JC / Railbird

Synthetic Surfaces Archive

What’s Lost

… when newspaper reporters on the racing beat are laid off or retired, then replaced by general sports writers, who might be fine journalists but have little understanding of the sport or the industry and its ongoing stories, is exemplified in this dull bit of LA Times reporting on SoCal synthetic surface tracks, which rehashes every point every racing fan or even vaguely interested reader has already come across elsewhere, padded out by press release quality quotes.

Posted in Media/TV/Film, Synthetic Surfaces on September 4, 2008

Synthetic Notes

It was inevitable that a synthetic surfaces forum convened by the New York Task Force on Retired Racehorses would have its dry bits, but for the most part, the Tuesday event was lively and informative, with panelists going in-depth on several subjects of interest to (and much speculation among) handicappers and fans. A couple of themes emerged through the day: Whether talking about maintenance, cost, benefits, or safety, too much of the debate over synthetics is driven by anecdote, more data and long-term studies are required on both dirt and artificial surfaces, and that when it comes to starts and breakdowns, track condition is only one factor in a complex problem.

A few interesting points and observations:

Props to Turfway president Bob Elliston for a fair presentation. After telling the Task Force that the track had experienced a 60% decrease in breakdowns, a 53% decrease in maintenance costs, and a significant increase in handle since it switched from dirt to Polytrack in late 2005, Elliston cautioned that a synthetic surface was not a panacea for eliminating catastrophic injuries. He also noted that the decline in maintenance costs was largely due to the track requiring less work in winter, savings other tracks might be less likely to see, and that increased handle could be attributed to fewer cancellations. He also isn’t convinced synthetics should be required by any jurisdiction, emphasizing a need for accountability, regardless of surface:

“Whatever the benchmarks, we have to hold all tracks accountable — but that doesn’t mean mandating going synthetic. We need to hold all track officials and track superintendents to standards of safety across all surfaces.”

One thing Elliston said about the breakdown rate — that Turfway’s decline was so dramatic the first meet following Polytrack installation that it probably helped create an “unrealistic expectation” as far as safety — was echoed in the panel featuring jockeys later in the day, when Richard Migliore admitted taking a horse who wasn’t warming up well to the gate, believing the track was “a safety blanket,” only to have the horse suffer an injury while running. “I should have followed my instincts,” he said ruefully. A point that all the jockeys made was that horses hit the artificial surfaces so much differently than they do dirt that it was difficult at times to tell how a horse was going over the track. Mark Casse, quoting his regular rider Patrick Husbands, said something similar during the trainers’ panel. “They hit so sweet on it, it’s hard to tell if they’re sound,” and Todd Pletcher added, “Dirt, to me, exposes weaknesses.”

There is little chance that any New York racetrack will install a synthetic surface, but NYRA president Charlie Hayward appeared open to the idea of an artificial training track and was careful to say, “where NYRA is going will be led by the data,” although the lack of any such troubled him:

“It’s a little scary as an industry, making things up as we go along. There’s no science behind it … no real track maintenance protocols. We need more research, more metrics.”

Also of concern to Hayward was the “entrepreneurial, thinly-capitalized” nature of the businesses that currently offer synthetic surfaces. Citing the problems Santa Anita had with Cushion Track last winter and the disappointing response from the company when officials there sought help repairing the drainage problems that plagued the track, Hayward told the Task Force, “You should be concerned [about these vendors] when you’re talking about the backbone of the industry.”

A Task Force member followed up on that issue by asking Sally Goswell of Fair Hill, who had said earlier the Maryland training facility chose Tapeta due to its relationship the surface’s developer, Michael Dickinson, what would happen if Dickinson retired or returned to training. “We’d be in trouble,” Goswell replied.

Track condition and injuries were the focus for vets and horsemen, and both groups saw problems with dirt tracks, or rather, with how dirt surfaces are sometimes maintained. “My biggest concern is that tracks are oversealed to protect the races,” said Pletcher. The trainer called Belmont problematic this spring and said there were an increased number of injuries among his horses stabled there. “Hard tracks create injuries and orthopedic lesions,” confirmed Dr. Mark Cheney.

