Future Polytrack sires?

[madelyn]

There is no doubt whatsoever that the synthetic surface is DIFFERENT than whatever dirt surface it replaces. And while no two synthetic surfaces will be precisely alike, they are at least both synthetic. I had the opportunity at Keeneland to get over to the synthetic surface and actually feel it with my hands (no matter that the pal I was with thought I was totally nuts). It is cushiony, with spring to it. I think the real difference is in the mechanics of the way different types of horses run. Speaking in the most general way, dirt horses tend to ropewalk and have a flatter knee, that daisy cutter action. The very long stride and efficient action is what gives them their success in the dirt. Of course there ARE exceptions, always, like Skip Away who had much higher action yet still could get out there and win on dirt. His action said he was a turf horse, though. The good grass horses tend to a much broader walk and higher action. Since the origin of Polytrack is as a training surface for turf horses, it is not that much of a stretch to imagine that horses with more turf action in their stride might tend to take to that synthetic surface more quickly and successfully than horses whose action is strictly suited to a dirt track.

Horses like my stallion, Rocking Trick, who could win on BOTH turf and dirt at least have a shot of throwing that versatility into their offspring. It is NO surprise that the Skip Aways have been doing so well. I happen to have a gorgeous Skip Away in my barn, just turned three, that I am putting in the February Fasig Tipton sale. He has that higher action, just like Skip Code.

Regarding the change in form over the period of the meet at Hollywood Park, the synthetic surface is different, so it IS likely that a horse who has a chance to train on it may develop ability on it.

As for breeders "overreacting" well it is a lot of my money out there in stud fees and mare care and vet bills. I think for me to ignore the synthetic surface when so MANY tracks have announced their plan to switch would be shortsighted. While the synthetic surface may not prevent ALL breakdowns, it has SIGNIFICANTLY reduced the number.

Regarding the number of tracks in Kentucky, it is misleading to say "only two" of them have changed over.. There are only five tracks period, and Kentucky Downs is turf only! It is more significant to note that 50% of the dirt tracks in Kentucky have changed over. Arlington has announced their plan to switch, also Monmouth and Meadowlands. All of the California tracks.. By the time this year's matings reach the track it will be 2010. And who knows how many tracks will have switched by then?

[Sam]

It is more significant to note that 50% of the dirt tracks in Kentucky have changed over. Arlington has announced their plan to switch, also Monmouth and Meadowlands. All of the California tracks.. By the time this year's matings reach the track it will be 2010. And who knows how many tracks will have switched by then?

That's exactly my point. There are over 300 tracks in this country... there have NOT been that many, statistically speaking, who've said they will make the change and the ones that have tend to be the big venues. Realistically, a breeder looking to have a foal race in 2010 needs to be thinking about the fact that BY 2010 it's quite likely less than 10% of the tracks in this nation will be a synthetic track AND that more than likely a small breed won't have a foal running on one.

Like I said, if I were breeding in CA -- where it has been announced that all tracks will be syn by 2008, I would be looking dual purpose stallions. If I were breeding in NM, AZ, and the like, I wouldn't. Listen to the individual regions, assess the likelihood of where your foal will be racing and whether that venue might be syn by the time the colt starts running and plan accordingly.

[Winnie]

"dual purpose stallions" in Ca. which ones would those be, if you don't mind my asking?

[Sam]

"dual purpose stallions" in Ca. which ones would those be, if you don't mind my asking?

Off the top of my head (and drowning in cold meds) I'd be hard pressed to come up with one right now... I can... but it'll take me a few minutes...

eta

okay.. short list.. not saying these are going to be THE stallions to breed to, just the ones I would keep an eye on..

Unusual Heat
Siberian Summer
Moscow Ballet
Bertrando
Western Fame

The thing is, it's much too early to really say with any conviction which sires are hitting for syn tracks; what's truly an affinity and what is just easy to see short term results. People hoping to score a syn track sire may find themselves breeding into a corner if they are basing their opinions on what's happened so far. I also think the notion of using a sire who was a winner on both surfaces might be a bit premature. We've no indication YET that is going to be a factor... it's just too early to tell. Shoot, many people are citing Skip Away... I don't recall him ever touching turf in his career.

We've been here before. When Remington put in their syn surface back in the late 80s/early 90s, it was suppose to revolutionize the industry.... and they tore out less than 5 years later.

