Stronach reneges on SA surface change..

[herkhorse]

I'm no Civil Engineer, but it sounds like they need a sub-surface change first.


Definition: Drainage - Removal of liquid from an area by either natural or artificial means, such as by gravity or pumping.



Maybe they should hire an expert :


http://www.intota.com/rfp/rfp.asp?perID=724737

[Honu]

The surface drains , just slowly , by Sunday morning it was back to normal and horses were galloping and working on it .

[Left Bank]

They should just have the meet at Del Mar in the winter until Frank gets his act together and his medication kicks in.

[Patrick333]

Originally Posted by Left Bank

They should just have the meet at Del Mar in the winter until Frank gets his act together and his medication kicks in.

That makes to much sense to have it happen.

[asudevil]

Originally Posted by Honu

The surface drains , just slowly , by Sunday morning it was back to normal and horses were galloping and working on it .

That means Dick!! It's pathetic! And even more so given the mid week cards. It's over for that place in the winter.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by asudevil

That means Dick!! It's pathetic! And even more so given the mid week cards. It's over for that place in the winter.

Whatever dude , if it was dirt we still wouldnt be training on it , but we would have that sealed racetrack to look forward to running on . Everyone seems to forget why they put the the surface in in the first place , its because horses were dying at an alarming rate. Were you here when the freaking horse ambulance was hauling horses off more than once a week to be put down? No you werent and you didnt see horses legs just hanging on by skin and you didnt see riders going down and being lucky to just break a bone. So yeah it isnt perfect or maybe not even close but it is better than what we had , its better than horses dying every week and that is just in the mornings.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Honu

Whatever dude , if it was dirt we still wouldnt be training on it , but we would have that sealed racetrack to look forward to running on . Everyone seems to forget why they put the the surface in in the first place , its because horses were dying at an alarming rate. Were you here when the freaking horse ambulance was hauling horses off more than once a week to be put down? No you werent and you didnt see horses legs just hanging on by skin and you didnt see riders going down and being lucky to just break a bone. So yeah it isnt perfect or maybe not even close but it is better than what we had , its better than horses dying every week and that is just in the mornings.

How come so many California trainers want a return to dirt if there was such carnage in the past?

[Honu]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

How come so many California trainers want a return to dirt if there was such carnage in the past?

Hell if I know ......uhm they dont care would be my first guess, but its just a guess.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Honu

Hell if I know ......uhm they dont care would be my first guess, but its just a guess.

That's quite a condemnation of the California training community.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

How come so many California trainers want a return to dirt if there was such carnage in the past?

I think trainers are hopeful that a quality, brand new dirt track would be safe.

[2Hot4TV]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I think trainers are hopeful that a quality, brand new dirt track would be safe.

Hope is not a very good business plan.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

How come so many California trainers want a return to dirt if there was such carnage in the past?

they ran out of excuses why the horses they train dont run fast.they need dirt.

[asudevil]

Originally Posted by Honu

Whatever dude , if it was dirt we still wouldnt be training on it , but we would have that sealed racetrack to look forward to running on . Everyone seems to forget why they put the the surface in in the first place , its because horses were dying at an alarming rate. Were you here when the freaking horse ambulance was hauling horses off more than once a week to be put down? No you werent and you didnt see horses legs just hanging on by skin and you didnt see riders going down and being lucky to just break a bone. So yeah it isnt perfect or maybe not even close but it is better than what we had , its better than horses dying every week and that is just in the mornings.

I was there!! And it was a freakish period for about 6 months back in '05-'06 Does that mean there should have been sweeping legislation across the state? Which was really BS because they left Fairplex, Los Al, and the other fairs alone. They never addressed the base at SA. It needs to be totally ripped out. That place is a ticking time bomb. The better trainers are scared schit everytime they put a decent horse on it. It's not that easy to pick up and move a whole operation to another part of the country, especially if you've been there for years. There's employees, uprooting of family, mortgages, etc. And it's not like there's anywhere to go that's geographically close. Say what you want about Hollywood....That surface has been pretty darn good. Problem there is that the future is on a "meet by meet" basis. Del Mar might as well be Turfway (no offense to those in Florence). But what once was, and now is......

