Bob, I'm a big believer in statistics.

I'm also a very big believer in statistical anomalies.

Who says breakdowns were reduced from 16 to 3 first off? The track or polyturfs manufacturer? Maybe Turfway has an interest in promoting itself as the safe winter haven. I'm always weary of vested interests. But lets assume we are past vested interests and not involved in "happy talk" pertaining to how safe the track is.

What if "serious breakdowns" really have decreased from 16 to 3 over the course of that year? What does that really mean? Is one year sufficient to throw all caution to the wind and conclude polyturf is safer than traditional surfaces regardless of the aging process?

Prudence to me would require more than one year's breakdown statistics. And that would apply to any track and any surface, but it applies especially to polyturf.

bobphilo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Chuckles,
>
> My remark about Beyer being the country’s “worst
> handicapper” was partly a joke in which Andy
> himself goes along with, though his handicapping
> skills don’t quite match his figure making skills.
> I was very serious about how irresponsible of him
> to be against Polytrack despite the fact that he
> believes, and gives example after example of the
> surfaces greater safety. Look at the fact that
> it’s endorsed by virtually every trainer or jockey
> who ride on it. Since it’s installation at Turfway
> catastrophic breakdowns have dropped from 16 to
> 3.!!! All other evidence points to the same
> conclusion. How many horse and riders could be
> injured or killed in the 10 or 20 years you
> propose to decide which surface is safer. We have
> to go with what all the data and preponderance of
> evidence shows is safer at this point. I’m all for
> preserving tradition at the “meccas” but the lives
> of horses and riders comes first. In any case, if
> a homogeneity of racing surfaces means a fair and
> uniform racing surface along with a safer racing,
> I’ll take it. It’s not like predicting the
> variations of horses’ abilities and form cycles
> won’t present enough handicapping challenges. In
> any case, certain things take priority over some
> handicapper’s track bias angles.
>
> Bob
>