…”We don’t need (more) vets, we need track experts."
https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/236850/baffert-calls-for-added-scientific-approach-to-surfaces
I agree. Having proper footing really is a skill that most, if any, vets actually have knowledge about. People that work on track or performance surfaces daily is who needs to be called in. While he is claiming science, I think he’s wanting experience. Footing in other disciplines are regularly studied and changed to enhance performance and lower injury rates.
I know now on barrel racing there is a specific company used for the NFR dirt. This dirt has to support all types of events and then handle barrel racing. This is a hard feat yet there’s minimal injuries that occur. Personally, I think synthetic needs to go and a good solid sand/dirt track needs to be maintained.
Adding more sand does increase injury, which is why the base is so important. It helps to drain the footing, give support to concussion, helps to lower rates of slipping, and also adds support and energy.
Just my humble thoughts.
1 Like
I wish he had spoken out this past spring. It shouldn’t have just been Shelbe Ruis.
For that matter, Madeline Auerbach could have done more instead of crapping all over the track on her way out.
2 Likes
I agree it’s a little late. But at least someone who the powers-that-be will listen to is speaking out now.
2 Likes
So how many track experts are out there? 3? 7?
I’m glad he spoke out. :yes:
I’m curious about several of his statements, particularly about Churchill being “dialed in.” But my curiosity stems from my own ignorance of surface management.
Southern California seems like an especially tricky management situation because you have a lot of the same hot/dry weather, until the rains come. Is there a magic surface that can handle such differences?
Reposting Life of the Track Superintendent.
https://www.paulickreport.com/news/the-biz/life-of-the-track-superintendent-a-long-days-night/
There is not a program to train people to maintain a racing surface. Looks like most people learn on the job. And the most important thing is that the weather report be correct.
I don’t understand Baffert’s comments about CD either, especially if the information in this article is correct,
“Among those tracks that didn’t make statistics available through the EID website was Churchill Downs, the most recognizable track in the U.S. The Louisville Courier-Journal, through public records requests, confirmed the fatality rate at Churchill Downs last year was 2.73 per 1,000 starts, the highest in the country next to Hawthorne, near Chicago, which had a 2.99. Last year, Santa Anita’s fatality rate was 2.04.”
https://www.latimes.com/sports/more/la-sp-horse-racing-deaths-santa-anita-20190711-story.html
Certainly easy to check and confirm that no, of the tracks that disclose fatality rates and are accredited by the NTRA’s Safety and Integrity Alliance, Churchill Downs in not on the list (at least as of March, 2019).
In addition, since March 2012, racetracks have been able to voluntarily publish their statistics from the EID in the Safety Initiatives section of The Jockey Club website. There are 25 tracks that self-reported during 2018, and their aggregate rate was 1.51. On average, the lowest average rate (1.45) was seen among the following tracks that disclose their fatality rates and are accredited by the National Thoroughbred Racing Association’s Safety and Integrity Alliance.
- Aqueduct Racetrack
- Belmont Park
- Del Mar Thoroughbred Club
- Golden Gate Fields
- Gulfstream Park
- Indiana Grand Race Course
- Keeneland
- Laurel Park
- Pimlico Race Course
- Santa Anita Park
- Saratoga Race Course
- Suffolk Downs
- Turfway Park
- Woodbine Racetrack
http://jockeyclub.com/default.asp?section=Resources&area=10&story=1105
1 Like
I think its unfair to blame strictly the surface and the science of the surface. Sure, the surface can play a role in soundness and injuries and California has some tricky weather… dry 90% of the time but a rainy season as well. Santa Anita is known to be very deep. Combine that with sealing the track every time it rains, now it becomes concrete to run on.
But has anyone else looked at the statistics as a whole and then continue to blame the surfaces?
in the 2017-2018 racing season:
40 Horses died at Los Alamitos
30 horses died at Golden Gate
12 died at Del Mar
44 horses died at Santa Anita (10 on dirt racing, 10 on turd racing, 17 in training on dirt. 7 died from other causes)
81% of the deaths in that season, above, were severe leg injuries that resulted in Euth.