Look, I'm pretty sure that you're an excercise rider. I appreciate your work because it's an integral part of the entire product. You guys keep the animals fit and I'm certain at times it goes unrecognized. But there is a level of frustration that is approaching a point of no return. Frank might have put the final nail in today.

State of racing in CA. is very sad.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by asudevil

I was there!! And it was a freakish period for about 6 months back in '05-'06 Does that mean there should have been sweeping legislation across the state? Which was really BS because they left Fairplex, Los Al, and the other fairs alone. They never addressed the base at SA. It needs to be totally ripped out. That place is a ticking time bomb. The better trainers are scared schit everytime they put a decent horse on it. It's not that easy to pick up and move a whole operation to another part of the country, especially if you've been there for years. There's employees, uprooting of family, mortgages, etc. And it's not like there's anywhere to go that's geographically close. Say what you want about Hollywood....That surface has been pretty darn good. Problem there is that the future is on meet by meet basis. Del Mar might as well be Turfway (no offense to those in Florence).

State of racing in CA. is very sad.

Freakish ??? Are you kidding me ? I came here in 1998 from very cheap racetracks with very cheap horses , truly never saw the amount of horses breaking their legs off as I did here except at Waterford Park back before it was Mountaineer . It wasnt just Santa Anita , it was all the major southern Cali tracks , Del Mar was the worst for whatever reason but still I never heard any compliments about the racing surfaces here. No one ever said "dang those tracks in Cali are kind to horses" " boy they have a nice soft surface out there" , no what you heard was "those tracks are hard and fast " those tracks are like the 405 freeway"
Trainers want to blame the sythetics on owners leaving the game , but they have a hard time admitting to the fact that owners are leaving the game because it costs to much money and that they have no interest in the infighting among the horseman . For most owners horse racing was something to be enjoyed , hard to enjoy it when you have everyone bitching and complaining and believe me they can and do find cheaper ways to enjoy themselves.

[richard]

Thanks for your perspective Honu and your grasp of history out there in Cali.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Honu

Whatever dude , if it was dirt we still wouldnt be training on it , but we would have that sealed racetrack to look forward to running on . Everyone seems to forget why they put the the surface in in the first place , its because horses were dying at an alarming rate. Were you here when the freaking horse ambulance was hauling horses off more than once a week to be put down? No you werent and you didnt see horses legs just hanging on by skin and you didnt see riders going down and being lucky to just break a bone. So yeah it isnt perfect or maybe not even close but it is better than what we had , its better than horses dying every week and that is just in the mornings.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2...s-fuel-debate/

California horse racing reported more racehorse deaths over the previous two years, 645, than any other reported two-year period, according to data released yesterday in the annual report by the California Horse Racing Board.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2...s-fuel-debate/

California horse racing reported more racehorse deaths over the previous two years, 645, than any other reported two-year period, according to data released yesterday in the annual report by the California Horse Racing Board.

Deb,

Not that I'm a defender of the synthetic by any means, but as Bill Finley pointed out in an ESPN piece last week, those figures also included some rather unfortunate and gaudy fatality figs from Los Alamitos. The use of breakdown figures in this debate is always going to be superfluous and inconclusive. The numbers are going to vary up and down, high and wide on any and all surfaces because of the capricious nature of injuries in general.

