably at a recycling center somewhere in the USA now. Who did he beat in the Hawthorne Gold Cup?

AP Arrow, who never lifted a hoof, and not much else.

Let me rephrase that.....AP Arrow was in the field and he beat nobody.

[pick4]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

The mighty Jonesboro and mighty AP Arrow.

That nag A P Arrow won the Grade 2 Clark last fall.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by pick4

That nag A P Arrow won the Grade 2 Clark last fall.

Yes, it is an especially tough race now with no one from the BC Classic or BC Dirt Mile running in it. When the race of your life is to beat a well past his prime Brass Hat by 3/4 of a length I don't think the Hall of Fame is going to be calling anytime soon.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pick4

That nag A P Arrow won the Grade 2 Clark last fall.

Which kind of provides evidence that there were no top older horses last year on just about any surface

[docicu3]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Synthetic surfaces have done two things, and they are exacerbated in high level races. First of all they have narrowed the gap between dirt and turf horses as in a sense they've created an evening factor of talent in that both types of horses may handle this third surface. Where the dirt horses were " faster " at each level than their grass counterparts we now see these two divisions being brought together. So, the turf horses, in a sense, are " better " on the synthetic surfaces and the dirt horses are " worse. "

The second thing they have done, essentially because of the first, is they have marginalized high level racing. The supposed good dirt horses aren't as good and the supposed good turf horses are seemingly better. In a sense this has created an interesting new division.....but it has clearly destroyed the former theoretical high level some of these races inhabited. Take, for instance, the two biggest Grade 1s on Polytrack in 2007, the Spinster at Keeneland and the Pacific Classic at Del Mar. Panty Raid is a nice horse, but she is certainly below the field she beat on Polytrack on the dirt. If you disagree with this feel free to revisit the Alabama Stakes. And then there's Student Council. His dirt form, while not awful, was certainly not superior to a number that finished behind him on Polytrack. Thus, these races are meaningless as " dirt " races and can only be rated as tests of synthetic ability. Now, this may not necessarily be a wholly bad thing, but it is certainly a new thing.......and no winner of the Santa Anita Handicap, as long as Santa Anita is a synthetic track, can ever be truly compared to the past winners of this race.

But, if you like Polytrack, whether for gambling reasons or some other reason I can't fathom, then you have plenty of opportunities to enjoy it. And, if you don't, then find a track with dirt. But, it goes without saying that these races are no longer the races they were in the past, whether you believe it's for better or worse.

Probably the most insightful thing you have ever posted here. Very smart!!

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Synthetic surfaces have done two things, and they are exacerbated in high level races. First of all they have narrowed the gap between dirt and turf horses as in a sense they've created an evening factor of talent in that both types of horses may handle this third surface. Where the dirt horses were " faster " at each level than their grass counterparts we now see these two divisions being brought together. So, the turf horses, in a sense, are " better " on the synthetic surfaces and the dirt horses are " worse. "

The second thing they have done, essentially because of the first, is they have marginalized high level racing. The supposed good dirt horses aren't as good and the supposed good turf horses are seemingly better. In a sense this has created an interesting new division.....but it has clearly destroyed the former theoretical high level some of these races inhabited. Take, for instance, the two biggest Grade 1s on Polytrack in 2007, the Spinster at Keeneland and the Pacific Classic at Del Mar. Panty Raid is a nice horse, but she is certainly below the field she beat on Polytrack on the dirt. If you disagree with this feel free to revisit the Alabama Stakes. And then there's Student Council. His dirt form, while not awful, was certainly not superior to a number that finished behind him on Polytrack. Thus, these races are meaningless as " dirt " races and can only be rated as tests of synthetic ability. Now, this may not necessarily be a wholly bad thing, but it is certainly a new thing.......and no winner of the Santa Anita Handicap, as long as Santa Anita is a synthetic track, can ever be truly compared to the past winners of this race.

But, if you like Polytrack, whether for gambling reasons or some other reason I can't fathom, then you have plenty of opportunities to enjoy it. And, if you don't, then find a track with dirt. But, it goes without saying that these races are no longer the races they were in the past, whether you believe it's for better or worse.

