Data show synthetic surfaces reducing horse racing fatalitie

[MaryS]

http://www.kentucky.com/2013/03/08/2548 ... ucing.html

[Thinkinproblem]

Wow, I would imagine these numbers make the proponents of dirt surfaces a little uncomfortable. Numbers are numbers, and at some point the evidence becomes irrefutable.

[Suddenice]

But you can't prepare a horse for the Triple Crown on synthetics so don't expect any changes soon. Just like the Lasix issue, the numbers don't lie so let's just ignore them when it comes to change 'tradition'.

[Srotagtbs]

All I got out of that article is that we should ban Synthetic surfaces...

[Thinkinproblem]

The fatality rate on dirt is twice that of synthetics, and the gap is widening. The Jockey Club would not "spin" the data would they? I think JC is impartial.

[Suddenice]

When folks read this:

"Surface-to-surface comparisons continue to show a broader difference, however. In 2012, the fatality rate per 1,000 starts on synthetic surfaces was 1.03 compared to 2.10 on dirt and 1.74 on turf.

The instances of fatalities on synthetic tracks have regularly been found to be lower than those on dirt since data began being tracked in 2009, but the gap between the two has widened as more tracks have contributed data."

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2013/03/08/2548 ... rylink=cpy

And concludes this:

All I got out of that article is that we should ban Synthetic surfaces...

How can there be any positive change in this industry.

[Srotagtbs]

When folks read this:

"Surface-to-surface comparisons continue to show a broader difference, however. In 2012, the fatality rate per 1,000 starts on synthetic surfaces was 1.03 compared to 2.10 on dirt and 1.74 on turf.

The instances of fatalities on synthetic tracks have regularly been found to be lower than those on dirt since data began being tracked in 2009, but the gap between the two has widened as more tracks have contributed data."

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2013/03/08/2548 ... rylink=cpy

And concludes this:

All I got out of that article is that we should ban Synthetic surfaces...

How can there be any positive change in this industry.

My "conclusion" was tongue-in-cheek given the myriad of posts that stated what I did at the time Synthetic surfaces were installed. Many posts (across many different sites, not just here on the DMFF) had the conclusion that Synthetics were hurting the game (and the animal) given the little amount of data. As time goes on, the opposite is being proven.

[Southieboy]

The fatality rate on dirt is twice that of synthetics, and the gap is widening. The Jockey Club would not "spin" the data would they? I think JC is impartial.

Of the eight synthetic tracks, five (KEE, WO, DMR, HOL, AP) offer a high number of quality races - and two of which run short meets. The dirt tracks also take in bottom feeder tracks such as the Los Al's, Beulah's, and Penn National's of north america where fatalities are frequent.

If you took BEL, SAR, MTH, SA and CD, I think the numbers would be much closer to each other during the same study period.

[Suddenice]

The fatality rate on dirt is twice that of synthetics, and the gap is widening. The Jockey Club would not "spin" the data would they? I think JC is impartial.

Of the eight synthetic tracks, five (KEE, WO, DMR, HOL, AP) offer a high number of quality races - and two of which run short meets. The dirt tracks also take in bottom feeder tracks such as the Los Al's, Beulah's, and Penn National's of north america where fatalities are frequent.

If you took BEL, SAR, MTH, SA and CD, I think the numbers would be much closer to each other during the same study period.

There is a higher fatality rate at Santa Anita with a newer dirt track than Golden Gate with an older synthetic track.

[Andymays]

The fatality rate on dirt is twice that of synthetics, and the gap is widening. The Jockey Club would not "spin" the data would they? I think JC is impartial.

Of the eight synthetic tracks, five (KEE, WO, DMR, HOL, AP) offer a high number of quality races - and two of which run short meets. The dirt tracks also take in bottom feeder tracks such as the Los Al's, Beulah's, and Penn National's of north america where fatalities are frequent.

If you took BEL, SAR, MTH, SA and CD, I think the numbers would be much closer to each other during the same study period.

Quit telling the truth Southieboy. LOL


Santa Anita re-worked the surface prior to last years Breeders' Cup and added 1000 tons of sand. I didn't like it at first as a handicapper but since then I think the surface has turned into an all around pretty good surface.