Update on the Pro-Ride and Tapeta surfaces
DiscreetCat
Moderator
from Left at the Gate:
I saw a story on Bloodhorse.com Sunday night, too late to write about it. And I figured that by the time I got around doing so, it would already have been well-discussed in the racing press, and on the blogs. However, much to my initial surprise, giving way to I should have known better, I haven't seen it picked up anywhere - not in the Form, not by the TBA, not by the non-TBA; don't even see a link on the Paulick Report....though a link depository has one.
The story concerns the outstanding recent safety records on both the Pro-Ride course at Santa Anita, and the Tapeta Footing at Golden Gate.
Since a rash of five horse breakdowns in the opening five days of racing at the current Santa Anita meet -- resulting in four fatalities -- there has been just one race-related death since Dec. 31, Dr. Rick Arthur told the California Horse Racing Board.
In a report to the board during its meeting Feb. 26, Arthur, the CHRB's equine medical director, said that there have been no racing fatalities at Golden Gate Fields at its current meet. Both tracks opened their winter stands on Dec. 26.
.....
"Going back to 2004, this is the only time I was able to find either track without a racing fatality in January," Arthur told the board. "Whatever the reason -- rain, changes in maintenance procedures, pre-race examinations -- we have had as safe of racing as anywhere in the world in January and February at our Thoroughbred tracks. Hopefully, we will be able to continue that success when the tracks dry out and the heat comes."
There were at least 5,366 starters at Santa Anita and Golden Gate Fields during this time frame, he said. [Bloodhorse.com]
Pretty impressive stuff there. You might think that, given the interest and scrutiny of synthetic tracks, news like this would be equally as relevant as the times when there have been rashes of breakdowns...and equally deserving of mention. Certainly, a lot of people wrote about the bad times earlier this year....and I was amongst them, as I've noted before. But this story has thus far gone largely unnoticed. This board meeting took place on Feb 26, and I imagine that someone other than Bloodhorse must have reported on it! Please send me a link if you've seen it.
I think there's a real media bias at play here, in the mainstream press and the blogosphere alike. Seems to me that most simply want the synthetic tracks to fail, sometimes with a ferocity that seems illogical. I don't really get why people are so enamored with and married to racing on dirt. What could be so terrible about a surface which stays fast in the rain, eliminates boring speed biases, and which favors horses who finish strong, the way racing should be in my view, instead of horses who run fast enough early to discourage the rest, and who win merely by coming home less slowly than the others. (And yeah, if they're a bit safer, that would be cool too.)
I saw a story on Bloodhorse.com Sunday night, too late to write about it. And I figured that by the time I got around doing so, it would already have been well-discussed in the racing press, and on the blogs. However, much to my initial surprise, giving way to I should have known better, I haven't seen it picked up anywhere - not in the Form, not by the TBA, not by the non-TBA; don't even see a link on the Paulick Report....though a link depository has one.
The story concerns the outstanding recent safety records on both the Pro-Ride course at Santa Anita, and the Tapeta Footing at Golden Gate.
Since a rash of five horse breakdowns in the opening five days of racing at the current Santa Anita meet -- resulting in four fatalities -- there has been just one race-related death since Dec. 31, Dr. Rick Arthur told the California Horse Racing Board.
In a report to the board during its meeting Feb. 26, Arthur, the CHRB's equine medical director, said that there have been no racing fatalities at Golden Gate Fields at its current meet. Both tracks opened their winter stands on Dec. 26.
.....
"Going back to 2004, this is the only time I was able to find either track without a racing fatality in January," Arthur told the board. "Whatever the reason -- rain, changes in maintenance procedures, pre-race examinations -- we have had as safe of racing as anywhere in the world in January and February at our Thoroughbred tracks. Hopefully, we will be able to continue that success when the tracks dry out and the heat comes."
There were at least 5,366 starters at Santa Anita and Golden Gate Fields during this time frame, he said. [Bloodhorse.com]
Pretty impressive stuff there. You might think that, given the interest and scrutiny of synthetic tracks, news like this would be equally as relevant as the times when there have been rashes of breakdowns...and equally deserving of mention. Certainly, a lot of people wrote about the bad times earlier this year....and I was amongst them, as I've noted before. But this story has thus far gone largely unnoticed. This board meeting took place on Feb 26, and I imagine that someone other than Bloodhorse must have reported on it! Please send me a link if you've seen it.
I think there's a real media bias at play here, in the mainstream press and the blogosphere alike. Seems to me that most simply want the synthetic tracks to fail, sometimes with a ferocity that seems illogical. I don't really get why people are so enamored with and married to racing on dirt. What could be so terrible about a surface which stays fast in the rain, eliminates boring speed biases, and which favors horses who finish strong, the way racing should be in my view, instead of horses who run fast enough early to discourage the rest, and who win merely by coming home less slowly than the others. (And yeah, if they're a bit safer, that would be cool too.)