All I can say is "Proceed with caution" and keep in mind that in all probability, less than 40 tracks across the nation will be synthetic in the year 2010... do you plan on racing in those venues?

[rudydee]

Regarding the number of tracks in Kentucky, it is misleading to say "only two" of them have changed over.. There are only five tracks period, and Kentucky Downs is turf only! It is more significant to note that 50% of the dirt tracks in Kentucky have changed over. Arlington has announced their plan to switch, also Monmouth and Meadowlands. All of the California tracks.. By the time this year's matings reach the track it will be 2010. And who knows how many tracks will have switched by then?

I do not recall Meadowlands & Monmouth announcing plans to switch to Polytrack. I think that they are "fact finding" at this point.

[Rokeby Forever]

Let's take the NY situation. The new franchise owner, Excelsior Group, wants to install Polytrack at Belmont and Aqueduct in 2008. They'd do it this year but the NYRA will have anything and everything tied up in the courts in 2007.

So, if you're a breeder in the NY Bred program, I think you'd better pay attention to Polytrack races in 2007 to figure out what to breed that would/might adapt to Polytrack. In their case, who cares if only 20 tracks have Polytrack by 2010 or 2011? 46 out of 52 weeks of racing in NY will be on Polytrack (unless Saratoga also has it installed), which is the bread and butter for NY breeders with the purses for statebreds and incentives for winning in open company in NY.

[madelyn]

The Monmouth/Meadowlands announcement was about two months ago, and they had, I believe, selected the Tapeta surface.

[rudydee]

NJSEA Officials Exploring Dual-Breed Synthetic Surface
Date Posted: November 10, 2006
Last Updated: November 10, 2006

Edited press release

Members of the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority racing team, as well as two trainers, visited Tapeta Farm in Maryland recently to review a synthetic racing surface with the inventor of Tapeta, trainer Michael Dickinson.

Dennis Dowd, senior vice president of racing; Chris McErlean, vice president of racing operations; Bob Kulina, Monmouth Park vice president and general manager, and Tad Stockman, director of Standardbred racing at Meadowlands, visited Dickinson's 200-acre farm on the Chesapeake Bay along with Thoroughbred trainer Kelly Breen and Standardbred trainer Jimmy Takter.

To demonstrate the versatility of the material, Dickinson trained two Thoroughbreds over the track and two hours later, after the surface had been rolled, Takter trained Standardbred horses over the same material. Tapeta--Latin for carpet--is a mix of sand, rubber and fibers coated with hot wax.

The NJSEA, which owns and operates Monmouth and Meadowlands, is in the early stages of exploring synthetic racing surfaces.

"We are watching closely the experiences of other tracks installing synthetic surfaces and the early results are extremely promising," Dowd said. "Mr. Dickinson invited us to review his Tapeta surface, and he fully understands our needs at the Meadowlands regarding a safe and consistent surface for both breeds. We will continue our due-diligence process in reviewing all the different synthetic racing surfaces, and its possible application at both of our racetracks."

Copyright © 2006-2007 The Blood-Horse, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

[Nighthenge]

Shoot, many people are citing Skip Away... I don't recall him ever touching turf in his career.

He raced on turf once or twice as a 2yo. The Blood Horse Stallion Register notes him as winning the Gilded Time S @5f on the turf

[kimberley mine]

Shoot, many people are citing Skip Away... I don't recall him ever touching turf in his career.

Skip Away is well-enough established as a sire for folks to note that he has been throwing useful turf horses.

Also, I would add Slewvescent to the list of possible turf-to-synthetic sires out in California, based on his performance at stud.

[Rokeby Forever]

Have you noticed something? Because sires like Skip Away, Pleasant Tap, and Military have offspring running well on the new surfaces, pundits are calling the early results "too early to tell." Imagine if the high end sires had offspring performing well....would the pundits still make the same claim? I tend to think not...

Let's face it...people had better start re-evaluating sire selection as more tracks convert.

[kimberley mine]

Have you noticed something? Because sires like Skip Away, Pleasant Tap, and Military have offspring running well on the new surfaces, pundits are calling the early results "too early to tell." Imagine if the high end sires had offspring performing well....would the pundits still make the same claim? I tend to think not...

Let's face it...people had better start re-evaluating sire selection as more tracks convert.

Well, from the length of discussion on this thread, I would go ahead and say people HAVE started re-evaluating which stallions to choose for polytrack racing. California will be a big test, as will Canadian racing (with their premier track already being synthetic).