In 1994-1995 season:
45 horses died at Santa Anita
19 Died at Del Mar
38 Died at Los Al
Del Mar’s meet recently opened. On the third day of racing , 2 horses died and 1 was severely injured.
Lets travel to the east coast:
10 horses died at NY tracks over the span of 9 days. 50 horses have died since January at NY’s tracks. 1,357 deaths have been recorded between 2009 and 2018 at NY tracks.
Finger Lakes has recorded the most deaths. 43 deaths in 2009, 62 in 2011, and 40 in 2013.
66 horses died at Belmont in 2010 and in that same year, 64 died at Finger Lakes.
I don’t have time to go and compile the list of all of the Equine deaths in NY thus far this year but between Belmont, Finger Lakes and Saratoga, the total deaths from about June to today is over 30 horses (from injuries, I excluded all non racing deaths). Saratoga death numbers are, historically, high despite the short season at the track.
And let me end this post by fully acknowledging that racing deaths will never be brought to 0. Horses will get injured in racing just as they do in any other discipline. BUT what are we doing to these horses that is causing such high amounts of horse deaths? Has anyone looked at the rigors of extreme sales prep and early strenuous training on yearlings and 2 yr olds as a contributing factor? <-- this is the biggest issue if you ask me.
What type of work is being done back in the barn to screen horses for unseen leg injuries that can be undetected otherwise? Has anyone reviewed or looked into the amount of and type of drugs and supplements being fed and how those may contribute>? Has anyone reviewed previous injury history on each horse that dies and how that could play a role in fatal break down? Did the horse not start as a 4 yr old because of soundness issues? Did the horse have any prolonged period of time off due to soundness/injury in its career? Did the horse have a history of soreness or lameness without prolonged period of time off? Why are we breeding stallions and unraced mares who had very short or non existent racing careers due to soundness issues?
For me, the injuries and breakdowns go far beyond the racing surface. And as I have said before, until trainers and owners are willing to look inwards at their current practices; the amount of equine deaths will not waver. Let them resurface Santa Anita; I hope they do. And lets see how much it truly affects the injury reports. Lets start at the surface but continue to look at what we can do differently in this industry for the sake of our equine athletes and not so much cashing the check at the end of the day on a sales topper.
3 Likes
He is pointing out that there is not much science involved in track maintenance. It’s people who learn on the job. There is not a formal training program, and to the best of my knowledge, no industry wide standards etc. The track superintendents are completely dedicated to their jobs and live and breathe track maintenance. But they have a lack of resources - both professional and sometimes financial - to do their jobs. And as many have pointed out, they have to make decisions for the afternoon races pretty early in the day, and are dependent on weather reports.
Funny, always thought SA was known to be hard and fast except for the way they prepped it for the BC races.
But thanks for recapping over 20 years of publicly available statistics. Nice catch pointing out the 10 horses who died racing on turds.
9 Likes
IMO, counting deaths is of marginal significance if you don’t also factor in the number of starts over which the deaths occurred.
2 Likes
😂. You just made me spit out some really good wine.
2 Likes
Clearly the conversation we need to be having is how manure management affects the racing surface. :lol:
5 Likes
Not quite the same, but I was listening to a sports talk show today that discussed the use of a “field consultant” for NFL games. Last year a high profile game that was scheduled to take place in Mexico City was cancelled because the field conditions (a soccer field, that was torn up from holding concerts there) were too poor. This year, today, they were able to hold a game there because the arena work with a “field consultant” recommended by the NFL. Here’s an article on it if anyone’s interested: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28047868/nfl-game-mexico-city-played-improved-field-estadio-azteca
2 Likes
In my unpopular opinion, Santa Anita needs to install Tapeta. Most everything else has been done and won’t be enough to significantly reduce the breakdowns to a level that the AR people back off. I worry that racing in SoCal will not survive in the current climate. So, no racing or back to synthetic are most likely choices. Though trainers such as Baffert will never allow the tracks to get away from dirt.
