OT: Best of the Best: Horse Racing

[RegisteredUconn]

Seems like a good time (Derby winner DQ'd, "Calgary Stampede" start at yesterday's Preakness) to take a fresh look at which horse should be considered the best ever. There can be several things used to measure performance. Fast times is obviously one, and the one I'll focus on.

Whenever possible apples-to-apples comparisons are preferred. Triple Crown races share these common, relevant characteristics:
1. All horses are all 3 year olds. No advantage for mature horses in their prime.
2. All horses carry 126 pounds (121 for fillies). No handicapping using weight in an attempt to even out performances for betting reasons.
3. Each race has been run at the current distance since 1926. Kentucky Derby a mile and a quarter, Preakness a mile and three-sixteenths, Belmont Stakes a mile and a half.

Triple Crown races are famous. The races attract the top talent, the best of the best run in them. Every owner/trainer/jockey would like to win even one. Winning a "Triple Crown" (a sweep of all 3 races) is so difficult only 12 horses won it in the 93 years since the distances were standardized. Sir Barton also won all 3 races in 1919 when the Preakness and Belmont were contested over different distances than today's races.

Begin with all the horses who've ever run at least one of the Triple Crown races (since 1926). Based on the finishing times of the winners for each race, select the top twelve horses for each event. The results of 278 races (the 2019 Belmont hasn't been run yet) distilled down to just 36 horses. A (potential) Triple Crown of Triple Crowns...or would it? Would any horse even qualify for all 3 races if only the 12 fastest were selected?

Just two horses would have qualified for multiple races: Affirmed would have qualified for the Derby and Belmont; and Secretariat for all 3. The vast majority of racehorses have never raced in a Triple Crown race. The vast majority of the distinguished horses that have raced in Triple Crown races wouldn't have been in one of twelve fastest winners races. Even Affirmed wouldn't have qualified for more than the Belmont Stakes if races were restricted to those 12 horses with the fastest times rather than 12 fastest winners. Sham, who lost to Secretariat and ran the second fastest time in Derby history, would have pushed Affirmed from 12th to 13th fastest time.

What Secretariat did is not just difficult, like winning a Triple Crown. What that horse did is incomprehensible. What Secretariat did would be labeled impossible if not for that fact that he did it. Secretariat not only would have qualified for each race, he would have WON each race.

Here are the win/place/show finishers for a Triple Crown of the 12 fastest winners in history.
Kentucky Derby
1. Secretariat (1973) - 1:59.4
2. Monarchos (2001) - 2:00.0
3. Northern Dancer (1964) - 2:00.0

Preakness
1. Secretariat (1973) - 1:53.0
2. Louis Quatorze (1996) - 1:53.4
3. Tank's Prospect (1985) - 1:53.4

Belmont Stakes
1. Secretariat (1973) - 2:24.0
2. Easy Goer (1989) - 2:26.0
3. A. P. Indy (1992) - 2:26.1

Secretariat not only would have won that hypothetical Triple Crown, he would have done so rather easily. Based on my "back of the envelope" calculations, Secretariat ran at the speed of 55 ft/sec. A "length" in horse racing is 8.5 ft. (I've seen both 8 feet and 9 feet cited, so used the number in the middle). Secretariat's winning margins would have been:
Kentucky Derby - 4 lengths
Preakness - 2.5 lengths
Belmont Stakes - 14 lengths.

The above are qualifications for being the best of the best.

 

[Monte]

Nice story about Secretariat. It bothers me when so many "racing fans", who never saw Secretariat race, rate him below some of the modern horses.

 

[Bigboote]

Secretariat at the Belmont is one of the greatest sports feats I can think of. Even Bob Beamon's incredible long jump in Mexico City (which IIRC broke the world record by about 5%) has been eclipsed. I don't think Edwin Moses won a 400m hurdles race by a margin like that, but he did have a streak of several years without a loss or even a close win. For those unfamiliar, have a look. It's breathtaking (fast forward to about 2:00 if you're bored):

 

[Waquoit]

Secretariat lost 3 times that year. Cigar won 16 times in a row.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

Nice story about Secretariat. It bothers me when so many "racing fans", who never saw Secretariat race, rate him below some of the modern horses.

Want something even more amazing? Secretariat ran the fastest Kentucky Derby (a mile and a quarter) in history. One minute fifty-nine and two-fifths seconds. Incredibly, he ran the first mile and a quarter of the Belmont Stakes even faster than he ran the Kentucky Derby where he holds the all time record. One minute fifty-nine seconds flat. So Secretariat likely ran the two fastest mile and a quarter splits in Triple Crown history.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

Secretariat lost 3 times that year. Cigar won 16 times in a row.

