We should petition Aqueduct for a change to Poly or Cushioned track now?

Question

This morning on TVG, Seibel asked when did Aqueduct plan on switching to the safer track, the answer was: "We'll see what is going on in the rest of the country with the ones who already made the switch". Well, they had their answer today.
In the first race at Aqueduct we had a tradegy, Mountain General, an 8 yo with 62 starts, grandson of Storm Cat and greatgrandson of Secretariat broke down while leading as he was making a turn and sadly is no longer with us.

Forgive the ugly typo: tragedy

Hollywood Park is delayed today, Nov 19. David Flores, other jockeys and trainers are going around surveying the track trying to figure out this new track surface, some dipping has formed. It was 50F last night and 90F today, this is a new organic surface.

Nakatani said: Let them try first and go from there but if the track is not leveled then stop the racing. If it's not 100%, let's not race. This new track is a learning process.

David Flores said: There is still ondulation there. Took a lap around the track, says it's pretty good. Yesterday late in the day was worse.

Decision: They, the jockeys and management, will ride on the Hollywood Park track.

I sincerely hope that I didn't speak too soon. Let's hope for everybody's health.

Answer 1

I'm not a fan of the polytrack/artificial surfaces. However, if you want to prevent life threatening injuries, right now, this is the way to go.

My question is if there is anyway to make current tracks safer without going to an artificial surface. Call me a traditionalist, but if you can make an artificial surface safer for horses, why not make a more natural surface like dirt safer.

I just feel that horses are going to break down, no matter if the surface is poly, dirt, turf, sand, whatever. Yes, Turfway's rate of catastrophic injuries is near zero for their spring 2006 meet from what I read, which is the goal of the poly-type surface. However, Woodbine's poly track did have a larger rate of catastrophic injuries when they first installed the surface, which they didn't contribute to the new surface, but because these horses would have broken down on either the old surface, the surface used when they were temporarily on the harness dirt track, on their unique turf course, or poly.

Although poly is going to help horses, horses are still going to break down. I think in a few years, we'll find that poly is safe, but not as safe as what people are saying.

Should Aqueduct goto a new surface. Sure, why not since they host races in the dead of winter. But they are in bankrupcy, which doesn't help the debate at this moment.

Answer 2

Aqueduct has zero chance of switching to polytrack right now. The New York Racing Association is endanger of losing its franchise. Their current contract expires in 2007 - no way will they make a major, expensive surface change to a track they may not have access to in a year. Add to that the whole bankruptcy issue and you might as well try and convince a rock.

There are more practical steps you could advocate. A change of leadership in the Track Superintendent's office would be first on my list. The current problem at Aqueduct is just the latest in a series of surface issues New York has been dealing with over the past 2-3 years. Of course soon enough all the offices will be changing. Hopefully Magna or Churchill or Woodbine or whomever brings some fresh ideas in.

ETA: Aside from railing against NYRA, if the sport had a ruling body it should consider the recommendations of the Welfare and Safety of the Racehorse Summit. http://www.bloodhorse.com/pdf/welfaresummit.pdf Whether this is something the NTRA can pull off is another question, but perhaps a petition to participate that is sent to ALL track owners/operators would be a good idea.

Answer 3

I question the wisdom of doing it. At Turfway Park's meet last year after installing it longshots were winning way more than normal and the handicapping was off for awhile.

Not to mention the fact that, yes, tragedies of the sudden kind MIGHT be avoided but the increase in the number of injuries to horses' legs over the long haul after running on the artificial surface is in question. Just ask any baseball player whether they'd prefer to play on grass or astroturf and that's the answer you need to look at.

I say no change unless it's all around better, rather than change for change's sake.

Why is it that in the "good" old days these kinds of accidents were rarer? Probably because there were a lesser number of tracks when you consider the new ones in states that previously had no tracks/had laws agains them, such as Georigia, Texas and Oklahoma, so consequently less jockeys finding work, so in a sense the standard of the jockey nowadays is slightly less good because more marginal ones find employment IMO.

So some of the "spills" are due to a slightly lesser standard of jockey excellence than in former times IMO.