Polytrack has ruined the Derby

[oliverstoned]

With all the Cali preps run on poly plus the Keeneland preps the horses who can actually run on dirt and have shot at the Derby can't get in because they couldn't give a true accounting of themselves or earn the necessary graded $. The Yum Derby has been ruined..........oh yeah and I hate the fact the twin spires are dwarfed by the new grandstand.

[Whirlaway]

Well written oliverstoned. I'll go one further: Polytrack has ruined the sport.

I was fortunate enough to go the the Belmont Stakes the year Smarty Jones ran for the Triple Crown ... 120,000 fans, most in the history of the sport. We picked four winners that day, I met a beautiful woman named Tiffany, everyone had enough to drink and I'll always remember everyone singing NY, NY at the top of their inebriated lungs. It was the best time I've ever had at a racetrack. I was fortunate enough to go to the Kentucky Derby to watch Afleet Alex attempt to win the Kentucky Derby. Nothin' like seeing the Twin Spires for the first time ... I was elated and actually breathless there for a few moments, I'll never forget that day. I was fortunate enough to attend two Breeders' Cup events and was witness to Sunday Silence and Easy Goer in the BC Classic. I can still hear the thunder of their hoof beats at the finish line and like it was yesterday, I still remember calling out to Gary Stevens, " the boys in Renton (home of Longacres racetrack, where he was champion jock) said good job in the Derby", and he gave a smile and thanks. And oh yes, Arlington Park and the Arlington Million, what a day and what a racetrack, like a beautiful painting ... the most beautiful track I've seen and a day that will be with me forever. I've been to countless racetracks all across the country ... I truly love the sport, but the nature of the game is a changin' and I for one don't know that I care for the new direction of the sport. I keep tellin' myself that no matter my circumstance, I'll be there should there be a running for a Triple Crown but I think those day, they're long gone ... I've got a hankerin', and I don't think I'm alone, that the sport as I knew it is coming to an end. Fortunately ... in my own time and in my own fashion, I loved the game.

[larrygene]

Whirlaway, the written word becomes you.

[Curlin]

Whirlaway, this is Tiffany. Would you like to meet your baby son?

[AscotStud]

Whateve, don't for one minute tell me that all dirt tracks equate Churchill. Grow up! I've been to every Derby since Monarchos, where I was at the winners party in the museum. I've been to every BC since '00 (so since I've been 22 I've seen every Derby & BC). I love a day at the races watching the best horses compete against each other.

I'm not some petty bitch who is going to say damn...this horse got here by right of the Poly, therefore it has ruined my day. How about the Rail/Speed freeks who used to use the Lexington as an easy trip to the Derby. Quit acting like Santa Anita and Keeneland were both the fairest tracks in the world before the poly. You people are the funniest bunch of idiots around. Come up with an argument that holds any water and maybe someone would take you seriously.

The variables with Poly are no different than the Golden rail at Keeneland or the Landing Strip in Santa Ana. If you're going to start a debate, don't make youreself look like a chump.

[oliverstoned]

Yes prepoly Keeneland and Santa Anita weren't the fairest but no way would turf horses win these derby preps while horses like Pyro would finish 10th.

Sincerely,

Pettybitchidiotchump

[Barbaro06]

[Shammy Davis]

Whirlaway wrote:

Polytrack has ruined the sport.

I agree with Barbaro06.

The preponderance of evidence is showing that polytrack, and I can name 10 variations of the surface used worldwide, is less biased, easier to manage, drains and drys readily, and is safer for the horse and rider. The fact that a horse may not respond to natural surfaces after training or competing on a poly surface, as is the case w/BEHINDTHEBAR is not unlike turf horses not moving well on the dirt or the majority of dirt horses being uncomfortable in the mud. It is probably more a matter of training regimen than it is surface consistencies or biases. Traditional dirt and sand surfaces are difficult to drain and dry and result often in less traction or problematic cuppy undersurfaces. BEHINDTHEBAR doesn't take well to dirt being thrown in his face. I know of no horse that enjoys a mouth full of dirt clogs, but natural surfaces that don't drain well or dry well produce granular clogs that are dangerous to the horse's eyes and are painful when a horse is struck around one of the most sensitive parts of the face, the nostril and lips.

The English Jockey Club was founded circa 1750. They have changed their modus operandi very little since then and the English racing community in total tends to be a resolute and narrow thinking sort of group, but I think their initiative to develop a safe and capable synthetic surface is probably their greatest contribution to modern worldwide horseracing. As I recall, Keenland and a majority of other tracks using poly surfaces contracted with English companies to design and construct their new track surfaces. Bully for them. It want be long before the surface is installed at Churchill Downs and this will all be a moot issue. Like it or not.

[bdw0617]

I'm not the biggest fan of polytrack, but let's not overexaggerate here. it has not ruined the sport. it is RUINING the sport.

It is no different than if there were 5-6 Graded stakes races on turf before the derby and some of thoose decided to give the derby a go around.

I'd rather take a top class turf horse than a horse like say, atoned, who has no chance in hell of winning but would be in the derby if there were no polytrack races.

it's all a matter of perspective I suppose.

why not have a million dollar polytrack race at keeneland or at Hollywood park for 3YO's?

[Whirlaway]

Whirlaway, the written word becomes you.

The thought came before the word and before the thought came my perception ... no doubt, like everyone else, I have my own perception of the world.

Whirlaway, this is Tiffany. Would you like to meet your baby son?

