Pollytrack and the triple crown

what is going on with this now.
it looks llike all CA tracks will have the stuff, that means we will have three divisions in racing, dirt, polly and turf.
its suppoosed to replace the dirt, but it won't. some tracks can't afford it.
are you ready for 3 divisions.

and how bout during TC season, all the west coasters will come to louisville without a race on the dirt.
will it be prudent to ship east for the grade 1 preps like Banjo did in the Wood 2005, and will this fianl prep be there only guage against other dirt contenders.

will the three tracks CD, PIm, And belmont switch to polly only?

there is a lot to this issue and its stretches back to the core of waht the Kentucky derby really is.

America longest running sporting event, 132 times on the SAME track. how will that change, now on ptrack for the first time.

will we refer to the good old days when they actually used to race on dirt , LOL as the good old days of dirt racing?

and what about belmont maybe taking its inner turf course and making it Pollytrack, any thoughts ??

I love PolyTrack, but I think people are jumping the gun a little. I want to see more data on the surface before major tracks switch. Let us wait 4-6 years and see what the surface does at Turfway, Woodbine and Keeneland. I think those three tracks are great testing tracks.

that aren't 4 to 6 years,
its law

in CA you must have Pollytrack.

this is a new issue and noones seems to think it means anything.
are you gonna wait till the 3rd saturday in april and start to wonder how those CA preps on polly will fit into the KD picture ?

[PSH]

It is hard to imagine some of our great racing venues such as Keeneland and now Del Mar and Santa Anita replacing their dirt tracks with poly tracks. For a traditionalist like myself this is a very disturbing trend. I can not believe that the handicappers are going to like this and remember it is the wagering dollars that drives this sport.....

Hopefully, Churchill Downs and the NYRA tracks will not follow suit.....

waht is amazing to me is that noone seems to think this is a big deal, its a s big a deal as changing to the aluminum bat in the major leagues.

[Unbridled]

Its hard to bet on races on with small fields. Horses continue to break down at Keeneland and the Californai tracks costing us potential superstars (i.e What A Song). The Polytrack is a much safer surface that can be made faster or slower depending upon the make up of it and also the climate that its in. More people(i.e those that watch on the big days) will stay interested in the game once they can follow a horse that will be able to race frequently throughout the year b/c its not injured from running on hard/concrete surfaces, also field size will swell (see Turfway Park) which will increase handle. The positives factors outweigh the negatives here.

...The California Horse Racing Board adopted a regulatory amendment last Thursday that will require synthetic surfaces at the state's major Thoroughbred racetracks by the end of 2007. The amendment states that any track that conducts four consecutive weeks of Thoroughbred racing must install a polymer synthetic type racing surface before it can receive a 2008 racing license. The decision affects Bay Meadows, Del Mar, Golden Gate Fields, Hollywood Park, and Santa Anita..

[randallscott35]

Unbridled, there are small fields because there are too many races available. Too many tracks going on at the same time. In areas in Asia they only have racing 3 days a week. They have huge fields and competitive racing. They need to cull the product.

Originally Posted by Unbridled

Its hard to bet on races on with small fields. Horses continue to break down at Keeneland and the Californai tracks costing us potential superstars (i.e What A Song). The Polytrack is a much safer surface that can be made faster or slower depending upon the make up of it and also the climate that its in. More people(i.e those that watch on the big days) will stay interested in the game once they can follow a horse that will be able to race frequently throughout the year b/c its not injured from running on hard/concrete surfaces, also field size will swell (see Turfway Park) which will increase handle. The positives factors outweigh the negatives here.

Geez Johnny V got injured on a horse that broke down on the grass after it won. Landseer and Funfair have gone down in big races as well. Horses were bred for dirt and grass. Its a marketing scheme, nothing more or less,
They could make surfaces deeper like the Oklahoma track in Saratoga. Trainers love it. I gues my question is if its the surface alone breaking down teh horses, then why all the turf breakdowns?
Whats next, marketing company gonna come up with polyturf? Green ground up tires coated with green wax?
Horses dont fire on it, ask a few top trainers about that. The Oaks winner spun her wheels on it badly in a minorstakes race. Lawyer Ron would have been a claimer had he stayed on it. Soi we should just dismiss all the talented runners and say screw it and run on the tires?
name one horse who has made an impact on dirt racing after racing on polytrack and replicated the form? You cant just replace dirt with something that bears no resemblance to it in form or reality whatsoever.

