Art Wilson: Cali perspective (with Shirreffs, Stute)

[Kasept]

http://www2.whittierdailynews.com/sports/ci_9200513

John Shirreffs, a harsh critic of the synthetic surfaces, claims the reduction in catastrophic breakdowns during the afternoons is more than offset by the casualties during morning workouts. "And the horses that get hurt in the morning are the promising young horses," he said.

Said Melvin Stute: "I've had nine horses put down in 40 years, and five of them have been since the synthetics."

[SentToStud]

Are the # starters/race stats holding up this year vs last in California or at Keeneland? I'd be surprised. To me, the proof is in the betting. I read a few days ago that Keeneland's average daily all-sources handle was down 12%. Santa Anita was down. Aqueduct was up 3-4% and had purse increases. Oaklawn was up as well. Of the bigger dirt meets, only Gulfstream was down (The Stronach Effect?).

Maybe it was the weather (or maybe '07 had more big carryover days) but when Keeneland Spring is down double digits, that says a lot.

Finally, Keeneland's percentage of winning favorites on the main track for the meet was 24% which is far below average and lower than the 29% of 2007. In spring of 2006 - the last year of dirt - the percentage of winning favorites on the main was 34%. I'm no big chalk fan but to me that means the surface is increasingly unpredictable. And when bettors move from playing Keeneland to Aqueduct in April, that says a lot too.

Hollywood's winning favorite % looks about right and I think they've had good weather so far. But if there is any weather involved, the synthetics are unpredictably unplayable and not just for the days or days after it rains.

A Jockey Clubs report showed fatalities for synthetics are down vs dirt .... 1.5/per 1,000 starts for synthetics vs 2.0/per 1,000 starts for dirt. That's certainly a good thing But like the article said, who knows how many are going down in training?

http://www.kentucky.com/232/story/396504.html

[ArlJim78]

those are some damn tough races to handicap at Keeneland, I don't care what the surface is. 12 horse fields of quality horses? I like the challenge but the handle going down indicates not everyone does.

[Linny]

I would was true and complete records of all injuries to be used. Lets face it, unless a horse crashed to the track, is he counted. Many horses finish races every day, walk back and then are foiund later to be seriously hurt. Are they counted? Trainers are not required to report injuries and if hurt horses are shipped out via private carrier, no one has to know why.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by Linny

I would was true and complete records of all injuries to be used. Lets face it, unless a horse crashed to the track, is he counted. Many horses finish races every day, walk back and then are foiund later to be seriously hurt. Are they counted? Trainers are not required to report injuries and if hurt horses are shipped out via private carrier, no one has to know why.

Dr. Mary Scolay's injury reporting system is the reference point for that question. But frankly, since those 'out of view' injuries/fatalities weren't being reported previously anyway, they wouldn't impact the study now if they continued to go unreported...

[Cannon Shell]

Horses that bow tendons are rarely vanned off

[sumitas]

Originally Posted by Kasept

http://www2.whittierdailynews.com/sports/ci_9200513

John Shirreffs, a harsh critic of the synthetic surfaces, claims the reduction in catastrophic breakdowns during the afternoons is more than offset by the casualties during morning workouts. "And the horses that get hurt in the morning are the promising young horses," he said.

Said Melvin Stute: "I've had nine horses put down in 40 years, and five of them have been since the synthetics."

These are observations without a valid statistical sample to substantiate their personal conclusions.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by sumitas

These are observations without a valid statistical sample to substantiate their personal conclusions.

It's called the Sumitas method.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

It's called the Sumitas method.

OOOOOOOOOO

[sumitas]

It's called legitimate scientific data. You all and Shirreffs prefer the old Greek method of who yells the loudest is right.

WRONG

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by sumitas

It's called legitimate scientific data. You all and Shirreffs prefer the old Greek method of who yells the loudest is right.

WRONG

Really? So you're saying that John Shirreffs is famous for shouting down those with differing opinions? That's the way you think he's approached this discussion?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by sumitas

It's called legitimate scientific data. You all and Shirreffs prefer the old Greek method of who yells the loudest is right.

WRONG

irony, thy name is sumitas.

[Linny]

I was at the Wood Memorial and War Pass, Spring at Last and Tater Tutt all got hurt. More may have. None of them were vanned off and I doubt that any of them would show up on an injury report.

[kgar311]

Originally Posted by sumitas

These are observations without a valid statistical sample to substantiate their personal conclusions.

Sumitas has some nice "observations" of his own

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by sumitas

These are observations without a valid statistical sample to substantiate their personal conclusions.

THESE ARE TRAINERS WITH REAL HORSES... Mel Stute is saying that he's had as many horses break down in 2 years as he did in the previous 38. Shirreffs is saying his young horses are getting hurt. What other kind of observation is necessary from their perspective?

Honestly.. your approach to this makes any conversation impossible and virtually worthless. I won't bother with another response. Everyone else was tired of the nonsense from you and now I am as well.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Kasept

I won't bother with another response.

You get one more and then I am out of smiles or whatever they are called

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by Scav

I'm through now with it. I have a show to put together yet.

[sumitas]

Data gathering is in process and as Linny stated, many injuries are never reported because they are detected after a race or during a workout. I'm waiting for comprehensive data, although the rate for breakdowns has been quantified as lower on synth races than dirt. That's a start.

The industry is moving very slowly for full reporting on all on track injuries regardless of work outs or races. NJ has a great model where they can test for drugs anywhere, anyplace, anytime. Comprehensive data is needed and many fight that, of course. They've got the stakes purses cornered, they're making all the money now.

[Cannon Shell]

I am under no obligation to report injuries nor will I report them. For one, the fear of litigation if an "injured" horse were to ever breakdown in the future, I dont want ammunition for a creative laywer. Secondly it is no ones business except mine and the horses owner what the status of my horses are until they are entered in a race. Then they can perform any kind of check up or examination that they want. If they pass out of competition testing for illegal drugs I will willingly participate.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by sumitas

I'm waiting for comprehensive data, although the rate for breakdowns has been quantified as lower on synth races than dirt. That's a start.

care to explain this? If we're waiting for the comprehensive data, how is it that its already been quantified that the breakdown rate is lower on synth?
I haven't seen any real strong data on that yet.