In horse racing, there's no consensus on track surfaces
HORSE RACING
Many believe synthetic tracks can reduce injuries and deaths among horses. Others say dirt tracks, if properly maintained, are better for the sport.
In the fractious sport of horse racing, even dirt can create controversy.
The issue is dirt tracks vs. synthetic surfaces, a debate that has come to the forefront since the Eight Belles tragedy at the Kentucky Derby.
Many believe synthetic tracks, which include about 80% sand and a mixture of fibers and waxes, can reduce injuries and deaths among horses. Others say dirt tracks, if properly maintained, are better for the sport.
Thoroughbred fatalities: An article in Friday's Sports section about synthetic racing surfaces cited incorrect statistics comparing racehorse deaths on synthetic and dirt tracks. A survey by Florida racetrack veterinarian Mary Scollay found 1.47 fatalities per 1,000 starts on synthetic surfaces, not 1.95, and 2.03 fatalities on dirt, not 1.96.
The evidence, while sometimes conflicting, favors synthetic tracks. The Grayson-Jockey Club Research Foundation in Lexington, Ky., studied 60 tracks and found a 25% reduction in "catastrophic fractures" on synthetic surfaces. It reported an average of 1.47 deaths per 1,000 starts on synthetic surfaces and 2.07 deaths per 1,000 on dirt.
A different survey released this year at the Welfare and Safety of the Racehorse Summit reported a ratio of one injury every 215 starts on synthetic surfaces compared on one every 136 on dirt.
The same survey came up with a confusing 1.95 deaths per 1,000 on synthetic compared to 1.96 on dirt.
Synthetic tracks have been used for many years in Europe, but have been installed in the United States only in the past couple of years. They are in use at only nine out of 129 tracks in North America, including four in California -- Hollywood Park, Santa Anita, Del Mar and Golden Gate Fields.
The others are Arlington Park near Chicago; Turfway Park and Keeneland in Kentucky; Woodbine near Toronto; and Presque Isle in Erie, Pa. These five tracks voluntarily made the change partly because of racing days lost to cold-weather conditions.
The California Horse Racing Board voted to require most of the state's major tracks to install the synthetic surfaces by the end of 2007 in hopes of reducing the fatality rate among horses.
Critics called it a rush to judgment, saying more experimentation was needed. They got some ammunition along the way.
The new mandated main track at Del Mar was fast in the morning but, under the afternoon sun, became slow.
Then, in January and February, Santa Anita lost an unprecedented 11 days of racing -- although three were made up -- because of heavy rains and a drainage problem with its new track.
Repairs were made and the drainage problem went away, but the Arcadia facility, which spent nearly $11 million to install its synthetic surface last summer, will have to replace it or overhaul it this summer.
