Nice editorial

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Riot

FTFY.

Another fine deflection.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Riot

We're the main country for dirt racing, and we are wedded to it and refuse to change. Other countries run on a horses natural surface, turf. So it goes.

So, dirt isn't natural to horses?

Therefore, why bother and just run over shredded tires and condoms?

That makes sense.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Another fine deflection.

Yeah, she's never answered a question honestly and completely lacks integrity when trying to defend her POV.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

We're the main country for dirt racing, and we are wedded to it and refuse to change. Other countries run on a horses natural surface, turf. So it goes.

Why is turf referred to as 'natural' like dirt is all manufactured? When people make these kinds of statements about 'other coutntries' they seem to forget that the scope of racing is so much larger in the US and the climates so much different that racing the majority of races on the turf is totally impractical.

And the breakdown rates ion synthetic are statistically insignifigant compared to the prior surfaces (mostly because the records werent kept so comparing is difficult)

Simply using breakdown rates to say that a track is/isn't safe or is safer is folly as it ignores the vast amount of influences beyond surface that cause horses to breakdown.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

We're the main country for dirt racing, and we are wedded to it and refuse to change. Other countries run on a horses natural surface, turf. So it goes.

i think the fact that synthetic tracks have been installed means we aren't refusing to try, or to change.
however, how long does one stick with an experiment before deciding it's not working?
cali racing went into a decline, it continues to decline. the majority of horsemen have become vocal about the tracks being an issue. when the new tracks were first installed, you saw trainers ship in. that has dropped dramatically since people have decided those awt's just aren't what they want to deal with. field sizes there continue to shrink, with several days cancelled this year due to lack of entrants.

i don't see turfway changing back-in their case it seems the awt is working for them.

as for us going to all turf, turf tracks wouldn't hold up to the amount of racing we require.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Yeah, she's never answered a question honestly and completely lacks integrity when trying to defend her POV.

"Be impeccable with your word. Speak with integrity."

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by chucklestheclown

I have to admit I did not read the editorial (really an opinion piece) until just now. It is not about synthetics, except as a metaphor, IMO. Did you read it yet?

My comments were not related in any way to the article. I was purely responding to the questions/comments of Riot.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Another fine deflection.

Deflection of what? Spit it out. I addressed G1's run on synthetic.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

So, dirt isn't natural to horses?

Therefore, why bother and just run over shredded tires and condoms?

That makes sense.

No, a manufactured track of dirt: drainage, a base, a manufactured cushion - isn't as "natural" as turf.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Yeah, she's never answered a question honestly and completely lacks integrity when trying to defend her POV.

Not evident, but nice try.

[hockey2315]

Turf courses don't have drainage?

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Riot

Deflection of what? Spit it out. I addressed G1's run on synthetic.

You're a smart guy, figure it out. I'm not wasting anymore time on disingenuous posters.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

You're a smart guy, figure it out. I'm not wasting anymore time on disingenuous posters.

Nice straw man. Isn't working.

[Riot]

We developed our own type of dirt speedball horse to suit, too.

I think that's why many dismiss any surface other than dirt out of hand. The above is what we are used to, the racing we in America know.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Riot

Nice straw man. Isn't working.

Keep spinning dude.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i think the fact that synthetic tracks have been installed means we aren't refusing to try, or to change.
however, how long does one stick with an experiment before deciding it's not working?
cali racing went into a decline, it continues to decline. the majority of horsemen have become vocal about the tracks being an issue. when the new tracks were first installed, you saw trainers ship in. that has dropped dramatically since people have decided those awt's just aren't what they want to deal with. field sizes there continue to shrink, with several days cancelled this year due to lack of entrants.

i don't see turfway changing back-in their case it seems the awt is working for them.

as for us going to all turf, turf tracks wouldn't hold up to the amount of racing we require.

I agree with all you say. It would take a tremendous amount of land to install a great turf track facility in the US (a track would need multiple gallops, training areas, etc) and hold up to our use. It would be cool to see, though.

We don't need synthetics either for daily racing because horse injury rates don't matter.

Consistent hysterics.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Consistent hysterics.

Yeah, "hysterical". Sure

[Riot]

Why is turf referred to as 'natural' like dirt is all manufactured?

Well, I answered this already, but self-deleted it by accident. Sorry.

Horses were designed to work on turf - hooves, legs, tendons, muscles, eyes, breathing, gut. Where do horses live on dirt?

Certainly turf courses are graded, grass types selected, drainage, divots replaced, etc. (less so with the centuries-old type tracks in Europe) But a dirt track is completely manufactured from scratch - drainage, base, and a mixture of soils (clay, loam, sand) specifically composed to a recipe (soils that may not even be local)

When people make these kinds of statements about 'other coutntries' they seem to forget that the scope of racing is so much larger in the US and the climates so much different that racing the majority of races on the turf is totally impractical.

I'm not forgetting. It is what it is in the US. Horse racing started primarily in the upper east, was imported from England and adapted to what we have here. We even developed the speedball specialist to run on our different type of track (dirt)

And the breakdown rates ion synthetic are statistically insignifigant compared to the prior surfaces (mostly because the records werent kept so comparing is difficult)

That's something you just made up. It is not true. Go on PubMed, there's plenty there.

Simply using breakdown rates to say that a track is/isn't safe or is safer is folly as it ignores the vast amount of influences beyond surface that cause horses to breakdown.

I agree. That's why I hate to see, when any horse breaks down on a synthetic track, the predictable few who sarcastically say, "I thought those surfaces were supposed to be safe?"

[Pedigree Ann]

Originally Posted by Riot

Getting SA back to dirt will be a really revealing project (in a good way), to see what a dirt track created in this day and age can be. Many said the old dirt tracks should just be torn up and have the base redone, then the cushion replaced, rather than go to synthetic. I never could find a good description of what the SA old base looked like as they took it out (how badly it was torn up, holes, etc)

.

As I said (in my posts at the time, which I haven't time to go looking for), if the tracks had spent more time and effort and maintaining their dirt courses, the drive for synthetics would have gone nowhere. Instead of which, they took their dirt for granted and let it get hard and uneven, leading to the injury problems that fueled the chorus for replacement with synthetics out west.