[Skip away]

Randall is right. They need to cut racing way down, especially at big tracks. Instead of a 5 or 6 day race week, limit it to 3 days- Fri, Sat and Sun. There is no reason to have racing Mon-Thurs. Its when the people who bet the most work. No sane person wants to bet or watch races more than 3 days a week.

If we got 3 days per week, we'd see 12-13 horses per race every race and the value would come back to the game like it use to.

[PSH]

The fact that our best meets are the shortest in duration is also a sign that we have way too many races and way too many tracks with live racing in the country.

Does anyone complain about the quality and fields at Saratoga, Keeneland (April and October), and to a lesser extent Del Mar.....

We need to cut the number of tracks down in half.....
Simulcasting should continue at those venues that do not race... The only question to answer would be the amount of people employed by our industry that would suffer....

Do we really need live racing at Delaware, Monmouth and Pimilico all at the same time?

There are too many tracks with shared dates....

With less tracks running, the remaining tracks should be able to field fuller fields for at least 5 days a week.

I know the state of racing in Northern California is really sad. Although i live in the area, i own horses that will be racing in New York State. I for one would not miss live racing year round at Bay Meadows or Golden Gate Fields. Each track could race 3 months a year.

[Skip away]

Even Saratoga and Keeneland could cut down there days to 3 a week. Racing from Mon-Thurs is not necessary. I'd rather see a slightly longer meet, with the only racing days being Fri-Sat. Instead of 9-10 races, they could have 14races and start post time at 11am instead of 1pm.

I find the weekdays very dull, especially towards the end of meets like Saratoga and Keeneland. No need for that nonsense.

[randallscott35]

5 day weeks at Sar tops.

[KonaNative]

Three days a week! Never happen. It would cost the tracks way to much money. I cant think of a single track that would go for it.

[Unbridled]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Geez Johnny V got injured on a horse that broke down on the grass after it won. Landseer and Funfair have gone down in big races as well. Horses were bred for dirt and grass. Its a marketing scheme, nothing more or less,
They could make surfaces deeper like the Oklahoma track in Saratoga. Trainers love it. I gues my question is if its the surface alone breaking down teh horses, then why all the turf breakdowns?
Whats next, marketing company gonna come up with polyturf? Green ground up tires coated with green wax?
Horses dont fire on it, ask a few top trainers about that. The Oaks winner spun her wheels on it badly in a minorstakes race. Lawyer Ron would have been a claimer had he stayed on it. Soi we should just dismiss all the talented runners and say screw it and run on the tires?
name one horse who has made an impact on dirt racing after racing on polytrack and replicated the form? You cant just replace dirt with something that bears no resemblance to it in form or reality whatsoever.

I'd prefer that there wasnt a change from dirt to polytrack, but there's no changing that. I agree that the tracks should go to a deeper surface ala Oklahoma as a possible solution (did it ever come up as one?), but its not going to happen b/c tracks are so focused on fast times and huge Rags/Beyers. Yes, horses break down on turf, but look at your examples, they are far more rare than those on dirt tracks: Up An Octave (Keeneland April '06), Funfair (Breeders Cup '05) Landseer (Breeders Cup '02???)-could be do to less turf racing, but I dont recall them being a frequent on those on the dirt. I believe its a step in the right direction and I have spoken to a few top trainers about it, Biancone likes it so much that he keeps his horses at Keeneland and Turfway (when not up at the Spa) b/c his horses respond to it so well and it keeps them healthy. I have no answer for the Lawyer Rons that dont take to it, it is unfortunate and thats a credible point. One of the reasons that horses dont "fire" over it is b/c a sprinter cant stretchout from 6F to 8.5F over the polytrack b/c it requires stamina versus running on a dirt track that is similar to concrete. Lemons Forever winner didnt "spin her wheels", she was closing very well in that minor stakes race as she was beaten just 1 length and that mile race set her up prefectly for the Oaks. Thats a valid example-Stream Cat is another. Agreed not a lot of horses have made a huge impact coming from Turfway to other tracks, but that's always been the case b/c Turfway is a lower tier track compared to Keeneland, and the Florida, NY, and Cal tracks.

Oracle, your point about Lawyer Ron and Lemons Forever is pointless. Who cares what horses are the superstars of racing just as long as we have superstars. Horse are bred to run on dirt and turf--this is too funny. Horses are bred to make money that is plain and simple. Doesnt matter what the surface is, just as long as they make money. People People People, more studies need to be done on PolyTrack before every track in American installs some sort of synthetic surface. So far, you cannot argure the success it has had at Turfway. Now we will have two more sample tracks in Woodbine and Keeneland to further our knowledge. I don't like what the CHRB is doing. I think they should wait and see what happens. But the bottom line is MONEY and that is what is going to drive the decisons.