Quite frankly Curlin, I got a good chortle out of that one! I still exchange emails w/Tiffany from time to time, not long ago in fact. I always look forward to going back to NY an seeing here again. Matter of fact when Street Sense won the first, I figured he'd win the second so I called her and everything was peas and carrots ... needless to say Street Sense lost the Preakness (damn it) and I didn't go to see her or go to the Belmont. Nevertheless, Tiffany, like that day, will always, always be in my heart. And we had a baby girl, not a son!

"The preponderance of evidence is showing that polytrack, and I can name 10 variations of the surface used worldwide, is less biased, easier to manage, drains and drys readily, and is safer for the horse and rider."

Please cite the evidence for your statement.



" is safer for the horse and rider."
http://www.rirdc.gov.au/reports/HOR/04-039.pdf
Check the link. It is the latest study I could find addressing surface related injuries. Here is an excerpt:

"However, the analysis of data from all racetracks in the USA (Mundy, 1997) and Japan (JRA, 1991) found that the average fatality rate was lower for turf races. Examination of injuries at New York Association racetracks reported that the incidence of fractures was greatest on dirt, however there was no difference in the soft tissue injuries between dirt and turf surfaces (Hill et al., 1986). These findings are supported by a case-control study that found horses racing on dirt were approximately three times more likely to sustain an injury than horses racing on turf (Mohammed et al., 1991). Furthermore, horses racing on turf were less like to sustain a severe injury (Mohammed et al., 1992). In the UK the injury rate was significantly greater for horses racing on equitrack and fibersand than for those racing on turf. (Williams et al., 2001). In particular the rate of sesamoid/fetlock injuries and flexor tendon/suspensory injuries was almost doubled that recorded during turf races."

Take particular note to the reference to Equitrack. This is how the Equitrack surface was promoted: "On the positive side, Equitrack has many virtues. It is virtually waterproof because rain runs right through the chemically coated grains and into drainage ditches, so there would be no more muddy or sloppy tracks. It can withstand subzero temperatures, meaning tracks could operate year-round without using salt and harsh chemicals that damage horses' feet. It requires only minimal maintenance, which would save tracks plenty of operating costs. Most important, though this is not yet documented, it may prolong horses' careers by reducing the incidence of some kinds of breakdowns. Injuries from the normal stress of racing on fragile bones would still occur, but the twists and breaks that happen when a horse slips and slides on a wet poorly maintained track might be eliminated." (by Steven Crist, Published: September 3, 1988, in the NY Times

" ... is less biased..."

http://www.chef-de-race.com/dosage/classics/2008/2008_top_25.htm
Check the link. Scroll down to the pace parameters and review the feet per second for the first and third fractions. The poly track is biased as most of the horses show a slower first fraction when compared to the third fraction: slow early - fast late. Pay particular attention to the numbers for Gayego where he goes from the polytrack at Santa Anita to the dirt at Oaklawn, big difference.

" ... easier to manage, drains and drys readily ..."

Considering what has happened at Santa Anita this past meet, I doubt they would agree.



Considering some of the facts cited above, I must conclude that the jury is still out on the safety and efficacy of polytrack.

I'm not the biggest fan of polytrack, but lets not overexaggerate here. It has not ruined the sport. It is RUINING the sport.

I agree.

[AscotStud]

Yes prepoly Keeneland and Santa Anita weren't the fairest but no way would turf horses win these derby preps

Who the hell did Sinister Minister beat on a fair track.

Sincerely,
Realist

[Patuxet]

The reason the Jockey Club Gold Cup isn't contested at two miles any more has nothing to do with poly tracks. Put the blame for the deterioration of the sport where it belongs.

[Tucumcari]

Shockingly I disagree.
The California horses are entering the Derby as well as they have in many years. We haven't been considered much in the last several years, and this year we might well be of a significant impact.
As per the BC, It will cost us regardless of what we do. Dirt or synthetic.. it's controversy no matter what.

[Shammy Davis]

Whirlaway asked for some references.

Consumer's Guide to Dust Control, AZ Dept of Environmental Quality 1989

Relationship of racetrack surface to lameness in the TB racehorse. Cheny, Shen, & Wheat 1973.

Track condition and racing injuries in TB horses, Hill and Crook 1986

The effect of polymer and rubber particles on arena soil characteristices, Malmgren, Shideler, Butler, and Anderson, 1994

Relative incidence of dorsal metacarpal disease in young TB racing horses training on two surfaces, Moyer, Spencer, & Kallish, 1990.

Impact and shear resistance of turf grass racing surfaces for TB's, Zebarth & Sheard, 1985.

Beat the odds on suspensory tears, Soule, 1996.

These are just a few of the studies I'm familiar with after taking a seminar on the construction and use of synthetic amendments to new or existing surfaces in indoor arenas and outdoor arenas & tracks. Admittedly, school is still out on the poly surface, but across the board, the majority of facilities are pleased with the surfaces. After reading your references, I think they prove the point that dirt/sand constituted tracks are more dangerous than turf and, even if you think it is a stretch, this newer alternative surface.

Keenland has been known for years to have a track bias for speed and yet since installing the polysurface, representatives of the track, trainers, and jockeys have repeatedly stated the bias appears to have disappeared.

I'm not familiar with what happened at Santa Anita.

As far as surface care and management, poly surfaces are clearly the wave of the future, even for Churchill Downs.

[Tucumcari]

Shockingly I disagree.
The California horses are entering the Derby as well as they have in many years. We haven't been considered much in the last several years, and this year we might well be of a significant impact.
As per the BC, It will cost us regardless of what we do. Dirt or synthetic.. it's controversy no matter what. AND they ARE staying synthetic for BC