Dollars over Horse’s Health? An exploration of Tracks Used in U.S. Racing

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

{Editor’s note: Below is a radio script minimally edited, so please read it as you would a script. But you should also just listen to the above audio. It’s been specially crafted for your ear}

Every one of the Triple Crown events will be run on dirt tracks. Some members of U.S. horse racing want to end that tradition and lay down potentially safer, though much more expensive, synthetic tracks. But with grandstands increasingly empty, critics say track owners are putting profits over safety.

Like every other stop of the Triple Crown, Pimlico has a dirt track. Critics say dirt is more harmful for horses than the new generation of synthetic race tracks. Former jockey and horse trainer Michael Dickinson was dubbed the “genius” of horse racing in his native Britain. He now manufactures Tapeta tracks – a hodge-podge of wax, sand, recycled clothes and, of course, some secret materials.

“We want it pliable. We want it obedient. It’s an obedient surface. Unlike my wife, my race track will do anything I ask it to do,” the retired jockey  and trainer says while showing off his concoction at his stables.

The Jockey Club reports nearly 50% fewer horse fatalities on synthetic surfaces than on their dirt counterparts. That’s part of the reason Dickinson loves showing off his spongy version.

“See how it bounces back. It’s got life to it. But he’s got to have stability from the rear end, so when he pushes it off he doesn’t want to be spinning his wheels,” he says while bouncing on his track tucked inside his majestic 200 acre plot of land.

With so many horses avoiding catastrophic injuries, Dickinson’s business is expanding in the U.K., Australia and the United Arab Emirates. It’s even the surface for the Dubai World Cup. But those customers are overseas. Dickinson doesn’t manufacture his product in the states anymore. There’s just no market.

“The only reason not to put a synthetic in is the cost,” he contends. “They’re about $4 million. Okay. So it’s a big ticket item,”

It’s not all dollars and cents. Another reason synthetics haven’t caught on in the U.S. is cultural. Trainer Larry Murray’s horses have raced in the Preakness and he’s not sold on synthetics.

“It’s different. It’s different for the horses. They have different injuries because of it. And I don’t really think it’s any safer. I think a well maintained dirt track is just as good. But I think that’s the key is a well maintained dirt track,” he argues.

It’s true: veterinarian Kathleen Anderson says on dirt tracks you typically get more chipped and broken bones, while on synthetics there are harder to diagnose hind leg injuries.  Anderson treats horses at the Fair Hill Training Center in northern Maryland, which boasts a dirt track alongside its synthetic. Comparing injuries from the two tracks, Anderson chooses synthetics.

“Just like artificial turf with football players. They probably have more stress related injuries than necessarily concussion related injuries, and it’s similar with horses,” she says.

In the U.S., California took the lead on synthetics – the state’s racing commission mandates them. The results are mixed. Santa Anita Park laid a multi-million dollar synthetic course, but has won permission for a return to dirt. Mike Willman – who directs publicity at the park – says their synthetic surface proved troublesome.

“It became readily apparent very early on that we had some very serious drainage problems and we had a number of cancellations over a two year period,” he says.

The technology is improving rapidly but the skepticism has hardened and extra cash just isn’t there. Graham Motion trained the winner of  the 2011 Kentucky Derby, Animal Kingdom. He’s a fan of synthetics but says the erratic roll-out in California and elsewhere sets the technology back indefinitely.

“I’m afraid that we might have already missed the boat with the synthetics. I’m afraid that the way they were introduced to racing in this country, I think, people are so down on them I’m not sure that they’re going to be around very long,” Motion believes.

That’s a dire prediction for a technology that’s reported to save horse’s lives, but, for an industry that itself is on wobbly legs, there just doesn’t seem to be much appetite for pricey innovations in America’s horse racing industry.

 

 

Category: Uncategorized