Let me ask you this, how much have you played tracks with poly, on a consistent basis?

The great thing about poly is the amount of misinformation going around and that people tend to react irrationally when faced with this new variable.

They might be basic, but the public sure hasn't picked up on them yet.

How can you argue about something that you haven't had alot of experience with?

Sometimes the simplest angles go over looked, which happens on all surfaces, but as aj said, people overreact to this stuff, all they have to do is change up their capping a little

I think the addition of a third surface has to help good handicappers in the long run. Being able to track the patterns of dirt-to-poly and poly-to-dirt performances is crucial.
At Arlington, for example, there have been a number of horses coming in off nice performances at CD or Hawthorne that have been seriously overbet (especially on Saturdays when there is a lot of dead money at the track) because the switch to poly wasn't given enough consideration. I also think the "turf horses love poly" angle has been seriously overblown, so horses with good turf form are often severely overbet in their poly debuts.
So like I said, I think the addition of a third surface helps the good handicappers. That, of course, is why I hate it. I need something to help us crappy handicappers.

I find it very hard to believe that synth. is totally random surface.
One of the main problems is the belief that fast horses are better. Or horses with a high cruising rate are better. It might just be this surface plays to endurance in a very diff. way that grass. And the horses you think or thought were crap (for whatever reason; its usually price or level run at on dirt), are actually tough animals in a war of attrition on a tiring surface. Or maybe they have a hoovestrike and stride that works well on the surface under certain conditions.

There has to be a way to cap it. It may be People are going to have to change notions and old habits drastically. I just have a hard time labeling a horse as crap when he/she has just beaten 9 other horses just because I lost a bet.

Hell maybe its just a matter of a horse relaxing and not battling the surface. Especially if they have been bred for, and trained on dirt.

I am glad it is here. And I am glad it adds some confusion. Because that leaves openings for folks willing to try and figure it out. I have seen many more horses in each race on the stuff, and larger payouts. I dont see what is wrong with that unless you are stuck on old methods that dont work anymore.

Now after stating all this betting stuff. I would much rather watch a horse run on dirt because its beautiful the way the horses can stride out on it. It really makes the horses look like the great athletes they are.

it isn't anywhere close to random. i would like to know how people are coming to this conclusion. where is the data? frankly I find it less random than dirt.

I will admit syn. is more confusing for me, but I really have not had time to look at it closely. So I will defer to the more resourceful, flexible, everyday cappers.

California was in DESPERATE need for it. Santa Anita track was horrible about breakdowns as was Del Mar.

I actually don't think this is as much about the actual surface but the actual bottom of the track. When installing poly track, you essentially start from ground zero, thus installing an even track. The old 'bottom' of Arlington was horrible, which led to all those breakdowns last year, with the new bottom, we have had substantially less. The recent breakdowns were because the horses were sore and had major problems, but we haven't had any healthy horses break down because of the surface, not a one

There were like 40 breakdowns, and about 20 of them were in the same exact on the track. Far turn near the rail

Arlington

Per Bruce Headley speaking about old school handicappers having problems.

http://www.drf.com/news/article/87604.html

If there is money to be made, they will come. You can be sure of that. It may be like a new market has opened up.

Scav,

The past 2 years have been the first 2 that I've started playing So-Cal tracks on a somewhat frequent basis. Why? The field sizes. Whether it has something to do with the switch to poly or not, the field sizes are getting bigger, and therefore bettable. Yuo're still seeing the 5 and 6-horse fields, but not nearly as much as a few years ago.

I believe Arlington had 24 breakdowns last year, not 40. As for the earlier comment about randomness with Polytrack, there's no question its more random. Until the majority of horses have run 5-6 times over it, one can only draw limited conclusions. I'll bet TP, where 95% of the non-maidens have run over it, and I feel speed at least has some chance. But the crap that they run on at Kee, AP and Dmr is just brutal to watch. It looks like all the speed tires, and the deep closers can't get in gear quick enough, and the midpack runners basically inherit the win with their one paced style. And ALL the runners look like they are struggling in the stretch. Let's hope PETA doesnt watch these debacles.

I find some horseman's comments very strange: they talk about the surface not "breaking away" like dirt, yet the horses' hooves must be sinking in further because the times are so much slower. What gives? And supposedly the horses come back after a race or workout and barely blowing? Yet it seems that every horse is struggling in the stretch....yet another contradiction.

I have a question regarding the DM surface vs other polytracks at Arlington, Keeneland, TP, and Woodbine. It seems DM Management was insistant on not watering the track, as some horsemen had asked to perhaps tighten it up, or make it firmer. Now DM will get no rain during their meet at all. Yet the other polytracks all get rain during their meets and the tracks seem to play fairer or at least time wise a bit more normal. What effect would one or two rounds of the water truck, a day, have on the track, that rain at the other places have been able to handle? I cant see it hurting the track as the rain is supposed to filter thru the track and keep it "fast" all the time. Was it something to do with not putting the "jelly" thing into the DM polytrack vs the other poly's?

I am all for a safe surface yet it seems the research and scenarios to keep a surface safe, and competive were not done.