OH Boy...Synthetics is True Test of Champions

[NoCarolinaTony]

Not sure if many of you saw this on Equidaily so I am posting the link here.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/sports/2009/November/sports_November520.xml§ion=sports&col=

FWIW I am sure the writer was told what to write by the ruling party....(kind of Like NBC with the current administration in the white house).

Synthetics may be here to stay. Please note the remark that the triple crown tracks refuse to install.......

[JimP]

Everything the author said appears to me to be accurate.

[NoCarolinaTony]

If you think Synth is the true test of Champions...

[JimP]

The true test of champions is where ever the best horses in the world run against each other.

[smalltimer]

Like the Breeders Cup

[JimP]

As far as I\'m concerned, the BC did a very good job in bringing together the best horses in the world. Some of them couldn\'t make it due to injuries. Some decided to duck the competition. But for the most part the top horses that were still in training took a shot at the BC.

[NoCarolinaTony]

Love the qualifying statement, \"still in training\" sort of like a starter allowance.

NCT

[P-Dub]

Thats a pretty lame analogy.

[SoCalMan2]

The problem as I see it is what did the horses that were brought together at Santa Anita show?  To me, they showed turf champions and synthetic champions.  As far as I am concerned, what happened at Santa Anita has nothing to do with dirt horses.  Maybe instead of a 2 day breeders cup, they should have a 3 day cup split out over two places (Unless Belmont or Saratoga decides to replace one of its turf courses with a synthetic course or maybe Aqueduct turns the IDT into Synth or some other place builds three surfaces).  Take a look at the sprints.  How many dirt sprinters did not show up in the two non-grass sprint races?  I suppose enough chose not to show up to make a solid dirt sprint championship somewhere. I would imagine that Indian Blessing should be female sprint champion hands down and as far as male, it is probably not any horse who entered at Santa Anita. I love that they actually ran something called a \"Dirt mile\"on something other than dirt.  That was funny.

Anyway, rather than have debates over which surface has primacy, why not just have three surfaces?  it is not like there was trouble deciding to have dirt champions and turf champions before synthetic came along.  Seems to me like it is time to add more championship races.  Imagine if turf races were rained off the turf for a breeders cup.  I cannot imagine anybody would rely on sea of slop conditions to determine who is a grass champion.  Assuming that is true, why use synthetic results to determine dirt champions?  It is nonsensical.

[sighthound]

We really idolize dirt in the US, don\'t we?  Nobody else in the world does. Nobody else breeds for \"dirt specialists\".

I\'m just sayin\'  Not looking to start anything, nor diss people that like dirt racing (I love dirt racing)   - just saying that we are a bit parochial in America  We are not good at being on the outside, looking in at ourselves, sometimes.

[P-Dub]

I hear what everyone is saying about dirt racing.

But when a dirt track comes up muddy or sloppy, aren\'t there certain horses that relish that surface too?? How fair was that Monmouth track??  Or the other years that the BC has been run over an off track??  There are many horses that hate off tracks, just as there are horses that hate synthetics.

[Lost Cause]

sighthound Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We really idolize dirt in the US, don\'t we?
> Nobody else in the world does. Nobody else breeds
> for \"dirt specialists\".
>
> I\'m just sayin\'  Not looking to start anything,
> nor diss people that like dirt racing (I love dirt
> racing)   - just saying that we are a bit
> parochial in America   We are not good at being on
> the outside, looking in at ourselves, sometimes.

I have the same feeling as you with this Sight..I could care less if they run on dirt or synth but just one or the other not both as it wreaks havoc on my bankroll trying to figure out who is going to like it and who isn\'t..

[Funny Cide]

sighthound Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We really idolize dirt in the US, don\'t we?
> Nobody else in the world does. Nobody else breeds
> for \"dirt specialists\".
>
> I\'m just sayin\'  Not looking to start anything,
> nor diss people that like dirt racing (I love dirt
> racing)   - just saying that we are a bit
> parochial in America   We are not good at being on
> the outside, looking in at ourselves, sometimes.

Who cares if nobody else breeds dirt horses?  You see something special about being just like everyone else?  And why is it that we\'re supposed to change our surface to be like everyone else?  Why don\'t others change over to dirt to be like us?

I\'m not wanting to be like the Europeans.  Take a look at their list of greats.  The list is paltry, with horses who made one or two handfuls of starts.  Compare that to all our greats, from Man o\' War to Secretariat, Fager, Bid, Affirmed, Slew, Citation, and dozens of others.  American dirt horses are the greatest racehorses in the world, and the proof is in the horses we\'ve produced. Don\'t forget that, and just say no to synth.

[SoCalMan2]

Why can\'t there be three types of surfaces and three types of championships?  If expanding the breeders cup to two days was a good idea, why not expand it to three or four days?  People can pick and choose whether they like dirt, turf, synth or some combination and everybody just does what they like.  Let the free market decide.  The problem is when people suggest that one surface can determine the championship for another surface (which is what has happened nowadays with the way the breeders cup is [dis]organized).  Are we going to hear next year that the synthetic horses are being prejudiced because the cup is being run on dirt for two years?  Personally, I prefer dirt, but if others prefer synthetic I do not begrudge them that. Why not run some synthetic championships at Arlington while the cup is being run at CD?  To have a battle between dirt and synth adherents is a surefire way to kill the sport even more than it is already being slaughtered.  We do not need to be alienating fans, we need to be including them. To quote Rodney King, why cant we all just get along?

[Funny Cide]

My response would be \"Why?\"  Why do we need a third surface?  We were doing just fine with the 2 surfaces, and no one complained about the supposed need for a third surface that \"levels the playing field\" for Europeans to be able to compete against our dirt horses until we put in a third surface that doesn\'t \"level the playing field\" but instead gives an advantage to Europeans and turf horses, and totally takes our dirt horses out of the equation.  

We installed synths because they were thought to be a panacea.  No more break downs, or at least a significant decrease in break downs. Well, the break downs have continued, hind leg injuries are way up, as are soft tissue injuries (which may not kill as often but have a very negative result nonetheless).  We\'ve had two jockeys paralyzed at one meet on the synth at Arlington, due to the very lack of slide/give in the surface that is causing problems to the horses.  If synths aren\'t the panacea, not serving its one intended purpose, why should we keep them?  All to the tune of millions and millions of dollars, confusion, and pretty much total chaos?