|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Praying for Cash retired
...and YES, he broke down over the Polytrack at Keeneland. No, he never went down in front of the public like many career ending-injuries that will be had on Polytrack, but he still broke down bad enough to never run again - and many others do everyday.
So, is Polytrack STILL a better track now just because it hides the grotesque breakdowns on the track from the public unlik dirt? the truth is that there are and will still be horrible injuries on Polytrack, but is it good enough from an image-standpoint to our sport if they don't go down on the track? Is that the REAL reason we embraced this stuff? |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
he survived it didn't he?
__________________
Seek respect, not attention. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Thats two garded stakes horses in a week whose careers are over now(Noble Stella) after working on poly. WOuld they have broken on dirt? probably. But the breakdown stat being pumped here by poly propagandists is strictly tragic brteakdowns, menaing put down on the track. They don't keep stats for carrer ending injuries so long as the horse has a pulse. This is the biggest myth and crock ever attempted to be perpetuated on the American racing public. Sorry to hear this talented colt won't be running anymore. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Do they keep stats for career ending injuries on the dirt? I would be interested in comparing those two numbers.
__________________
Seek respect, not attention. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
I do believe that a synthetic surface is safer than SOME dirt surfaces. However, I would have much rather seen tracks trying to tweak their dirt surfaces to make them safer rather than just embracing synthetic surfaces. Like the good dirt surfaces, synthetic surfaces aren't going to prevent all breakdowns. I do believe they they prevent a lot of breakdowns or the breakdowns from being so grotesque or fatal though. I need to see more to make a decision on how safe that I think the synthetic surfaces are compared to a good dirt surface. I would imagine that they are about the same.
With that being said, I definitely think that polytrack has purposes on tracks that need an all-weather surface, tracks that have had an unimaginable number of breakdowns who have tried tweaking their dirt surface, or for training purposes. Otherwise, KEEP IT OUT OF THE INDUSTRY!!! Last edited by kentuckyrosesinmay : 10-19-2006 at 11:57 AM. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
I think that the stuff is still too new to make overly drastic opinions on it in ANY DIRECTION as of yet, but I believe that they are selling this stuff as "safer" and I don't think it is any safer than a well cushioned dirt track. JMO...
I have showed on the stuff for YEARS and my jumper did NOT like it at all. While it isn't as hard on a horse's legs impactually, it IS harder on them in the standpoint that it takes more effort to pick the legs up out of it. That was my experience with the stuff.
__________________
http://www.facebook.com/cajungator26 |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Most of my horses have done wonderful over the stuff. They get a ton of bounce off of it. Well, most of the horses that I have ridden are incredibly scopy anyway...
I don't think that it is any harder for them to pick their legs up out of than a dirt ring unless they have the ring incredibly deep with the stuff (I've actually ridden in a horribly deep dirt ring before, but not a horribly deep sand/rubber mixed ring). My horses bounce over it. At the big shows up here, that is not the case. The surfaces in the rings are always incredible. Otherwise, show management would have a lot of mad riders and trainers. Last edited by kentuckyrosesinmay : 10-19-2006 at 12:15 PM. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I will say that anyone who actually knows horses intimately, ie.. actually is hands on owners, riders etc... will tell you to a person that there is no way you can deny the surface is easier on a horses legs, now whether that translates to better racing in the afternoons is the question. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
The bottomline is that horses are still breaking down regularly....who cares aboyt image of how and where they break down?...Most are dead soon anyway because most are too cheap to take care of if they have no revenue potential - and thats just the plain truth....
So what we have esentialy done with the implementation of Polytrack is percievably cleaned-up our public opinion by the lack of breakdowns ON THE TRACK, and for that we have to trade the entire way we breed horses and taint the entire tradition of our game? ...thats a trade I bet 90% of horse fans who understand the entire sport would not agree to make - But the deal with the devil is unfortunately in process |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
And without the influx of new fans and bettors (who will adapt to the surface) you will eventually have no breeding industry. So ye,s maintaining a favorable public image is paramount to the survival of the sport, and if that means poly track you should get used to it.
__________________
Seek respect, not attention. |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
I would submit to all that there have been an insufficient number of races to draw conclusions about the safty of artificial surfaces. We'll know soon enough.
__________________
I'm greener than Al Gore so therefore I'm green enough! |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
You made my point exactly...the game has traded a public image nightmare on one facet for 10 public image nightmares on other levels... |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|