Sand makes for the best race track surface according to the document. It has good hardness, structural damping, and friction damping properties which helps reduce hoof impact and shock on horses. Sand can also control friction by adding or removing water, unlike other surfaces like wood chips. While other materials like asphalt, gravel, and wood saw dust are cheaper, they are much harder on horses' hooves, joints and tendons over time.

1. RACE TRACK SURFACES
Which track surface
reduces hoof impact
and shock?
ASPHALT WOOD CHIPS GRAVEL WOOD SAW DUST SAND
HARDNESS
STRUCTURAL DAMPING
FRICTION DAMPING
HARDNESS
STRUCTURAL DAMPING
FRICTION DAMPING
HARDNESS
STRUCTURAL DAMPING
FRICTION DAMPING
HARDNESS
STRUCTURAL DAMPING
FRICTION DAMPING
HARDNESS
STRUCTURAL DAMPING
FRICTION DAMPING
HARDNESS
STRUCTURAL DAMPING
FRICTION DAMPING
GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD
GOODGOOD GOOD
POOR POOR
POOR POOR POOR
GOODGOODPOOR POOR POOR POOR
Asphalt is a cheap
track but will take
a toll on horses
hooves, Joints,
and Tendons.
Wood Chips are
Cheap but have
to be replaced
and cannot
control friction
with water like
sand.
Gravel, a lot like
asphalt is cheap
but is very hard
on the horses
physically.
Wood is Surprisingly
good for some
impact on hooves
but is not a good
surface for traction
and friction.
Saw Dust makes
for a good track
surface in almost
all areas except
that its hard to
get the amounted
needed for a track
and needs to be
replaced often.
Sand makes for the
best track surface
because of its
properties that keeps
wear and tear down
on horses also it can
be changed by adding
water or drying it out
to enhance properties.
BARRE, E., В. LANDJERIT, and R. Wolter. "Shock and vibration during the
hoof impact on different track surfaces." Training 1.94.6 (1991):
94-6.
Crevier-Denoix, N., Pourcelot, P., Ravary, B., Robin, D., Falala, S., Uzel, S., Grison, A.-C., Valette, J.-P.,
Denoix, J.-M. and Chateau, H. (2009), Influence of track surface on the equine superficial digital
flexor tendon loading in two horses at high speed trot. Equine Veterinary Journal, 41: 257–261. doi:
10.2746/042516409X394445