Sire lines on Polytrack

It will be very interesting to watch. I know I was voicing concerns as a breeder that any foal bred this coming spring wont be racing until 2010 at the earliest and by that time, most tracks will more than likely be polytracks. Its extremely important for breeders, especially smaller breeders, to try to find a trend now and hope that it stays true by the time your foals hit the track. Its such a strange time for the industry, especially for breeders. I really do think this will be a big change for most.

[Revolution]

A poster here that is in the breeding business said there are numerous different types of synthetic surfaces and they have been racing on them for years outside the United States. This isn't new stuff. How can you make any decisions on "poly" based off a 17 day meet. How about Turfways numbers. Do just Keeneland's count? That would be ridiculous.

What about Steve Byk's theory and others who said Keeneland has more to do with the way they set up the track than the poly?

Based on the sires you listed, it means nothing. Those sires produce winners because they are the top sires. The sample is so small and it doesn't mention if these sires just had more horses run.

It would be crazy to change the way one spends millions of dollars choosing stallions to even consider the synthetic surfaces right now. They all are going to play differently, just like dirt tracks do.

Originally Posted by Revolution

A poster here that is in the breeding business said there are numerous different types of synthetic surfaces and they have been racing on them for years outside the United States. This isn't new stuff. How can you make any decisions on "poly" based off a 17 day meet. How about Turfways numbers. Do just Keeneland's count? That would be ridiculous.

What about Steve Byk's theory and others who said Keeneland has more to do with the way they set up the track than the poly?

Based on the sires you listed, it means nothing. Those sires produce winners because they are the top sires. The sample is so small and it doesn't mention if these sires just had more horses run.

It would be crazy to change the way one spends millions of dollars choosing stallions to even consider the synthetic surfaces right now. They all are going to play differently, just like dirt tracks do.

Yeah because it's crazy to take a chance.

Fortune favors the bold.

[Revolution]

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

Yeah because it's crazy to take a chance.

Fortune favors the bold.

Not when breeding horses it doesn't.

Originally Posted by Revolution

A poster here that is in the breeding business said there are numerous different types of synthetic surfaces and they have been racing on them for years outside the United States. This isn't new stuff. How can you make any decisions on "poly" based off a 17 day meet. How about Turfways numbers. Do just Keeneland's count? That would be ridiculous.

What about Steve Byk's theory and others who said Keeneland has more to do with the way they set up the track than the poly?

Based on the sires you listed, it means nothing. Those sires produce winners because they are the top sires. The sample is so small and it doesn't mention if these sires just had more horses run.

It would be crazy to change the way one spends millions of dollars choosing stallions to even consider the synthetic surfaces right now. They all are going to play differently, just like dirt tracks do.

No one is saying change your breeding methods by looking at 2 weeks worth of results. The point was its something every breeder should be looking at.

No, polytrack isnt "new" to the world. There are all-weather tracks all over Europe... but its new to North America and the majority of our dirt stallions.

Furthermore, those "top" stallions on the list are also good to great turf stallions. Thats the point that was being drawn from the results. Horses who can produce versatile runners on either surface seem to be reaping some success on the polytrack.

And these numbers are very limited... there's not enough info around to make a safe judgement, but it would be ridiculous to not pay attention and keep a tally of whats going on.

Until you can put your money where your mouth is and feel 100% confident that polytrack will have no impact on the foal you breed and the future worth of your mare, I wouldnt be so quick to jump into conversations balls out when the point of the whole topic is to keep a tally of possible outcomes and results not to make a definitive conclusion off two weeks worth of results.

[Revolution]

Originally Posted by Balletto

No one is saying change your breeding methods by looking at 2 weeks worth of results. The point was its something every breeder should be looking at.

No, polytrack isnt "new" to the world. There are all-weather tracks all over Europe... but its new to North America and the majority of our dirt stallions.

Furthermore, those "top" stallions on the list are also good to great turf stallions. Thats the point that was being drawn from the results. Horses who can produce versatile runners on either surface seem to be reaping some success on the polytrack.

And these numbers are very limited... there's not enough info around to make a safe judgement, but it would be ridiculous to not pay attention and keep a tally of whats going on.

Until you can put your money where your mouth is and feel 100% confident that polytrack will have no impact on the foal you breed and the future worth of your mare, I wouldnt be so quick to jump into conversations balls out when the point of the whole topic is to keep a tally of possible outcomes and results not to make a definitive conclusion off two weeks worth of results.

I thought you were basing this on the belief that turf runners do better on poly, which is simply not true. There is no proof of this anywhere.

There are two or three horses that showed this and it could simply be those horses don't like the kickback on dirt, and with the poly they don't have to deal with it.

It is much more likely that track configuration and the role of kickback are at play here, not the breeding.

Its too early to tell if the track favors turf runners or not... but I will say EARLY results show that stallions who sire versatile runners seem to be doing the best on this surface. I think that says a lot... but again, the results are very limited.

From what I understand from my family's trainer at Keeneland, the actual substance is turf like in the give and cut. The fields are also playing a lot more like turf races. Does this mean turf breeding will do better on it? We dont know yet... but with early results in, its telling that the best results come from stallions who can get a good turf runner. Each one of the stallions listed are better than "good" hidden turf stallions.