As for soft-tissue injuries, rumors of which have dogged any discussion of synthetics since the surfaces have been installed, there was no consensus on whether there was a change in occurrence. Trainer Dale Romans reported a rash of “tibias” in his barn at Keeneland and said that he sent a dozen horses to Del Mar last summer, “and ended up with a dozen sore horses.” Casse, who came across as one of the strongest supporters of synthetics, told the Task Force that any rise in such injuries had to do with better veterinary care. “We’ve become more aware of hind-end issues in the last five years,” he said. “Now that we have different ways of diagnosing, we’re finding injuries where we might not have before.” Pletcher sensibly suggested that “tracks are cyclical” when it comes to injuries and that it might take 10 years of data to draw any conclusions about which, dirt or artificial, are safest.

Nick Zito — “I don’t have turf horses, I have dirt horses” — was adamant in his support of tradition:

“I want to stay with dirt. Period. I like dirt … there are good dirt tracks around America and we need to preserve them. If you went to a Polytrack situation, you would change history.”

And that might be the crux of the issue. If studies are done and the data comes back that artificial surfaces are safer, kinder, yield more starts and more handle, but that the same results can be attained with properly-maintained dirt, then the question will be about sticking with tradition or abandoning history for the future. “Dirt tracks aren’t consistent either,” one panelist sniped at another complaining about Del Mar last year, and we have only to think back to the rain that swamped opening day at Saratoga to know that’s true. Still, there are many like Zito who would take slop over rubber, and even I — who can think of 45 good reasons from just that one day for why synthetics might prove preferable to dirt — take pause at the thought of jettisoning the records of horses like Secretariat, Kelso, and Dr. Fager for a track that never changes.

Posted in Synthetic Surfaces on July 29, 2008

Call Him Crazy

… because Jeremy Plonk likes handicapping synthetic surfaces such as Del Mar:

Call me crazy too, I’m also a fan of the synthetic era.

Posted in Del Mar, Synthetic Surfaces on July 17, 2008

I Heart Synthetics

Thanks for all the great comments on this post linking to Andrew Beyer’s column about the Blue Grass. I’m reminded of why I enjoy this game so much: It’s a perpetual puzzle that attracts smart people and spirited discussion, and it’s one of the few hobbies or pursuits that doesn’t just reward contrarianism, but practically demands it.
I like synthetic surfaces: I went to Turfway in 2006 to see Polytrack up close, I started following the Southern California circuit with the advent of Cushion Track at Hollywood, I prefer playing Keeneland Polytrack to Keeneland dirt. Putting aside the safety question, I enjoy handicapping these surfaces. I like that stamina is rewarded and cheap speed folds, that new pedigree plays are popping up. Synthetics shake up the scene, create new challenges and betting opportunities, and if they’re properly installed and maintained, they play fair. Like commenter ‘Crunk, I’ve found there are differences between the surfaces — just as there between dirt tracks — and I’ve adjusted my handicapping.
I won’t argue that some surfaces aren’t quirkier than others — that the pick six at Keeneland went unhit for seven days and that favorites through Sunday had won only 18% of races (although, favorites did finish in the money 63% of the time, so it’s not total chaos in Kentucky), suggests horses and handicappers are struggling with the surface there — but neither am I willing to throw up my hands and declare synthetic track results bizarre and incomprehensible, at least not any more so than I would other surfaces, such as Aqueduct’s inner dirt mid-winter.
As for the Blue Grass and what it means for the Derby: Monba is a solid and versatile, if uninspiring, colt. Throw out the Fountain of Youth, credit his myectomy for the Blue Grass turnaround, and you’re left with a middling horse who could win the Derby if this year’s field were filled with similarly dull beasts. (Aside: When will horseplayers get disclosure of surgical procedures performed between races? It’s ridiculous that Monba flipped his palate and had throat surgery to prevent another displacement and that wasn’t officially reported anywhere.) Pyro didn’t take to the track and he didn’t show anything in the stretch. He seems to have come out of the race fine, so he’ll almost certainly bounce back to his pre-Keeneland performance level in the Derby, but it won’t be enough, no matter how well he works. That says more about the rigors of the Derby than it does about the surface of the Blue Grass.
—
Related: Ellis Starr says “Adapt or die!” when it comes to synthetic surfaces. That’s harsher than I’d put it, but it’s not the worst advice …

Posted in Handicapping, Synthetic Surfaces on April 17, 2008