CAL Surfaces - from Bad to Worse

[Joltman]

http://news.bloodhorse.com/article/48696.htm

How many $million have the tracks been forced to shell out for this stuff? Back to dirt I say, or maybe Pacific coast beach sand, or redwood chips.

jm

[HR LLC]

Everyone wanted all weather tracks and now we see it doesnt stop breakdowns...

I say back to dirt and stay there.

Maybe the race tracks can apply for TARP bailout money. They made a mistake in putting in a bad racing surface just like the automakers made a mistake in building bad cars.

[Sysonby]

The amazing part of that article are the people now going on the record against synthetics. Some of them led the charge for synthetics back when Del Mar put it in and it is a major big deal to see them jump off the bandwagon. Maybe the debate will no longer be framed in the obnoxious "Don't you like horses?""Don't you care about horse safety?" vein when someone criticizes the performance of the synthetic tracks.

The problem is that Magna is broke and to put a new dirt surface in will still cost several million dollars. This is a fine mess California got itself into.

[Joltman]

And a small part of why Magna is broke is perhaps because it was forced to spend $millions on two surfaces at SA let alone the other tracks they own.

Govt. mandates have a way of killing good businesses and slaughtering bad ones.

jm

[zinn21]

At GGF they just added more fiber and wax to the track citing the track had lost it's bounce. That is one of the problems with these surfaces in general. The material looses it's memory very quickly and you end up with a track returning no energy to the horse.

I've noticed at GGF, the track seems to change from day to day. Some days slow/some days fast. My horses just don't seem to get a hold of it and come back very tired after a race.

In general all these surfaces cannot handle the amount of training and racing required for North American racing. I'm not sure it is possible or cost effective to maintain these synthetic surfaces to attain consistency.. They deteriorate very quickly. I think the verdict is in-return to dirt.

Looking forward to the Fair circuit and a return to dirt racing..

[Sysonby]

I've noticed at GGF, the track seems to change from day to day. Some days slow/some days fast. My horses just don't seem to get a hold of it and come back very tired after a race.

The real danger of course is injury. One theory I've heard floated to explain all of the hind end injuries and rear leg condylars is that the track grabs the feet and won't let the hind feet slide a bit during the stride as a good dirt surface will. Those forces are then transmitted up the leg instead of being expended in the movement of the slide and eventually something tears or breaks.

Rear condylar fractures used to be a once in a blue moon kind of injury. Now I could point you to trainers who say they've had multiples of them and I find it hard to believe that's progress even without the latest problems.

[Fireslam]

Sysonby, youre exactly right. Its one thing galloping over these surfaces for training; its a whole nuther using these surfaces for top speed racing. I have never had horses at a synthetic track and never will.

[Joltman]

One factor may be the amount of work that the track is exposed to. Those tracks that have fewer horses in training on the average might tend to hold up better. Then again, those that have a 100 horses breeze on a given day are getting a lot more stress on that stuff, with resultant breakdown of materials. Its inevitable.

jm

[Tucumcari]

When do I gt to say "I told you so..?"

[photofinish]

Seems to me the synthetics were so hyped up to the general public as the "savior" for the horses that it has taken a long time to admit "the emperor has no clothes". Really, the whole synthetic debacle brings home that particular childhood fable.....

[Fair Play]

The local vets say the polytrack has been a boon for surgeries. Ca ching.