Originally Posted by Unbridled

I'd prefer that there wasnt a change from dirt to polytrack, but there's no changing that. I agree that the tracks should go to a deeper surface ala Oklahoma as a possible solution (did it ever come up as one?), but its not going to happen b/c tracks are so focused on fast times and huge Rags/Beyers. Yes, horses break down on turf, but look at your examples, they are far more rare than those on dirt tracks: Up An Octave (Keeneland April '06), Funfair (Breeders Cup '05) Landseer (Breeders Cup '02???)-could be do to less turf racing, but I dont recall them being a frequent on those on the dirt. I believe its a step in the right direction and I have spoken to a few top trainers about it, Biancone likes it so much that he keeps his horses at Keeneland and Turfway (when not up at the Spa) b/c his horses respond to it so well and it keeps them healthy. I have no answer for the Lawyer Rons that dont take to it, it is unfortunate and thats a credible point. One of the reasons that horses dont "fire" over it is b/c a sprinter cant stretchout from 6F to 8.5F over the polytrack b/c it requires stamina versus running on a dirt track that is similar to concrete. Lemons Forever winner didnt "spin her wheels", she was closing very well in that minor stakes race as she was beaten just 1 length and that mile race set her up prefectly for the Oaks. Thats a valid example-Stream Cat is another. Agreed not a lot of horses have made a huge impact coming from Turfway to other tracks, but that's always been the case b/c Turfway is a lower tier track compared to Keeneland, and the Florida, NY, and Cal tracks.

Lemons did spin her wheels, I watch races for a living and remember that race well if you wanna debate it. She wasnt closing, she was under a drive for half a mile as the jock tried to get her to run but she only ran in small spots. I wagered on her that day, and remember it well. One paced and unable to accelerate. Biancone is a great guy and a great trainer, but hardly the guy to quote as an authority on it. Patrick has long been known as a guy who drills the **** out of his horses, which has lead to so many of his great two year olds being done before fall, nuch less age three. Of course Patrick would want it, it suits his training style, which is to basically train the hell out of them.
There isn't any way that all tracks are gonna make the switch. A few will hold back and I can gurantee you this, it will be the demise of california racing Unbridled, worse than it is now. If you think that owners are gonna put up a lot of cash to buy expensive horses and race them there for long, no way. A sound horse is no good if its not a valuable horse. I know whats going to happen, so does everyone. They will run horses out there, and if they show no ability on Poly, they will be promptly shipped East to race on dirt. Its the only logical move. Everyone already knows about the Lemons and Lawyer Rons. Then the fields will REALLY be small, because the only options will realy be one and the same, poly and turf.
The tracks that take a wait and see attitude will prevail in the end. Turfway and smaller cheaper tracks that focus on cheap claiming races to fill their cards may indeed be well served by it, keeps the old cripples sounder and they can make more starts. But if you think that trainers won't bail out of the all poly venues with top horses whose form goes down on Poly, or on horses they think have talent but arent showing it on Poly, you are kidding yourself. They will bail to the nearest major venue that races on dirt and have huge divisions.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Geez Johnny V got injured on a horse that broke down on the grass after it won. Landseer and Funfair have gone down in big races as well. Horses were bred for dirt and grass. Its a marketing scheme, nothing more or less,
They could make surfaces deeper like the Oklahoma track in Saratoga. Trainers love it. I gues my question is if its the surface alone breaking down teh horses, then why all the turf breakdowns?
Whats next, marketing company gonna come up with polyturf? Green ground up tires coated with green wax?
Horses dont fire on it, ask a few top trainers about that. The Oaks winner spun her wheels on it badly in a minorstakes race. Lawyer Ron would have been a claimer had he stayed on it. Soi we should just dismiss all the talented runners and say screw it and run on the tires?
name one horse who has made an impact on dirt racing after racing on polytrack and replicated the form? You cant just replace dirt with something that bears no resemblance to it in form or reality whatsoever.

I agree with this. Other tracks need to look at dirt track surfaces such as Pimlico to see how breakdowns can be prevented instead of polytrack. I'm all for safety, but I don't think that polytrack is the way to go. Pimlico's racing surface is extremely safe. Barbaro was the first horse of the meet to break down there. Let's face it. Horses run and they get hurt. I've had horses come in with injuries from just romping around the pastures. You can't prevent all of the breakdowns in horse racing, but if the horses are managed right, and not racing on speedways, then you can limit them.