Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Riot
The point I'm trying to make is that maybe - gee, just maybe - the folks in charge actually give a damn about the lives of horses and jockeys.
|
Of course. And I'm a big proponent of synthetic surfaces. Just saying that there is a difference between how Arlington did theirs and how other tracks did. Arlington
had to do something. The two can very well go hand in hand, though Arlington's could very easily be viewed as nothing more than a PR move. To be honest, in their case, I imagine it was quite a bit of both. They didn't want breakdowns any more than anyone else did, but cynically, it was a brilliant PR move...the best they could have made.
I'm not disagreeing with you one bit, and didn't intend for it to sound like I was. I was just noting that the Arlington situation was a bit different than others in that regard.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Payson Dave
As you know, I'm not anywheres near as bright as yourself.... what exactly is the point that she is "obviously" trying to make?
|
Was her rhetorical question that tough for you to decipher? "No" is the point she was obviously trying to make....glad to be of service again on things like this for you, tiger.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Riot
You really think that public perception outside the industry was the driving force for the installation of synthetic surfaces?
|