I'd like to ask you about the part that I highlighted. In what way do you mean that the dirt horses were faster than the grass horses at each level? I don't want to go looking around but it seems to me that at many distances at the major tracks, the track records for grass races are usually faster than the ones for dirt races at the same distance. A lot of times, significantly faster. It sort of feels to me that synthetic surfaces, rather than evening the gap, has widened it more. In the past, I've always felt like in general, grass horses have been superior and that real dirt was what actually evened things out because it put them at a disadvantage. I thought Sakhee and Giant's Causeway were both better than Tiznow. If those two BCC's were on grass, I think they romp but on dirt, they were disadvantaged enough to get them beat. I have a feeling that they win both of those races on synthetic tracks.

A lot of people are saying that the mass crossovers haven't been taking place yet and grass racing is still doing ok. It's still early. Watch what's going to happen in California this year. Watch how the BC "dirt" races are going to be affected. So far, for the most part, we've seen modest grass horses having a lot of success on the synthetics. It won't be long before the people with real good ones start moving over. It's going to happen.

[Danzig]

grass horses here will never be considered as superior, since most only end up there after failing on the dirt. dirt is our number one surface, and the ability to excel on that surface garners the most respect from american horsemen, the press and fans. synthetic may supplant turf as the one to go to when a horse can't run a lick on dirt-but a classic dirt horse will always reign supreme, regardless of 'feeling' that a turf horse may be 'better' than his dirt peers. if he was better, he'd be on dirt. right or wrong, that's the consensus in the sport.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I'd like to ask you about the part that I highlighted. In what way do you mean that the dirt horses were faster than the grass horses at each level? I don't want to go looking around but it seems to me that at many distances at the major tracks, the track records for grass races are usually faster than the ones for dirt races at the same distance. A lot of times, significantly faster. It sort of feels to me that synthetic surfaces, rather than evening the gap, has widened it more. In the past, I've always felt like in general, grass horses have been superior and that real dirt was what actually evened things out because it put them at a disadvantage. I thought Sakhee and Giant's Causeway were both better than Tiznow. If those two BCC's were on grass, I think they romp but on dirt, they were disadvantaged enough to get them beat. I have a feeling that they win both of those races on synthetic tracks.

A lot of people are saying that the mass crossovers haven't been taking place yet and grass racing is still doing ok. It's still early. Watch what's going to happen in California this year. Watch how the BC "dirt" races are going to be affected. So far, for the most part, we've seen modest grass horses having a lot of success on the synthetics. It won't be long before the people with real good ones start moving over. It's going to happen.

If good turf horses start running on the synthetic wont new turf horses emerge to take their place? Looking at CA turf races in particular arent the majority of the turf stakes run with imported horses? Why wouldnt we just import more to fill the turf stakes? Couldnt the sport overall be helped if there were full fields in turf and pseudo-dirt stakes?

[blackthroatedwind]

Turf track records are set on rock hard turf which is a faster surface than dirt ( real dirt that is ). Honestly, King, you should understand what I said implicitely.

[Danzig]

it's not as tho turf horses will become extinct. many don't like synthetics. wait a while, for instance, hated the surface.
so some slow dirters will try synthetics before turf....big deal. or some turfers will switch if they like poly better. since poly races inherited former dirt status (which i think will change-it has to) such as the santa anita h'cap, there is more prestige in winning those races-for now.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

If good turf horses start running on the synthetic wont new turf horses emerge to take their place? Looking at CA turf races in particular arent the majority of the turf stakes run with imported horses? Why wouldnt we just import more to fill the turf stakes? Couldnt the sport overall be helped if there were full fields in turf and pseudo-dirt stakes?

The sport could be helped from a wagering perspective. But what about the quality of the races themselves? Yes, if the good ones switch over, new ones will take their places. But won't the new ones just be ones that weren't good enough to win in the first place. It will be like this year's handicap division. If Curlin, Hard Spun, Lawyer Ron, Street Sense, and Any Given Saturday were still around, I am pretty sure that the top of the division would look better than it's going to look this year. But they are all gone and somebody has to step in and fill the voids and win the races. Doesn't mean they are anywhere near as good as the ones that left us though. I don't look at it as new horses emerging as much as old horses taking advantage of new opportunities.