Other suggestion is to eliminate or greatly reduce the number of claiming races. Wish we could figure out a way to use a handicap system such as they do in Europe. Too many trainers play hot potato with the lower level horses --patch them up and send them back out. Would be nice if there was a way to level the playing field for the lower level races such that they didn’t have to switch barns all the time.
And…eliminate shock wave treatments and track and limit joint injections to no more than 2-3 times yearly.
And…increase field size by giving lower level horses a place to run. The maiden races and starter allowance races have full fields, but once you break your maiden, unless you are an allowance horse, not really anywhere to run. These horses fall down the ladder to the cheap claimers. And even the cheap open claimers at Santa Anita are pretty fast horses–mostly older allowance horses who have some “issues” or are slowing down with age.
Would love to see Santa Anita with a big turf course outside and an inner Tapeta course. But…will never happen.
1 Like
@jolise Is it Tapeta specifically you think is the answer? I ask because Santa Anita had two separate artificial surfaces: Cushion Track from 2007 to 2008, which was then replaced with Pro-Ride from 2008 until 2010 when it was ripped out and dirt was re-installed.
They had problems with fatalities on both surfaces, specifically the Pro-Ride. Neither surface ever functioned correctly in the SoCal weather and drainage was a constant problem.
From my own limited experience (actually, I have pretty extensive experience with Tapeta), I don’t think the three formulations are so different that the results would be different on the third try.
1 Like
I’ve run something like almost 50 races on Tapeta. It is not a panacea. It works (sort of) at Golden Gate because the track is right on the bay and there is fog and moisture. Albany has 60 degree summers. Arcadia has 100 degree summers. Tapeta, like all of the synthetics I am aware of, is partially made of wax. On a hot day, you could see heat shimmering off of it and it smelled like cooking rubber.
Synthetics were simply a disaster at Santa Anita before. I distinctly remember cancellations on the all weather surfaces because um, we experienced weather and the entire track wouldn’t drain. It would have been funny if California racing hadn’t spent $50 million acting as guinea pigs for surfaces that ultimately didn’t work in the climate where they were installed.
No, Tapeta in Arcadia is not the answer and it is a really expensive diversion.
Don’t laugh–that was actually a thing. I don’t recall if it was Pro ride or Cushion Track but one of the issues with it is that manure degraded it so they had a poop patrol picking it off as soon as possible. Again, it would have been hysterically funny except for the fact that it was ridiculously expensive to install and maintain, and horses --and people–got hurt on it. Those stats measure catastrophics. They don’t address bowed tendons, or stifle injuries or hock problems.
1 Like
As I understand it the Tapeta surface currently available is the 10th generation. It is supposed to be a big improvement over the early Tapeta surfaces. I’ve been told that the product has changed significantly since then.
From the Tapeta website:
Since the original Tapeta Racetracks were built at Presque Isle Downs and Golden Gate Fields in 2007, Tapeta Footings has continuously strived to improve the Tapeta surface. At the forefront of that research is the safety of both horse and rider.
A substantial research and development programme has been in place for over 20 years utilizing the Tapeta Farm training surface and laboratory. The current Tapeta version, Tapeta 10, is the result of 10 years of dedicated study of the impact of training Thoroughbred racehorses on surfaces around the world in many different climatic conditions.
Tapeta Footings continues to improve the Tapeta surface to make training and racing as safe as possible for the Thoroughbred racehorse. Our research will not stop at Tapeta 10 and we are currently working towards Tapeta 11. We encourage potential customers of Tapeta to visit Tapeta tracks and our Laboratory to witness our efforts to improve our surface.
Could be it’s worth another look.
1 Like