As I said up front, there can be different measures for "best" and mine would focus on fast times. Remind me, how many stakes and track records does Cigar hold? How many world records? Secretariat holds the stakes record for all 3 of the most celebrated and challenging races run in America, and the world record for a mile and a half on dirt.

 

[Magy Cannon]

Secretariat and Ruffian.

Then, Secretariat didn't produce offspring that were top horses.

Ruffian's story breaks my heart. Have you read the book about her? Wonderful book, and, heartbreaking.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

We all tend to focus of the surreal Belmont Stakes victory, but Secretariat announced he was a legend toying with children in the first quarter of the Preakness where he went from last to first in about 180 yards and broke the record going away.

I do feel sorry for Sham; a very very fine horse who was cursed to be matched up against , unquestionably, the greatest of them all.

 

[Bama fan]

Secretariat and Ruffian.

Then, Secretariat didn't produce offspring that were top horses.

Ruffian's story breaks my heart. Have you read the book about her? Wonderful book, and, heartbreaking.

It is a heartbreaking story. She was perhaps the best horse to ever race. Never lost, never even trailed in a race. Her tragic death is said to have led to changes in veterinary medicine. Barabaro , another fine horse with a bad injury, was treated differently as a result of knowledge gained from Ruffian's surgery. He was saved, and the injured leg healed, but his story also ended tragically. These animals are delicate and are risking their very lives when racing. Nothing is quite as beautiful or potentially tragic as high stakes racing.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

Secretariat and Ruffian.

Then, Secretariat didn't produce offspring that were top horses.

Ruffian's story breaks my heart. Have you read the book about her? Wonderful book, and, heartbreaking.

Ruffian was something special indeed. I saw her race a few times on TV, including her tragic last race. Heartbreaking is certainly the word I'd use to describe it.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

It is a heartbreaking story. She was perhaps the best horse to ever race. Never lost, never even trailed in a race. Her tragic death is said to have led to changes in veterinary medicine. Barabaro , another fine horse with a bad injury, was treated differently as a result of knowledge gained from Ruffian's surgery. He was saved, and the injured leg healed, but his story also ended tragically. These animals are delicate and are risking their very lives when racing. Nothing is quite as beautiful or potentially tragic as high stakes racing.

Just saw a PBS special (NOVA, I think) on the origins of the horse. In it they explained some of the benefits slender legs provide in the pursuit of speed. A horse's hooves, for example, don't have much surface area and thus less friction with the ground, for example (and yes, I'm aware hooves aren't legs but you get my drift and I can't think of anything else specific at the moment).

 

[RegisteredUconn]

We all tend to focus of the surreal Belmont Stakes victory, but Secretariat announced he was a legend toying with children in the first quarter of the Preakness where he went from last to first in about 180 yards and broke the record going away.

I do feel sorry for Sham; a very very fine horse who was cursed to be matched up against , unquestionably, the greatest of them all.

Were it not for Secretariat, Sham would hold the record for the fastest Derby ever run.

That move Secretariat made in the Preakness is one of the most phenomenal things I've ever seen. It was something out of a Hollywood movie. It looked rehearsed, staged. Horses can't really pass other horses like they're standing still. But Secretariat did to that Preakness field that day.

Here's the call from the TV broadcast.
"But here comes Secretariat...
He's moving fast...
and he's going to the outside...
and he's going for the lead...
and it's right now he's looking for it."

Starts about the 1:04 mark.

 

[Orangutan]

Nice story about Secretariat. It bothers me when so many "racing fans", who never saw Secretariat race, rate him below some of the modern horses.

I can't say that I've seen this happen.

As soon as American Pharoah won the Triple Crown, there were stories like this: American Pharoah’s A Superhorse, But He’s No Secretariat

And videos showing their Belmonts side-by-side to show how much faster Secretariat was.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

I always chuckle when I hear "Secretariat trying to hold it and Sham is driving to get him...." Poor Sham had the whip put to him so much down the stretch and Turcotte just sat there. In the 3 races Ron used the whip just twice in the Derby.

 

[LesMis89]

Something else that linked Secretariat and Sham was heart size. Sham's heart was nearly twice the size of the average Thoroughbred which is 8 1/2 lbs.
Secretariat's heart weighed 22 lbs. Bigger heart = easier oxygen processing

 

[RegisteredUconn]

I always chuckle when I hear "Secretariat trying to hold it and Sham is driving to get him...." Poor Sham had the whip put to him so much down the stretch and Turcotte just sat there. In the 3 races Ron used the whip just twice in the Derby.

