Synthetic at Belmont inside the Inner

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

isnt the belmont turf the original surface..id hate to let that history get ripped out.......do it at the big a..

[the_fat_man]

Here a suggestion from someone who actually doesn't have POLYPHOBIA:

rather than going to all that trouble/expense, invest a miniscule amount in some
XTRA RAIL and RUN the ****IN RACES on turf. Can't be any more dangerous than running on dirt (and it might just break some of the jocks from their WIDE TURF TRIP habits) and maybe it's time to stop BABYING the courses. Gee, they do it in Europe all the time; and it's not like they run on them all year.

Problem solved.

[hockey2315]

Maybe that would make sense if there was an incredible problem with races coming off the turf. . . But, from what I gather, the main reason for the track would be for training - the added plus of being able to move races from the turf to the synthetic is more an extra selling point than the purpose for the whole thing.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Here a suggestion from someone who actually doesn't have POLYPHOBIA:

rather than going to all that trouble/expense, invest a miniscule amount in some
XTRA RAIL and RUN the ****IN RACES on turf. Can't be any more dangerous than running on dirt (and it might just break some of the jocks from their WIDE TURF TRIP habits) and maybe it's time to stop BABYING the courses. Gee, they do it in Europe all the time; and it's not like they run on them all year.

Problem solved.

1. Europe is where synthetics were invented
2. They rarely have meets that are more than 4 or 5 days at a time
3. if you make the turf wider wont the jockeys just go wider?

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

1. Europe is where synthetics were invented
2. They rarely have meets that are more than 4 or 5 days at a time
3. if you make the turf wider wont the jockeys just go wider?

The idea is not to completely eat up the grass course. So, save the XTRA WIDE rails for those days when you'd typically take the races off the turf. Who cares if the outside half of the turf is eaten up eventually? Bad turf == wet/off dirt. And, I'd imagine there'd be the odd time or two when Channing Hill goes over the OUTER RAIL. **** happens.

As for number 1: I'd imagine areas with atypically high rainfall dictated the need for an alternative surface.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

The idea is not to completely eat up the grass course. So, save the XTRA WIDE rails for those days when you'd typically take the races off the turf. Who cares if the outside half of the turf is eaten up eventually? Bad turf == wet/off dirt. And, I'd imagine there'd be the odd time or two when Channing Hill goes over the OUTER RAIL. **** happens.

As for number 1: I'd imagine areas with atypically high rainfall dictated the need for an alternative surface.

The jocks wont ride if it is too deep

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The jocks wont ride if it is too deep

Higher boots. Or exchange the slop boot for the swamp boot.

[hockey2315]

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/nat...-surfaces.aspx