The synthetic doesn't work as constituted by this generation of man-made surfaces because they have failed to live up to their advertised features and benefits overall. They aren't maintenance free as advertised. They aren't any appreciably safer than a well maintained organic dirt surface as advertised. They have turned off a significant group of the horse-playing public. There has been no benefit to their installation other than to make money for those that got behind it. And for all the adulation Keeneland receives from its' dew-eyed worshipers, I'm curious how they've escaped criticism for their hand in the synthetic surface 'putover'.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Deb,

Not that I'm a defender of the synthetic by any means, but as Bill Finley pointed out in an ESPN piece last week, those figures also included some rather unfortunate and gaudy fatality figs from Los Alamitos. The use of breakdown figures in this debate is always going to be superfluous and inconclusive. The numbers are going to vary up and down, high and wide on any and all surfaces because of the capricious nature of injuries in general.

The synthetic doesn't work as constituted by this generation of man-made surfaces because they have failed to live up to their advertised features and benefits overall. They aren't maintenance free as advertised. They aren't any appreciably safer than a well maintained organic dirt surface as advertised. They have turned off a significant group of the horse-playing public. There has been no benefit to their installation other than to make money for those that got behind it. And for all the adulation Keeneland receives from its' dew-eyed worshipers, I'm curious how they've escaped criticism for their hand in the synthetic surface 'putover'.

ah, i didn't see the finley piece. but you'd expect that with the largest tracks having synthetics, there would be a decrease even with the fairs included-unless of course those numbers weren't used in the past. at any rate, it certainly hasn't lived up to its billing.
as for the track surface being changed, it appears stronach is trying to use the surface as a bargaining tool. perhaps it'll end up being changed after all. but i'm not holding my breath.

[johnny pinwheel]

Originally Posted by Honu

Whatever dude , if it was dirt we still wouldnt be training on it , but we would have that sealed racetrack to look forward to running on . Everyone seems to forget why they put the the surface in in the first place , its because horses were dying at an alarming rate. Were you here when the freaking horse ambulance was hauling horses off more than once a week to be put down? No you werent and you didnt see horses legs just hanging on by skin and you didnt see riders going down and being lucky to just break a bone. So yeah it isnt perfect or maybe not even close but it is better than what we had , its better than horses dying every week and that is just in the mornings.

did they ever think of fixing the dirt surface? softer base, deeper cushion? instead, its a man-made piece of garbage! he says people don't even want to race on it. to me, that says it all! yes, horses were dying but this was not the answer. people are more leary of this track then the dirt one! wow, horses galloped over the weekend, after what, losing millions in missed dates? he says those tracks have costed 24 million, i believe. in reality its closer to 50 million due to lost racing dates and lack of participation by horsemen. who really knows, like he said, its not a free market when you change the rules(with mandates)! like someone else said, fix it, means fix it. this definetly did not "FIX" anything! its the basic rule of thumb with folks these days. it happens at all levels with every problem that comes up. people panic and over re-act, its why we are in stupid wars, going bankrupt and having these stupid tracks that people don't want (because they don't work!). everytime something happens, "its the end of the world, the hype is telling me so!" instead of simple solutions, its simple people panicking and making things worse!

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by johnny pinwheel

did they ever think of fixing the dirt surface? softer base, deeper cushion? instead, its a man-made piece of garbage!

I'm sure they have thought of that, but the reason, I would venture, that the CA dirt tracks were hard as rock is that, for all that these torrential rainstorms have been in the news, southern CA is a desert. That's the climate. Yes, a dirt track could be put in, but the cost of keeping it soft and deep will be quite a bit. The synthetic was an attempt to get what the Northeast gets without having to pay the difference for being in a different climate.

It's business- you try to get as much as you can and pay as little as you can. The horse owners aren't the track owners- it's not the track owner that loses money when the horse breaks down on the track and I doubt the horse owners are interested in paying for the track maintenance because it's not their property.

What sucks, of course, is that, as in most business-related things where risk is compared with cost, the biggest victims are the ones who don't have any say in the situation; in this case the horses.

So, the ongoing solution to find an inexpensive, easy solution goes on. And it reminds me of the old adage that there's cheap; there's fast; and there's good, and you can have two out of the three.