Hi all,
I don't know if anyone is interested in this but me, but I thought I'd start a thread where I could publicly keep track of Giant's Causeway's progeny's performance on the dirt- that way, maybe his progeny's performance on this surface could be more fairly evaluated.
This week's dirt performances:
1. 2/7, 6th @ GP, MSW 7.5f dirt- Malliol (ex Unbridled mare) --> 7th
2. 2/9, 1:20 @ Lingfield (Eng.), 1 1/4 all weather- Bridge Loan (ex Generous mare) --> 1st
Giant's Causeway and the "non-turf"
Moderators: Roguelet, WaveMaster, madelyn
Giant's Causeway and the "non-turf"
Last edited by ef on Wed Feb 09, 2005 8:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sorry, FOS, I guess I was thinking more "non-turf." I'll change the title (if I can figure out how) to suit you.
Of course, "dirt" tracks are a mix of sand, silt, clay, and organic materials, with a lot of variation between tracks. I guess it's always a good thing to keep in mind that not all dirt is created equal.
Of course, "dirt" tracks are a mix of sand, silt, clay, and organic materials, with a lot of variation between tracks. I guess it's always a good thing to keep in mind that not all dirt is created equal.
Hi FOS,
Not quite sure what you're so upset about... I'm just curious about how the Giant's Causeway perform on surfaces that aren't turf. If you are questioning the idea that there is some relationship between dirt and all weather performance, then I suggest you consider the numerous owners who ship horses that perform well on the England all weather to the states for dirt racing.
I thought I'd post this material for anyone else who might be interested in Giant's Causeways performances on a variety of surfaces, for this may help reveal how Giant's Causeway will ultimately do in this country. You are welcome to not read it.
Thanks for your support, LSB
sorry if I somehow offended you, FOS,
ef
Not quite sure what you're so upset about... I'm just curious about how the Giant's Causeway perform on surfaces that aren't turf. If you are questioning the idea that there is some relationship between dirt and all weather performance, then I suggest you consider the numerous owners who ship horses that perform well on the England all weather to the states for dirt racing.
I thought I'd post this material for anyone else who might be interested in Giant's Causeways performances on a variety of surfaces, for this may help reveal how Giant's Causeway will ultimately do in this country. You are welcome to not read it.
Thanks for your support, LSB
sorry if I somehow offended you, FOS,
ef
FOS wrote:hi ef
"Non-turf"...who are you kidding ?
I suggest that the semantics are misleading and disingenuous (at the very least).
See ya.
Respectfully
hi ef
In your original commentary you wrote "...I thought I'd start a thread where I could publicly keep track of Giant's Causeway's progeny's performance on the dirt- that way, maybe his progeny's performance on this surface could be more fairly evaluated."
Those are YOUR words ef...you chose the word "dirt."
YOUR stated goal was to "fairly" evaluate "Giant's Causeway's progeny's performance on the dirt..."
If that is your goal...why isn't the title "Giant's Causeway and the DIRT...
...not
Giant's Causeway and the "non-turf" (which you apparently changed it to)?
"I suggest that the semantics are misleading and disingenuous (at the very least)" possibly in an attempt to make Giant's Causeway out to be something that he (to a large degree) is not (at least yet...All Things Considered)...a successful DIRT sire.
Regarding synthetic surfaces...to my knowledge there has been no pari-mutuel thoroughbred racing on a SYNTHETIC surface in the United States ever since the synthetic surface at Remington Park was torn up over a decade ago.
Best to you.
Respect6fully
In your original commentary you wrote "...I thought I'd start a thread where I could publicly keep track of Giant's Causeway's progeny's performance on the dirt- that way, maybe his progeny's performance on this surface could be more fairly evaluated."
Those are YOUR words ef...you chose the word "dirt."
YOUR stated goal was to "fairly" evaluate "Giant's Causeway's progeny's performance on the dirt..."
If that is your goal...why isn't the title "Giant's Causeway and the DIRT...
...not
Giant's Causeway and the "non-turf" (which you apparently changed it to)?
"I suggest that the semantics are misleading and disingenuous (at the very least)" possibly in an attempt to make Giant's Causeway out to be something that he (to a large degree) is not (at least yet...All Things Considered)...a successful DIRT sire.
Regarding synthetic surfaces...to my knowledge there has been no pari-mutuel thoroughbred racing on a SYNTHETIC surface in the United States ever since the synthetic surface at Remington Park was torn up over a decade ago.
Best to you.
Respect6fully
Just a few questions for my information in my ongoing quest to educate myself.
Do the synthetic surfaces take on some of the same qualities as a turf course, i.e. do they provide more "cushion" than a regular dirt course? Are most of the European tracks (that aren't turf) a dirt or synthetic material? Do the synthetics tend to produce faster or slower times than a dirt course?
I vaguely recall the synthetic surface at Remington, and if I remember right it was a major fiasco and the entire surface was replaced at least once before being torn out completely at a huge expense. Seems to me it was some sort of individual coated grains of sand?
