Comprehensive equine H&S recommendations in NY.

[curious]

19 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

What is the cite?

 

New Veterinary Medicine Findings from University of Glasgow Outlined (Risk factors associated with fatal injuries in Thoroughbred racehorses competing in flat racing in the United States and Canada). (2016, October 31). Veterinary Week, 48. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A468461947/AONE?u=anon~6c7c13b2&sid=sitemap&xid=b08f0d6b

[curious]

Georgopoulos SP, Parkin TD. Risk factors associated with fatal injuries in Thoroughbred racehorses competing in flat racing in the United States and Canada. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2016 Oct 15;249(8):931-939. doi: 10.2460/javma.249.8.931. PMID: 27700272.

[curious]

52 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

 

0.42% of 4,500 is 18.9.  I rounded up to 0.5 because it is roughly midway between 0.42% and 0.63%.

That's 18.9 not 1.89.

Yeahh sorry. Think it should be .63/1000 and .42/1000 respectively.

[Chief Stipe]

1 hour ago, curious said:

Georgopoulos SP, Parkin TD. Risk factors associated with fatal injuries in Thoroughbred racehorses competing in flat racing in the United States and Canada. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2016 Oct 15;249(8):931-939. doi: 10.2460/javma.249.8.931. PMID: 27700272.

Overall they found a fatality rate of 1.9 per 1000 i.e. 0.19%.

1 hour ago, curious said:

Think it should be .63/1000 and .42/1000 respectively.

Which is way higher than the Georgopoulos SP, et. al. Study.

The difference between Synthetic and Turf was 0.04% (0.11% vs 0.15%).  Or 1 horse in 2,500.

 

[curious]

37 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Overall they found a fatality rate of 1.9 per 1000 i.e. 0.19%.

Which is way higher than the Georgopoulos SP, et. al. Study

I don't see how .42 per 1000 is higher than 1.9 per 1000?

[Chief Stipe]

19 minutes ago, curious said:

I don't see how .42 per 1000 is higher than 1.9 per 1000?

You were at one stage mixing up whole numbers and percentages.  You quoted 0.42%.  1.9 per 1000 is 0.19%.  The actually overall fatality rate is 0.19% or 1.9 horses per 1000.

[curious]

My point is that when you said "you can't beat a turf track", that's not the case on an equine safety basis. Synthetics are well demonstrated to be safer, especially Tapeta. I still don't understand why they put polytracks in here in preference. That's why the NYRA are installing Tapeta at all their tracks after extensive investigation per the headpost. There is no evidence anywhere that I have seen that turf tracks are safer or more reliable in any way, and you haven't produced any.

[Chief Stipe]

31 minutes ago, curious said:

My point is that when you said "you can't beat a turf track", that's not the case on an equine safety basis. Synthetics are well demonstrated to be safer, especially Tapeta.

Not based on the research you have posted can you come to such an emphatic conclusion.

32 minutes ago, curious said:

I still don't understand why they put polytracks in here in preference.

But isn't a polytrack exactly the same as a Tapeta i.e. a surface made from a mixture of silica sand, wax and artificial fibres.

Tapeta:  a Thoroughbred Racing and Training surface comprised of a carefully selected mixture of the finest silica sand, wax and fibres that have been extensively researched and simulate the root structure of turf.

Martin Collins Polytrack:  A mixture of silica sand, recycled synthetic fibers (carpet & spandex) and recycled rubber/pvc. In cold climates, the mixture may also include jelly cable (plastic insulation from copper phone wire). The entire mixture is coated with wax.

What's the difference?

39 minutes ago, curious said:

There is no evidence anywhere that I have seen that turf tracks are safer or more reliable in any way, and you haven't produced any.

I don't believe the evidence you produced is conclusive.  I also haven't seen any evidence or properly structured research to prove one way or another.

The research that has been quoted from what I can see is an analysis of the data contained in the North American Equine Injury Database (EID).

Canadian authorities have also claimed that the improvement in fatality statistics is related to changes in withholding times.

Do you consider the Flemington or Moone Valley Strathayr courses Turf or artificial?

[curious]

6 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Not based on the research you have posted can you come to such an emphatic conclusion.

Well where's the evidence for you to conclude that turf tracks can't be beaten?

And yes, I consider Strathayrs to be turf i.e. grass, though I'm not clear how that matters.

[Freda]

This is an interesting topic [even though I tune out when the figures/percentages come in]

Another factor, covered, to some extent, by the displayed data about number of races, age, workouts, etc...is the potential for catastrophic injury already carried by horses as a result of prior exertion.

Something that here, we have absolutely no idea about.  Obviously, the cost of scanning each and every horse on a regular basis is enormous and prohibitive in the NZ context.  But, we do know that injuries don't as rule just 'happen' whatever the track surface is.

