Polytrack in New York's Future

I'm on the polytrack attack.

I've read and heard a slew of objections against using polytrack or synthetic racing surfaces at tracks across America.

If you ask me, they don't hold any weight.

Some trainers don't like polytrack because it's not natural. God didn't make it.

God didn't make rubber either. It's not natural. Rubber is made up of synthetics. But nobody minds the rubber that forms the tires on their cars.

Rubber saves lives...in many ways.

And what do you know, rubber is used in polytrack.

A slightly better argument against polytrack is that it may cause soft tissue damage to horses who run on it. This is potentially serious.

Except, are there any studies proving that natural dirt surfaces are good for soft tissue in horses? Please, feel free to share if you have a spare copy of that report that doesn't exist.

The clearest statistical trend about polytrack in relation to natural racing surfaces is that over equal periods of time, polytrack yields significantly less catastrophic injuries than natural surfaces.

I won't quantify this for several reasons, but if you don't believe me, try this thing called Google. Just search for "polytrack" and "catastrophic" at the same time.

Why isn't proof of this enough for New York's tracks to mandate the installation of synthetic surfaces? Why isn't horse safety a top priority?

I know something that many people would think is more important than the safety of stupid, smelly horses and that is the safety of jockeys. Jockeys are people too! It's true and you know it.

The most plausible argument I've read about is that polytrack doesn't seal up in wet conditions with the same quality as natural surfaces. That is probably more true than not.

Research never sleeps, so I'm confident the best of artifical racing surfaces are on the horizon.

I'm resolute that the use of polytrack and similar artificial surfaces in horse racing have so many more pros than cons, that I believe we're supposed to act on it.