A poster here that is in the breeding business said there are numerous different types of synthetic surfaces and they have been racing on them for years outside the United States. This isn't new stuff. How can you make any decisions on "poly" based off a 17 day meet. How about Turfways numbers. Do just Keeneland's count? That would be ridiculous.
What about Steve Byk's theory and others who said Keeneland has more to do with the way they set up the track than the poly?
Based on the sires you listed, it means nothing. Those sires produce winners because they are the top sires. The sample is so small and it doesn't mention if these sires just had more horses run.
It would be crazy to change the way one spends millions of dollars choosing stallions to even consider the synthetic surfaces right now. They all are going to play differently, just like dirt tracks do.
Last edited by Revolution : 10-30-2006 at 11:01 AM.
|