Quote:
Originally Posted by ArlJim78
i think you and I are saying the same thing.
to me its, whatever the benefits or shortcomings are for polytrack, lets not exagerate them one way or the other. as they say "just the facts maam"
|
ArlJim, I completely agree with you and Deb on this one as well.
Its been fraudulently marketed as a cure all in so many different ways.
Its not the existence of it or possible uses of it that I oppose, just the bull**** used to sell it.
The problem is that those who buy into it cannot easily, or ever, decide they made a mistake and take it out. A total and complete reconfiguation and resurfacing and cushioning of Gulf cost 5 million bucks. This stuff is upwards of TEN MILLION to install. Once a track makes this huge expenditure its gonna be hard pressed toever take it out, its like the roach motel, you can check in but never check out. To be this makes it almost a permanent decision once the choice is made. Not enough facts or data is in to move to this stuff on a broad and sweeping range.
because no tracks have the room to install synthetic and keep dirt, it is INDEED a dirt replacemnet surface and I see no way it could be called anything but. Has any track installed this stuff and kept dirt racing yet? Of course not.
In an ideal world they could experiment with it by installing a new course with synthetic and keeping dirt but noone has done this.
The severe way in which trainers are being asked not to speak out against it, or if they don't like it to just leave is wrong as well. Tracks have such big investments in it after they install it that they don't wanna hear, see, or speak any evil about it.
Horses will always break down as they are now on Turf, dirt, or synthetic. I'd think that first trying to make dirt tracks safer with better cushions, deeper harrowing, and safer top layers would make more sense at a fraction of the price and many trainers have wondered aloud why this can't be.
Noone seemed to care for years about whether the tracks were safe or not and they could have adressed the issue had they chosen to at a fraction of the price.
My firm theory is that these huge contracts and bdiing processes work no different than they do in any other business in the real world. You get in a few guys ears and tell them if they help steer the contract to you, that maybe a big job or Christmas present awaits them in a Swiss ban account.
Why else would everyone rush to spend 10-12 mill when in the past the same guys wouldn't spend one mill to just resurface the track? Call me cynical, but I think this is allabout lining people's pockets. the rest they make up as they go along.