It's funny how things work out sometimes. Sham ran the second fastest Derby ever but didn't even win the race. 93 years (in my example) and poor Sham gets matched up with the only horse in all that time that could beat him. Secretariat's winning margin in the Preakness was 2.5 lengths (according to the call in the video) which is also the margin I offered had Secretariat won my mythical race against those other 11 horses with the fastest times. It's entirely possible that Sham not only ran the second fastest Derby but ran the second fastest Preakness too. And who knows what he'd done in the Belmont without Secretariat to worry about.

For many years Jesse Owens owned the national high school record for the 100 yard dash. 9.4 seconds. I went to high school with the kid who finally broke it. A tiny town in South Jersey farming country. Funny thing is, about an hour earlier that day, a kid from the next town down the road, had set the New Jersey state record for 100 yards, just a tenth of a second off Owens' mark. That two kids from two small towns 5 miles apart could run that fast does tend to make one's head itch.

 

[Golden Husky]

I was a sports journalist for 46 years, mostly covering thoroughbred racing, chronicling more than 60 Triple Crown races, including the campaigns of Secretariat, Seattle Slew and Affirmed. As any turf writer will tell you, speed alone is not a qualification for greatness. If it were, we'd be talking about Twin Sparks, the North American record holder for six furlongs, or Simply Majestic, who holds the mark for a mile and one-eighth.

In addition to being fast, to be considered "great," a horse must defeat quality opposition while winning races of importance and significance.

Obviously, Triple Crown winner Secretariat meets the three criteria. His victory in the 1973 Marlboro Cup in a then record 1:45.2, came at the expense of four champions, stablemate Riva Ridge, Cougar II, Key to the Mint and Kennedy Road.

Years ago, a fourth consideration would have been an ability to carry weight. That's certainly how Kelso and Forego earned their greatness. The game has changed and--sadly for me--horses rarely carry significant weight, nowadays.

For a combination of speed and an ability to carry weight, I doubt any horse could match Dr. Fager, the fastest horse I ever saw and, arguably, the fastest horse to ever look through a bridle. Dr. Fager ran a mile in 1:32.1 (including a second quarter of 20 1/5) carrying 134 pounds and then, in the final race of his Hall of Fame career, won the seven furlong Vosburgh Stakes in 1:20.1 hauling a staggering 139 pounds. Now that's greatness.

 

[Waquoit]

As I said up front, there can be different measures for "best" and mine would focus on fast times. Remind me, how many stakes and track records does Cigar hold? How many world records? Secretariat holds the stakes record for all 3 of the most celebrated and challenging races run in America, and the world record for a mile and a half on dirt.

No horse beats Secretariat when he's at his best. He's better than Cigar. But he did lose 3 times in one year. I brought up Cigar because his streak is forgotten, he didn't lose for almost 2 years. He beat all the best horses in the world for 16 straight. East coast, west coast. mid-west, Middle East. One measure for being a great race horse is winning all the time.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

I was a sports journalist for 46 years, mostly covering thoroughbred racing, chronicling more than 60 Triple Crown races, including the campaigns of Secretariat, Seattle Slew and Affirmed. As any turf writer will tell you, speed alone is not a qualification for greatness. If it were, we'd be talking about Twin Sparks, the North American record holder for six furlongs, or Simply Majestic, who holds the mark for a mile and one-eighth.

In addition to being fast, to be considered "great," a horse must defeat quality opposition while winning races of importance and significance.

Obviously, Triple Crown winner Secretariat meets the three criteria. His victory in the 1973 Marlboro Cup in a then record 1:45.2, came at the expense of four champions, stablemate Riva Ridge, Cougar II, Key to the Mint and Kennedy Road.

Years ago, a fourth consideration would have been an ability to carry weight. That's certainly how Kelso and Forego earned their greatness. The game has changed and--sadly for me--horses rarely carry significant weight, nowadays.

For a combination of speed and an ability to carry weight, I doubt any horse could match Dr. Fager, the fastest horse I ever saw and, arguably, the fastest horse to ever look through a bridle. Dr. Fager ran a mile in 1:32.1 (including a second quarter of 20 1/5) carrying 134 pounds and then, in the final race of his Hall of Fame career, won the seven furlong Vosburgh Stakes in 1:20.1 hauling a staggering 139 pounds. Now that's greatness.

Great points persuasively argued.

