Horse Racing: Synthetic, Less than Dirt
There has been a long standing debate in the horse racing community as to the safety of synthetic surfaces compared to dirt and so far there is no sign of a resolution. The supporters of both are holding on to their points of views.
Earlier this year Glasgow University epidemiologist, Tim Parkin’s conducted a study and compared horse racing fatalities on synthetic and dirt surfaces. The study found no significant difference. That battle was a draw but this Thursday’s events clearly go in favour of dirt.
Californian horse owners and trainers rallied against the Santa Anita’s synthetic surface forcing the Californian Horse Racing Board to give in and reject Oak Tree Racing’s bid to hold their fall event at Santa Anita. This battle belongs to dirt. Despite assurances from Santa Anita, horse owners refused to sign a contract to race on the track.
Even before the announcement of the cancellation of Oak Tree was made, Chairman of Magna International, owners of the Santa Anita Park, Frank Stronach told a gathering of journalist and horse owners that the Santa Anita would begin the installation of a dirt track as soon as the Oak Tree meeting concluded. Stronach won’t have to wait now, and the transition can begin much sooner.
The estimated $6 million project was to begin in October but could begin much sooner now and finish before the next major thoroughbred meeting begins in California. Stronach has always been a strong proponent of dirt and used the opportunity to push his pro-dirt agenda. Stronach’s support of dirt wins him goodwill among Californian horse owners who have lately come out strongly against synthetic surfaces. Over the past few years many races have been cancelled on synthetic surfaces because of poor track conditions.
Stronach said that he was never a fan of the synthetic surfaces and made it clear that the only reason he installed them was because of the horse racing board. Stronach was blunt and wasn't shy of taking a swing at the board and calling the move a mistake and hoping that “we never do something similar again.”
The synthetic surfaces were mandated by the California Horse Racing Board in an effort to improve equine fatality figures without any real evidence that the tracks were indeed safer. Since the synthetic tracks have been installed in California a drop in horse fatalities has been seen but due to the small overall number of synthetic tracks, the drop is not statistically significant. Soon after the tracks were installed they quickly became an object of hate with many Californian horse owners and trainers.
Stronach announcement was greeted with cheers in the crowd. The horse racing board is under increased pressure now to take by the synthetic track requirement. Sadly, the experiment with synthetic might very well come to an early end. At a glance it would appear that there are more in the horse racing community who oppose synthetic but the opinions to the contrary are just as popular.
After Santa Anita announced its plans to bring back dirt, Craig Fravel, President of Del Mar Thoroughbred Club, defended Del Mar’s synthetic surfaces. He said that what Santa Anita does with its surface is their own prerogative, Del Mar however was happy with their tracks. Craig acknowledged that there were problems with Santa Anita’s tracks and their move to switch to dirt was understandable.
However he insisted that the synthetic surface was not to blame. “When somebody says, ‘It’s synthetic tracks, they’re no good,’ I have a big problem with that,” Fravel said. Fravel said that continuing to operate on dirt was the right choice because the tracks at Del Mar were not giving them any kind of trouble and were also safer statistically. “We’d be crazy to go back.”
There is also the question of money. Racetracks have spent tens of millions of dollars on fitting synthetic surfaces and going back to dirt would mean an added cost of many millions more per track. If the track owners can get away from incurring that cost, they are going to try everything they can.
Tags: