Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Bid
Im not calling you a buffoon Im speaking to Sumitas.
You think its a normal practice to seal an all weather track?
Mig says the track is hard as a rock, and the super says its soft, make sense?
To be honest with you I dont care whats said in the DRF or any other publication. Some reporter just did a piece on Equidaily praising GG on their breakdown rate. The week before they had a bunch go down, over 10 eased and vanned. The day after they had one go down in the stretch. BTW that was 5 catastrophic breakdowns 12 eased and 7 vanned over a 6 day period. Just because its reported, doesnt mean its the truth. You are hearing what they want you to hear, not what is actually going on. How long are people going to believe these tracks are as advertised? Catastrophic breakdowns went up at Keeneland, will be up at GG, Woodbines track is a disaster, and Southern California cancelled Sat and Sun cards, and are probably going to cancel Monday. If thats not enough to make you scratch your head a little bit and question what you are hearing, then you must be making a commission on the stuff.
|
but you have to take a lot of things into consideration other than raw numbers...take turfway for instance. their first year with an AWT, they had great numbers regarding injury. the next year, not so much--but with more entrants, more runners, the raw # would also increase, correct? also, how many trainers thought this surface was the cure for all ills, and sent horses who needed more time, who had no business running, to that track to race as the surface is thought to be some miracle worker? i'd imagine plenty, and that may be the case for others tracks who have made the switch as well.
all the AWTS are seeing increases in starters, sad to say that would also have to lead to an increase in injuries and breakdowns.
they need to study percentages of starters to injuries, rather than just going with a total. that will tell the tale.