Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Main Forum > The Paddock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-21-2008, 10:32 AM
ShadowRoll's Avatar
ShadowRoll ShadowRoll is offline
Woodbine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Caln Township, PA
Posts: 975
Default synthetic surface fake out

Now that we're getting down to the nitty-gritty, how are people going to deal with the synthetic to dirt angle? Some commentators have opined that while form doesn't translate dirt to junk, it works just fine vice versa.

If this is true, throw out bad performances by usual dirt runners, like Pyro, who have tried the stuff (assuming you don't think there's other reasons for the anomalous stinker), and handicap the junk runners as if they were going to run the same on dirt.

Or, is it a mistake to treat the subject monolithically? Maybe there's a big difference among different synthetic surfaces at different tracks, in terms of how form transfers.
__________________
Ticket Seller: All kind of balls...
Bodyguard: One of his is crystal.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-21-2008, 10:37 AM
SniperSB23 SniperSB23 is offline
Hialeah Park
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 6,086
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowRoll
Now that we're getting down to the nitty-gritty, how are people going to deal with the synthetic to dirt angle? Some commentators have opined that while form doesn't translate dirt to junk, it works just fine vice versa.
If this is true, throw out bad performances by usual dirt runners, like Pyro, who have tried the stuff (assuming you don't think there's other reasons for the anomalous stinker), and handicap the junk runners as if they were going to run the same on dirt.

Or, is it a mistake to treat the subject monolithically? Maybe there's a big difference among different synthetic surfaces at different tracks, in terms of how form transfers.
I gave a list in another thread of about 10-15 graded stakes winners on synthetics that came back to not be able to run anywhere near as well on the dirt so that just isn't true. I'm going to actually pay attention to the works for the first time for the synthetic horses. Most of them I will be tossing cause they will be overbet on their synthetic form but if one of them turns in a nice work I will give them consideration. If Colonel John were to not work on the dirt I will significanly cut back the money I'm wagering on the Derby as I don't care to have to guess whether or not the horse will like the dirt for a horse that certainly has a shot but will be at far too low odds for my taste.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-21-2008, 10:50 AM
SlewsMyHero's Avatar
SlewsMyHero SlewsMyHero is offline
Bowie
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Keystone
Posts: 204
Default

It seems to me that the Poly surface is much different that the other synthetics. From what I've seen, the transition from dirt to Poly is much more difficult than from dirt to "Cushion", "Tapeta" or "Pro-Ride". Many horses just don't seem to take to the Poly and don't run their true race. I think the other synthetic surfaces are closer to dirt, and a greater percentage of them will run "their race". I agree that synthetic to dirt seems to be an easier transition.

I will forgive Pyro for his Poly blunder. I saw so many horses at Del Mar last summer that did not run a step on the stuff, and others that were Poly freaks. In my opionion, Pyro will be a major player in the derby. Like Colonel John, he will need racing luck, but I believe they will run their races at Churchill. I still have some work to do on the race, but they are my top 2 contenders at the moment.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-21-2008, 11:30 AM
sumitas sumitas is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,362
Default

Why work ? Pyro and Col John are obvious choices.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-21-2008, 11:45 AM
sumitas sumitas is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,362
Default

The paralysis of analysis.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-21-2008, 12:23 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Or, is it a mistake to treat the subject monolithically?
I think it is a mistake to treat all synthetics the same - most of us do not do that for the various dirt tracks, or turf - recognizing that they differ, sometimes quite markedly. Barbaro was a bit hard to follow for that reason.

The synthetics are just another surface. I'm going to do the same as I always do - pay the most attention to how the horses are looking and going the last couple of weeks (my own and others observations - Haskin is the best) and where they are training.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-21-2008, 02:09 PM
Thunder Gulch's Avatar
Thunder Gulch Thunder Gulch is offline
Churchill Downs
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Southland Greyhound Park
Posts: 1,846
Default

I'm treating it the same way I always treated changes in surface- whether it be dirt to turf, mud, whatever. If they have proven they can or can't, then make the judgement accordingly. Otherwise you have to be flexible and see what else you can use to make sense of the whole puzzle. Colonel John, Pyro, and Coal Man are the ones with the huge questions on surfaces with the latter two having disastrous synthetic results after good dirt races. For them, the works at Churchill will go a long way to helping me decide who is and isn't a contender.
__________________
Do I think Charity can win? Well, I am walking around in yesterday's suit.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.