A question about a hypothetical contest. Contestants will pick one horse. One of the major stakes races will be the venue. The goal is to maximize winnings. Contestants won't know which race ahead of time. All horses ever is the pool of available picks. All entries will be fit and in peak condition. You are a contestant and randomly selected to have first choice of horses. I realize there are a lot of unknowns in that question and that's on purpose. Who do you send to the starting gate?

 

[Bama fan]

Great points persuasively argued.

A question about a hypothetical contest. Contestants will pick one horse. One of the major stakes races will be the venue. The goal is to maximize winnings. Contestants won't know which race ahead of time. All horses ever is the pool of available picks. All entries will be fit and in peak condition. You are a contestant and randomly selected to have first choice of horses. I realize there are a lot of unknowns in that question and that's on purpose. Who do you send to the starting gate?

If it is muddy, I'll take Pegasus!

 

[Golden Husky]

Great points persuasively argued.

A question about a hypothetical contest. Contestants will pick one horse. One of the major stakes races will be the venue. The goal is to maximize winnings. Contestants won't know which race ahead of time. All horses ever is the pool of available picks. All entries will be fit and in peak condition. You are a contestant and randomly selected to have first choice of horses. I realize there are a lot of unknowns in that question and that's on purpose. Who do you send to the starting gate?

This question, in a variety of incarnations, has been asked over the last 40 years. I participated in one survey in which the 300 or so members of the National Turf Writers Association (NTWA) were polled to produce a list of the 100 greatest horses of the 20th century. Man o' War came out on top with Secretariat second. I remember that distinctly because Anthony Alonso's gorgeous painting of Man o' War, defiantly rearing on his hind legs, was on the cover of the publication. I believe Citation, Count Fleet, Native Dancer, Seattle Slew, Dr. Fager, Kelso, Forego and Ruffian--in some order--also were in the top 10, but don't hold me to that. The second 10? Colin and John Henry, for sure, although either or both of those horses might have slipped into the bottom end of the top 10. I'm sorry but I just don't remember. Affirmed and Buckpasser (beautiful head) were somewhere in the 11-20 range, as was Spectacular Bid, of whom John Nerud, the trainer of Dr. Fager said when Buddy Delp compared SB to the good Doctor, "Dr. Fager couldn't strangle Spectacular Bid with 30 feet of rope." I'm not sure what that means, exactly, but it sounds great.

There also have been attempts to assemble a field for a mythical "Race of the Century." As I recall, the distance, usually a mile and a quarter but occasionally a mile and eighth, wasn't in as much dispute as which horses should be in the field.

Back to your question, RUConn. Admitting my bias--I knew and liked Penny Chenery well enough to exchange holiday cards with her and dine in her Old Westbury home once--I'd choose Secretariat.

Our buddy Waquoit (the person, not the horse) wrote in this thread: "No horse beats Secretariat when he's at his best" and I think that's a solid observation. Man o' War was called "The mostest horse" but Charles Hatton, the squire of The Daily Racing Form and, arguably, the best turf writer ever, tutored me during my early years covering the sport and I both respect and agree with his opinion:

"Exterminator and Man o' War have come and gone since the present writer's first acquaintance with the sport. Impressions of longstanding tend to become fixed and assume a prescriptive right not to be questioned. But Secretariat is the most capable horse we ever saw, and geriatrics defeat any thought of ever seeing his like again. Secretariat was the Horse of the Century and his only reference point is himself."

 

[Waquoit]

I think Man O' War loses points because he ran against such short fields. Over his last 10 races he only faced one other rival 6 times. Three other races had only 3 total horses, the last but 4. But he had such a great name.

 

[UcMiami]

We always have trouble comparing athletes, human or otherwise, over decades and while I am not a serious horse race follower I still suspect science and technology have had a fairly important effect on horses and racing. From track preparation and timing mechanics, to tack, to nutrition and training, to the jockeys themselves a century of advances have to make a difference.

that said, secretariat was amazing and hard to put second to any horse.

One caveat - we are very US biased - there have always been phenomenal horses in Europe who never crossed the Atlantic. It has not been easy to transport horse until quite recently, and even with the ease now available, a lot of owners don't like to do it.

 

[UcMiami]

Just another thought - it is actually a little sad to me that the great three year olds have become so valuable that they get retired to stud and we do not see them as mature athletes. It is as if we retired Usain Bolt after his first WR, or Sue and Diana after their college careers.

 

[Adesmar123]

[QUOTE="RegisteredUconn, post: 3160579, member: 1477"
The above are qualifications for being the best of the best.
[/QUOTE]

Mr Ed