Santa Anita = Dirt (Starting with Winter Meet)

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Honu

I know what Ive seen

Sweet, well there's no statistical evidence that synthetic tracks are safer than dirt ones, meaning they failed miserably at their one purpose while diluting the game in numerous other ways. So you might understand why some people would be happy to see real dirt come back.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Sweet, well there's no statistical evidence that synthetic tracks are safer than dirt ones, meaning they failed miserably at their one purpose while diluting the game in numerous other ways.

Ah. I see. Well, if you actually read what you are referencing, you will note the different results over time. Rather than quoting only one year's initial data.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Riot

Ah. I see. Well, if you actually read what you are referencing, you will note the different results over time. Rather than quoting only one year's initial data.

So go ahead and show me the stats that say synthetic tracks are significantly safer than dirt tracks. I'm still waiting.

[ateamstupid]

Here's another study from 2008, showing 2.02 fatalities per 1,000 starts on dirt to the microscopic 1.47 fatalities per 1,000 starts on synthetic. Hardly a huge difference.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...-ratio-changes

[Riot]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Here's another study from 2008, showing 2.02 fatalities per 1,000 starts on dirt to the microscopic 1.47 fatalities per 1,000 starts on synthetic. Hardly a huge difference.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...-ratio-changes

No, statistically that is a huge difference.

The point is that Honu was right: there were plenty of dead and injured horses on SA old dirt track. Whether the various synthetics were right to use (the weather there is so different from where the synths are used in the rest of the world), or whether the track should have been torn up and redone from the base upwards, with that cushion retained - we'll see how the new dirt track is. And the new cushion.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Riot

No, statistically that is a huge difference.

The point is that Honu was right: there were plenty of dead and injured horses on SA old dirt track. Whether the various synthetics were right to use (the weather there is so different from where the synths are used in the rest of the world), or whether the track should have been torn up and redone from the base upwards, with that cushion retained - we'll see how the new dirt track is. And the new cushion.

From the same article, the sample before had 1.96 for dirt to 1.95 to synthetic. I'm still waiting for any kind of stats supporting synthetics' superior safety from you, since you said that pro-synth rhetoric is about "the safety and welfare of the horse."

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Sweet, well there's no statistical evidence that synthetic tracks are safer than dirt ones, meaning they failed miserably at their one purpose while diluting the game in numerous other ways. So you might understand why some people would be happy to see real dirt come back.

I would say the synthetic tracks in California are safer than what we had before, but that's not saying much. The tracks we had before were terrible. They were in desperate need of some serious renovation.

However, if you compare our current synthetic tracks in California to good dirt tracks, I think that a good dirt track is safer. I think there are actually more injuries on the synthetic tracks.