Turfway - Poly

[sumitas]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

What was it about the surface that you didnt like? Were you on it? Did you not like the way the races were playing out?

I am not a big poly proponent. I hated it last year but im starting to get use to it now. I do enjoy the fact that the fields are more full thus you get better value on the horses that you bet.

I played the card last night and it was abundantly clear that you pretty much had to throw out speed.

It's nice to see a lot of horses running over a kinder surface.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by sumitas

It's nice to see a lot of clydesdales plodding over a kinder surface.

FTFY.

[sumitas]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

FTFY.

Clydesdales bring the beer so don't knock them.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by sumitas

It's nice to see a lot of horses running over a kinder surface.

but i read recently that supposedly there have been a lot more soft tissue injuries related to the poly surfaces.

anyone know if this is actually the case? trading one type of injury for another isn't a move in the right direction.

[sumitas]

Trading injuries is not the goal, for sure. What is needed is quantifiable data and toward that end, breakdowns are way down at every track I believe.

Have a great weekend.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by sumitas

Trading injuries is not the goal, for sure. What is needed is quantifiable data and toward that end, breakdowns are way down at every track I believe.

Have a great weekend.

getting rid of breakdowns is obviously good, but not good for a horse who suffers an injury of another sort. of course, generally fans in attendance don't ever hear about those....keeps up the image of safety.

[ELA]

As far as "hard" data, quantifiable, I think that will be slow to come. Plus, getting data on soft-tissue injuries is going to be tough, and to be able to attribute these injuries to the poly/synthetic/etc. surface is going to be extremely difficult if not impossible.

Any data on the new surfaces are going to come from a much smaller sampling and as such might be inconclusive. I am all for reducing breakdowns. I think we are seeing different "problems" (so called problems) at different tracks across the country. I still haven't seen the hard, quantifiable data where most (percentage) trainers dislike these surfaces. Sure, there are very vocal voices of displeasure, dislike, etc., but I am not sure if that is reflective of the majority or what size group.

Kickback, weather, moisture or lack thereof, and several other issues need, and will, be addressed. It's still very new, and there will be a lifecycle to it.

Eric

[Riot]

As far as "hard" data, quantifiable, I think that will be slow to come. Plus, getting data on soft-tissue injuries is going to be tough, and to be able to attribute these injuries to the poly/synthetic/etc. surface is going to be extremely difficult if not impossible.

The current track study being conducted will give exactly that type of information.

[disrespectnfool]

oh poly,poly
saving the horses for sure
killing bettors more

[ELA]

Originally Posted by Riot

The current track study being conducted will give exactly that type of information.

For the reasons I mentioned, and others, do you really think this information is going to be conclusive. One meet? One year? Without the variables, changes that can and weren't made in the track surface. I agree with you that the information is needed. I am just concerned that too many people are too hesitant to start making changes, tweaking, etc.

I would have liked to see track management have people assessing, reviewing, and being a lot more proactive once these tracks were installed. I don't like hearing track management say "We aren't making any changes whatsoever until the meet is over" or something to that effect.

Eric