As far as "too early to tell," I'm going to take a page out of Sam's book and throw a flag on the play for "correlation does not equal causation" and another for "beware small sample size error." There are four major tracks in the country with synthetic surfaces--Keeneland, Turfway, Hollywood, and Woodbine. The synthetic tracks have been in place for a grand total of 2 years. Compared to US and Canadian racing as a whole, I think 2 seasons of running on 4 tracks simply isn't enough to say for sure if synthetic surfaces favour (or DISfavour) different pedigrees. If we had 10 seasons of running on synthetic tracks, the emerging top sires were Military, Skip Away, and Pleasant Tap, and folks were still saying "it's too early to tell," I'd suscribe to a conspiracy theory...but at present, no.

[Rokeby Forever]

C'mon....Taylor Made, Walmac, and all the others do not like the trends they're seeing...any one of them would be tooting their horns over a stallion doing especially well on Polytrack or a synthetic surface. They don't like what they're seeing and they won't even discuss the subject.

[kimberley mine]

At the risk of starting a flame war...

...if you are going to make an argument, make sure you're not making an argument that folks here WILL poke huge holes in, fast. I say this with the utmost of respect and hope you'll keep reading the rest of the post.

You stated:

Because sires like Skip Away, Pleasant Tap, and Military have offspring running well on the new surfaces, pundits are calling the early results "too early to tell."

There are two statements in there that are arguably true:

1. Sires like Skip Away, Pleasant Tap, and Military have offspring running well on the new surfaces.
2. Pundits are calling the early results "too early to tell."

Both of these statements are factually true, and I agree with you that they are factually true. Where I disagree vehemently with you is that they are directly related. That's a big bold statement, for which you did not provide a shred of evidence (either way, for or against) and it's a classic example of correlation being unrelated to causation.

If I were to tell you that because of an increased global average temperature rise since July of 2004, the number of blue jays living in my parents' backyard has increased dramatically since 2004, would you believe my argument? While it is factually true that the average global temperature did rise between 2004 and now and that there are more blue jays living in my parents' backyard than the summer of 2004, the real reason is that my parents' old cat died that July and so the annual blue jay slaughter ceased. Furthermore, I am a Virgo, and I have dated precisely one Scorpio in my life. He turned out to be the single most chickensh*t man I've ever met...you could hear him running away clucking after life-shattering questions like "want to go to a movie on Friday?". By extension, are all Scorpios cowards? Should I avoid dating any Scorpios whatsoever because one of them was chicken?

Going back to the subject at hand, we are relying on statistical analysis for better or for worse here because we don't HAVE anything better with which to judge the performance of thoroughbred breeding stock. That is why folk put so much store in AEI/CI, average vs. median earnings, dosage, and average win distances. Most of us on here are careful when we use stastics because we (a) know their failings and (b) know how easily they can be abused. If you want proof of that, go dig through the archives to some of the posts about Werk Nicks. So when folks on this board by and large agree that no, there is not enough data about the response of certain racehorse bloodlines to various surfaces to make a statistically valid judgement, they are not just sprinkling sunshine around--they say that because in their opinions, there just isn't enough data YET.

And that is why the likes of Sam, Roguelet, Madelyn, FOS, and myself will question your posts when you bend a statistic all around. I know I've dinged you about three times now...on cherrypicking your data to match your conclusion (Unbridled's Song), small sample size error (Successful Appeal and Appealing Zophie), and correlation/causation (present discussion).

For the record, I do like a lot of what you post and I hope you'll keep on posting. You're quite a firecracker and the conversations you enter are always lively. But for your own sake, please be more careful with your statistics when you post!

[Sam]

C'mon....Taylor Made, Walmac, and all the others do not like the trends they're seeing...any one of them would be tooting their horns over a stallion doing especially well on Polytrack or a synthetic surface. They don't like what they're seeing and they won't even discuss the subject.

Do not confuse marketing spin with actual events. Even if Taylor Made DID have a stallion that appeared to be having success on the syntracks, that still doesn't mean there are enough races being run on enough syntracks to draw any kind of meaning conclusion.

There is spin and there is fact and the two are often at odds with each other.

Say, for instance, Tiznow has had 8 foals start on the syntracks and 1 of them are winners with the other 7 finishing 3rd. Granted, that might be impressive, but would you really think it correct to hear "100% on the board with every start" knowing we were only talking about 8 horses?