Laurie
Do the synthetic surfaces take on some of the same qualities as a turf course, i.e. do they provide more "cushion" than a regular dirt course? Are most of the European tracks (that aren't turf) a dirt or synthetic material? Do the synthetics tend to produce faster or slower times than a dirt course?
I vaguely recall the synthetic surface at Remington, and if I remember right it was a major fiasco and the entire surface was replaced at least once before being torn out completely at a huge expense. Seems to me it was some sort of individual coated grains of sand?
Laurie
So many pedigrees...so little time. (C)
hi ZiaLand
Years ago at Remington Park apparently many horsemen complained of both soft and hard spots in the sand-based synthetic surface...which many suspected (which could be an understatement) may have been responsible for breakdowns. The surface (which included a coating of some type of petroleum product on the synthetics) was discontinued as a result.
Regarding the polytrack synthetic surface...it's probably fair to say that the jury is still out on the product...but it is being given an opportunity to prove itself.
Prior to the current polytrack synthetic at Lingfield, another "all-weather" synthetic was used there...which apparently met disfavor (which may be an understatement). It was pulled and replaced with the wax-coated and apparently very consistent product...known as polytrack.
As a matter of interest...Lingfield Park Race Course is a unique shape as compared to the North American ovals...to the extent that it is a trianglular shape with a very short (approx 1/4 mile straight) run to the wire. Time comparisons may be difficult (for obvious reasons) .
Best to you.
Respectfully
Years ago at Remington Park apparently many horsemen complained of both soft and hard spots in the sand-based synthetic surface...which many suspected (which could be an understatement) may have been responsible for breakdowns. The surface (which included a coating of some type of petroleum product on the synthetics) was discontinued as a result.
Regarding the polytrack synthetic surface...it's probably fair to say that the jury is still out on the product...but it is being given an opportunity to prove itself.
Prior to the current polytrack synthetic at Lingfield, another "all-weather" synthetic was used there...which apparently met disfavor (which may be an understatement). It was pulled and replaced with the wax-coated and apparently very consistent product...known as polytrack.
As a matter of interest...Lingfield Park Race Course is a unique shape as compared to the North American ovals...to the extent that it is a trianglular shape with a very short (approx 1/4 mile straight) run to the wire. Time comparisons may be difficult (for obvious reasons) .
Best to you.
Respectfully
jeez...a wild hair get to you some where...bite her head off why dont ya ?heck were not in court here .... ahh...i have them days too............in fact i got an itch now.....FOS wrote:hi ef
In your original commentary you wrote "...I thought I'd start a thread where I could publicly keep track of Giant's Causeway's progeny's performance on the dirt- that way, maybe his progeny's performance on this surface could be more fairly evaluated."
Those are YOUR words ef...you chose the word "dirt."
YOUR stated goal was to "fairly" evaluate "Giant's Causeway's progeny's performance on the dirt..."
If that is your goal...why isn't the title "Giant's Causeway and the DIRT...
...not
Giant's Causeway and the "non-turf" (which you apparently changed it to)?
"I suggest that the semantics are misleading and disingenuous (at the very least)" possibly in an attempt to make Giant's Causeway out to be something that he (to a large degree) is not (at least yet...All Things Considered)...a successful DIRT sire.
Regarding synthetic surfaces...to my knowledge there has been no pari-mutuel thoroughbred racing on a SYNTHETIC surface in the United States ever since the synthetic surface at Remington Park was torn up over a decade ago.
Best to you.
Respect6fully
..best to all of you.
...extra hour of sleep should clear this up...even the dog dont like me today.-
louis finochio
- Darley line
- Posts: 9181
- Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:21 am
- Location: Alhambra-Calif.
- Contact:
giant causeway and
ef and others
To me everyone on this board is almost the same to me and if you,re like
you,re starting a new thread whats so ever. As simple as that. Without
bringing your head under the Quillotine and cut of by someone else.
Ben
To me everyone on this board is almost the same to me and if you,re like
you,re starting a new thread whats so ever. As simple as that. Without
bringing your head under the Quillotine and cut of by someone else.
Ben
NON-TURF & DIRT
EF firstly thank you-I quite like GC and would very much like to see what his progeny are doing off the turf tracks.
Currently there are 3 All Weather tracks in UK (there are 4 more planned for 2006 inc. Newmarket)
Almost every trainer in GB trains on the All Weather and rarely will a turf training track be available.
Lingfield is by far the best, Wolverhampton second & Southwell is lowly rated. Lingfield had a new track in last year (?) with Polytrack and the breakdowns have slowed to a normal rate (i.e. same as a turf track), however the course was awful beforehand.
FOS slap my hand as when talking to people about the AW I usually will call it dirt
Currently there are 3 All Weather tracks in UK (there are 4 more planned for 2006 inc. Newmarket)
Almost every trainer in GB trains on the All Weather and rarely will a turf training track be available.
Lingfield is by far the best, Wolverhampton second & Southwell is lowly rated. Lingfield had a new track in last year (?) with Polytrack and the breakdowns have slowed to a normal rate (i.e. same as a turf track), however the course was awful beforehand.
FOS slap my hand as when talking to people about the AW I usually will call it dirt