Even just from my little corner of the track, there can be many horses go past where I tie up looking anything but sound....and a slight lessening of bone density, for example, isn't necessarily accompanied by obvious lameness either.  A complex subject.

[Freda]

12 hours ago, curious said:

My point is that when you said "you can't beat a turf track", that's not the case on an equine safety basis. Synthetics are well demonstrated to be safer, especially Tapeta. I still don't understand why they put polytracks in here in preference. That's why the NYRA are installing Tapeta at all their tracks after extensive investigation per the headpost. There is no evidence anywhere that I have seen that turf tracks are safer or more reliable in any way, and you haven't produced any.

Polytracks were the only option considered.  Saundry had some connection, Reid Sanders is a former stipe from here, a lot of back-scratching.

[curious]

13 minutes ago, Freda said:

Polytracks were the only option considered.  Saundry had some connection, Reid Sanders is a former stipe from here, a lot of back-scratching.

Back-scratching or back-handers?

[Freda]

31 minutes ago, curious said:

Back-scratching or back-handers?

Make your own mind up about that !

Edited August 4, 2024 by Freda

[Chief Stipe]

14 hours ago, curious said:

And yes, I consider Strathayrs to be turf i.e. grass, though I'm not clear how that matters

If you accept that definition then you accept there is as much variance amongst turf tracks as you infer there is amongst synthetics.

BTW Tapeta is a Trademark/Brand Name.  Apart from that there is no difference between Tapeta and the NZ Polytrack AWT's.

Their perceived safety is negated without proper maintenance/grooming at least once a day and ideally between each race.  Not to mention the appropriate watering.

[Chief Stipe]

2 hours ago, Freda said:

This is an interesting topic [even though I tune out when the figures/percentages come in]

Another factor, covered, to some extent, by the displayed data about number of races, age, workouts, etc...is the potential for catastrophic injury already carried by horses as a result of prior exertion.

Something that here, we have absolutely no idea about.  Obviously, the cost of scanning each and every horse on a regular basis is enormous and prohibitive in the NZ context.  But, we do know that injuries don't as rule just 'happen' whatever the track surface is.

Even just from my little corner of the track, there can be many horses go past where I tie up looking anything but sound....and a slight lessening of bone density, for example, isn't necessarily accompanied by obvious lameness either.  A complex subject.

I see no measures about the natural attrition/fatality rate of horses.  What I know is it isn't zero.

[Chief Stipe]

14 hours ago, curious said:

Well where's the evidence for you to conclude that turf tracks can't be beaten?

One of the studies you cited (the only one) essentially shows no difference.

[Chief Stipe]

3 hours ago, Freda said:

Polytracks were the only option considered.  Saundry had some connection, Reid Sanders is a former stipe from here, a lot of back-scratching

 

2 hours ago, curious said:

Back-scratching or back-handers?

Isn't the only question that should be asked is why ANY synthetic track(s) (x 3) should have been considered?

The answer was originally to reduce meeting abandonments.  Well that hasn't happened.

Still haven't seen a proper business case which reminds me of what wound @Pitman up so much.

If my intuition is correct I would guess that the maintenance on the AWT'S is being short changed.  If it isn't then in the absence of substantially increased funding then something else must be suffering.  The rose gardens perhaps?

 

[Freda]

I think the thrice-yearly visits by Martin Collins staff is part of the contract - so, in theory, no extra cost incurred for that. The local track staff have been applauded for the good job they are doing.  However, as far as replenishing material that has lost resilience, body and structure, no idea what is planned to remedy that.

[curious]

[Chief Stipe]

1 hour ago, curious said:

Need more information on the specific composition of the tracks.  Different variations of Tapeta AND Polytrack.

[curious]

12 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Need more information on the specific composition of the tracks.  Different variations of Tapeta AND Polytrack.

Doesn't matter much if there's not enough on there to provide a cushion or if it's not evenly groomed to cover the substrate. This is from the finish of the last at Awapuni a week ago. It's supposed to have 175mm of top mix and the sand should not be separated out. Didn't get the HD of this but it sure doesn't look good.

[Freda]

175 top mix?

[curious]

6 minutes ago, Freda said:

175 top mix?

At least. In the below it says 7"compacted and a further loose 3" above that. Mostly I've seen 7" total. For Tapeta it's less 100-175mm.

[Freda]

39 minutes ago, curious said:

At least. In the below it says 7"compacted and a further loose 3" above that. Mostly I've seen 7" total. For Tapeta it's less 100-175mm.

150 mm here

[curious]

25 minutes ago, Freda said:

150 mm here

Probably some variance of design characteristics based on climate and other conditions.