Tapeta vs Polytrack Explained: Key Differences in UK Synthetic Horse Racing Surfaces and Which Tracks Use Them

Tapeta vs Polytrack explained in simple terms. Here’s what separates the UK’s two main all-weather racing surfaces, which tracks use them, and why it matters for betting.

If you’ve ever checked a racecard and seen Tapeta or Polytrack, you might have wondered what the real difference is and whether it actually matters. It does.

Understanding Tapeta vs Polytrack racing surfaces in the UK can help you assess form properly and avoid a common mistake: assuming all all-weather tracks ride the same. They don’t.

What Are UK All-Weather Racing Surfaces?

All-weather racing in the UK is run on synthetic tracks designed to:

• Reduce weather cancellations
• Provide year-round consistency
• Improve safety for horses and jockeys

The two main surfaces are:

• Tapeta
• Polytrack

Both are artificial, but they ride differently and certain horses clearly prefer one over the other.

Tapeta: Surface Profile and UK Tracks

Tapeta is made from sand, rubber, fibre and wax. It’s designed to offer cushioning similar to turf while remaining consistent in all conditions.

How Tapeta Rides

• Slightly deeper surface
• Often suits strong finishers and stamina types
• Can ride slower, especially in colder weather

UK Racecourses Using Tapeta

• Wolverhampton
• Newcastle
• Southwell (switched from Fibresand in 2021)

When analysing races at these tracks, I always prioritise proven Tapeta form.

Polytrack: Surface Profile and UK Tracks

Polytrack is made from sand, synthetic fibres, recycled rubber and wax. It was one of the first synthetic surfaces introduced in Britain.

How Polytrack Rides

• Generally slightly quicker than Tapeta
• Can favour tactical speed
• Suits horses that travel smoothly and quicken

UK Racecourses Using Polytrack

• Kempton Park
• Lingfield Park
• Chelmsford City

Pace and draw still matter at these venues, but surface preference can be crucial.

Why Surface Type Matters for Betting

This is where many punters get it wrong.

Strong Kempton Polytrack form doesn’t automatically translate to Wolverhampton on Tapeta. Likewise, a Newcastle Tapeta specialist may not show the same turn of foot at Chelmsford.

When analysing UK all-weather racing, I focus on:

• Surface-specific wins and places
• Trainer strike rates by surface
• Running style suitability
• Track-specific draw bias

It’s a small detail but that’s often where the betting edge lies.

Final Thoughts on Tapeta vs Polytrack in UK Racing

Tapeta and Polytrack may both be labelled “all-weather,” but they’re not interchangeable.

Wolverhampton isn’t Kempton.
Newcastle isn’t Chelmsford.
And Southwell is no longer the old Fibresand test it once was.

If you start factoring surface type into your betting analysis, you’ll spot patterns others miss and that’s where the advantage begins.

 

[NUGGSY]

Thanks Dave.

 

[Danny]

Quick question regards surfaces and AW form translating to turf. A friend of mine told me once that the underlay of Ascot turf course makes it react like a synthetic track. In fact he just reffered to Ascot as another All weather track. I never really doubted what he said as he had some decent results here and there with horses that had shown form on synthetics going to Ascot. If memory serves I think the first horses Wes ward sent over Strike the tiger and Jealous again were winners he sourced from races on synthetics in the states before winning at the Royal meeting (Lasix assisted of course) . He also had a couple of huge price handicap winners coming from the British all weather surfaces to big Ascot handicaps which considering the gulf between the sort of horses expected at Royal Ascot or even Ascot in general in comparison to Friday nights in the luvvly Wolverhamperton is quite something ( spelling taken from the way "buy it off the market" is sang before Uncle tells me off for not being able to spell my own hometown name).

So my question is have you ever noticed this correlation and if so are there any other turf tracks these days with a similar underlay ? Or any other turf tracks you notice where turf to All weather form translates best. Would you say there is also a difference between how fibresand form translates to turf as opposed to tapeta ?

Don't feel you have to answer Dave I just thought them interesting questions. And things may well of changed in the 20 or so years since when we we're looking at such things.

 

[pawras]

Interesting, I'm going to look at some stats on that

 

[Ian_Davies]

before Uncle tells me off for not being able to spell my own hometown name).

He knows me so well:

 

[davewatts50]

Quick question regards surfaces and AW form translating to turf. A friend of mine told me once that the underlay of Ascot turf course makes it react like a synthetic track. In fact he just reffered to Ascot as another All weather track. I never really doubted what he said as he had some decent results here and there with horses that had shown form on synthetics going to Ascot. If memory serves I think the first horses Wes ward sent over Strike the tiger and Jealous again were winners he sourced from races on synthetics in the states before winning at the Royal meeting (Lasix assisted of course) . He also had a couple of huge price handicap winners coming from the British all weather surfaces to big Ascot handicaps which considering the gulf between the sort of horses expected at Royal Ascot or even Ascot in general in comparison to Friday nights in the luvvly Wolverhamperton is quite something ( spelling taken from the way "buy it off the market" is sang before Uncle tells me off for not being able to spell my own hometown name).

So my question is have you ever noticed this correlation and if so are there any other turf tracks these days with a similar underlay ? Or any other turf tracks you notice where turf to All weather form translates best. Would you say there is also a difference between how fibresand form translates to turf as opposed to tapeta ?

Don't feel you have to answer Dave I just thought them interesting questions. And things may well of changed in the 20 or so years since when we we're looking at such things.

Hi Danny,

Some very interesting, thought-provoking comments. I really have no idea about the Ascot track and the underlay situation. However, now you’ve mentioned it, I’m going to keep it in mind and try to delve a bit deeper.

