The good news is that when you Google “dirt vs. polytrack,” my post on this topic is the first link that comes up. The bad news is that when you Google “dirt vs. polytrack,” my post is the first link that comes up. What does it say about the information out there on this topic that my little blog entry is the first hit? Michael’s post on Curb My Enthusiasm from May 2006 is the fifth hit.

Here’s your rundown:

Link #1: Me, as noted above.

Link #2: Advice on handicapping on synthetic surfaces from betus.com.

Link #3: A PowerPoint from Dr. Rick Davis, equine medical director at UC Davis and the California Horse Racing Board, from 2006. Interesting info, with little specific information about racing surfaces.

Link #4: A 2006 page from Keeneland’s website, marketing its Polytrack surface; this link does include statistical information about field sizes, horses in training, and number of injuries. The data appear to have been compiled by Keeneland.

Link #5: As noted above, Michael’s May 06 post.

It’s great for Michael and me that we’re getting such good publicity, but deplorable that so little real information is out there about one of the major issues facing racing.

And to give credit where credit is due, I started this little odyssey at StatCounter, which provides my information on who’s visiting this site and where people are finding out about it. Technology continues to amaze me, so I found it totally cool that StatCounter tells me that a bunch of people have discovered me by searching for information on racing surfaces.

Here’s hoping that before too long, science and not opinion will be prominent as people look for answers to their questions about track surfaces.