I have backed several of Wesley Ward’s horses when they’ve come to Royal Ascot and had a few winners. If you could bet on who would be winning at the 1F or 2F pole, then most of his runners would be the winners. I think that’s probably why he does so well in the dirt sprints in the States.

I think a lot of my comments about early speed and position into the first bend on the AW can translate over to the US sharp dirt tracks and most probably the sharp turf courses. I really know nothing about racing in the US other than reading books on why early speed counts.

I think the better-class horses can handle most surfaces. Kachy was probably the best sprint horse over 6F we’ve seen on the AW, especially at Lingfield going around the tight bend. His form translated quite well at Ascot in the Commonwealth Cup. You also see a number of quality turf horses competing for the big AW prize-money races.

With regard to Fibresand and how it translates to turf, I remember a jockey once saying it’s like riding on soft ground. You can’t accelerate past horses very easily.

I generally don’t take AW form to turf, and I don’t generally take turf form to AW. Some horses are fine regardless of surface, but many aren’t. That said, if the right opportunity arises, then I will bet.

September and October on the AW can be an interesting yet very tricky period, as a number of trainers start to bring horses they’ve been running on the turf onto the AW tracks. It’s a period for caution when parting with your cash.

Off the top of my head, I had a decent winner at Chelmsford in Morte Point. He was running in a Class 4 race over 7F worth about £10k, and he’d just finished second in a Class 2 race at Doncaster over 7F worth £65k, beating some very talented horses. He had no previous AW race form but had no doubt run on it at his training facility.

He obviously possessed the class to have finished second in such a strong race. In comparison, he was meeting much lesser opponents at Chelmsford. The only question was whether he would handle the surface. His record showed he had won on good ground, finished second on good to soft, and had a second on good to firm. This convinced me that the horse wasn’t ground-dependent, so he could switch to the AW. He was bang in form and running in a much easier race.

I had my bet and he won as he liked. So the classy horse that isn’t ground-dependent can win regardless of surface. These are the turf switchers that I look for in September and October especially when dropping in class after a good run.

 

[pawras]

Tapeta vs Polytrack explained in simple terms. Here’s what separates the UK’s two main all-weather racing surfaces, which tracks use them, and why it matters for betting.

If you’ve ever checked a racecard and seen Tapeta or Polytrack, you might have wondered what the real difference is and whether it actually matters. It does.

Understanding Tapeta vs Polytrack racing surfaces in the UK can help you assess form properly and avoid a common mistake: assuming all all-weather tracks ride the same. They don’t.

What Are UK All-Weather Racing Surfaces?

All-weather racing in the UK is run on synthetic tracks designed to:

• Reduce weather cancellations
• Provide year-round consistency
• Improve safety for horses and jockeys

The two main surfaces are:

• Tapeta
• Polytrack

Both are artificial, but they ride differently and certain horses clearly prefer one over the other.

Tapeta: Surface Profile and UK Tracks

Tapeta is made from sand, rubber, fibre and wax. It’s designed to offer cushioning similar to turf while remaining consistent in all conditions.

How Tapeta Rides

• Slightly deeper surface
• Often suits strong finishers and stamina types
• Can ride slower, especially in colder weather

UK Racecourses Using Tapeta

• Wolverhampton
• Newcastle
• Southwell (switched from Fibresand in 2021)

When analysing races at these tracks, I always prioritise proven Tapeta form.

Polytrack: Surface Profile and UK Tracks

Polytrack is made from sand, synthetic fibres, recycled rubber and wax. It was one of the first synthetic surfaces introduced in Britain.

How Polytrack Rides

• Generally slightly quicker than Tapeta
• Can favour tactical speed
• Suits horses that travel smoothly and quicken

UK Racecourses Using Polytrack

• Kempton Park
• Lingfield Park
• Chelmsford City

Pace and draw still matter at these venues, but surface preference can be crucial.

Why Surface Type Matters for Betting

This is where many punters get it wrong.

Strong Kempton Polytrack form doesn’t automatically translate to Wolverhampton on Tapeta. Likewise, a Newcastle Tapeta specialist may not show the same turn of foot at Chelmsford.

When analysing UK all-weather racing, I focus on:

• Surface-specific wins and places
• Trainer strike rates by surface
• Running style suitability
• Track-specific draw bias

It’s a small detail but that’s often where the betting edge lies.

Final Thoughts on Tapeta vs Polytrack in UK Racing

Tapeta and Polytrack may both be labelled “all-weather,” but they’re not interchangeable.

Wolverhampton isn’t Kempton.
Newcastle isn’t Chelmsford.
And Southwell is no longer the old Fibresand test it once was.

If you start factoring surface type into your betting analysis, you’ll spot patterns others miss and that’s where the advantage begins.

Interesting , how did you draw your conclusions that form on the different types is not interchangeable?

 

[jinnyj]

Tapeta was invented by the legend that is Michael Dickinson - interesting article on him where he talks a bit about the surface:

Michael Dickinson: how I plan to make a better life for my horses | Topics: Tapeta, Tapeta Farm, Michael Dickinson, Saeed bin Suroor | Thoroughbred Racing Commentary

Article by Paul Haigh: Legend is a sad word, virtually stripped of its original meaning and since rendered almost meaningless by repeated abuse. But, if it can still be usefully applied to anyone in racing, it has to be used to describe Michael Dickinson.

www.thoroughbredracing.com

And a bit more on the actual surface:

http://www.tapetafootings.com/why-tapeta/