TALK OF THE'DAY.

Otago Witness, Issue 3617, 10 July 1923, Page 51

TALK OF THE'DAY.

By

SENTINEL

THE TIME TEST. The time test is always a much discussed and ever recurring subject amongst sportsmen. It is accepted as a most reliable guide by those who can apply it and analyse the conditions under which a fast gallop or race has been performed. Due allowance has to be made for the various track conditions, and what may read slow on one course may comparatively be a really smart gallop when measured against the same class of field and race on another track. Take, for instance, Wingatui. It is a slow track over six furlongs, but over a mile and a half it is one of the fastest in the Dominion, though not generally recognised as such. The short courses are on the collar, but a start at the twelve furlong post lets the field travel over a lowering grade over about the first five furlongs, then comes to a dead level stretch for about three furlongs. A rise follows into the straight, which is undulating and mostly down hill. It will be seen at a glance that the records show that some of the best gallops ever achieved over a mile and a-half• in the Dominion have been accomplished at Wingatui. Note, for instance, that Amythas carried 9.1 and won the Dunedin Cup in 2.32 2-5, whilst Trespass, a by no means high-class horse, won with 8.3 in 2.31 3-5. Some interesting comment on the time test recently appeared in the London Sportsman from the pen of the Special Commissioner, who said: “I have noticed a good deal of discussion on the above subject, and the writers generally treat the published times os if they were like the law of the Medes and Persians, accurate and unalterable, even by a fraction of a second. Thev also seem to think that if a horse wins a race in a certain time and is subsequently beaten over the same course in longer time, the time test is proved to be valueless. Both these assumptions are fallacious. In the first place, it is impossible to be fractionally accurate in timing races when you are not well placed to see both the start and the finish. Several watches are generally held, and the time as published is a compromise between them. Now the other point as to time-test being valueless if a horse is beaten in longer time than he has previously won in, over the same course, is interesting, because it illustrates the curious incapacity of certain minds to grasp what the time-test really means. A phenomena such as that referred to. so far from proving the time-test, valueless, proves exactlv Ihe opposite when rightly understood. Thirty years ago Ravensbury repeatedly ran second to his great opponent, Isinglass, and I, who timed all those races, found that on each occasion they were truly run throughout. Once, and once only. wa3 Ravensburv badly beaten into third place. Isinglass winning as usual, the second Icing a colt, whom Ravensbury easily defeated on other occasions. There was nothing amiss with Ravensbury, but I found the time of the race to have been about lOsec longer than when he had run second to Isinglass over the same course. Now, here i« where the value of the time-test came in. It proved, as I at once concluded, that Ravensbury, though a fine stayer! lacked a dash of speed, and. in a slow-run

race had been beaten for speed. His subsequent career proved this, though Captain Machell, who bought him, had to find out the truth by losing money over him until such time as they put him to his true game, and v T on the Ascot Stakes and Alexandra Biate. Anyone with personal experience of running will understand what I mean and how valuable time is in proving to him whether he has run a true race or not. I myself, in a small way, used to run races of half a mile and upwards, and not having any speed worthy of mention found, again and again, when I ran with a friend who had abundant speed, but could not stay more than a quarter of a mile, he wou.d infallibly beat me over half a mile unless I made the time 2min lOsec. Then I used to beat him. If I took longer time than that I was always beaten. This is a practical illustration of how the time-test may be utilised.” SIZE AND STAMINA. Some considerable attention has latterly been given in England to the question Are big horses stayers'/” and several instances were quoted to show that very many ol tiie best horses seen on the British turi were big horses. The question then arises as to what constitutes a big horse. As the average horse stands between 15 and -o hands, then it can be assumed that one standing 16 hands or over is a big horse. The lean, light-framed, varmty type ot horse, irrespective of height, is frequently found to stay well, always provided that it is in the hands of a capable trainer. Ihe principal reason why that is so is because that it can carry itself whilst a big- heavytopped horse tires, not because of lack ot staying power, but because it cannot carry its own weight. One of the best stayers ever seen in Australia or New Zealand was Nelson, who stood, as far as memory goes, at least 16 hands or over, and he was a big, lusty-conditioned horse that had to be worked twice a day to keep his bulk down so as to make him carry himself over a journey. Sfc. Clair was also a very gross horse, small in size and loaded, and to lick him into a racehorse he required heaps of work to bring him to the top of his form. He also had to be kept busy twice a day. Both were trained by the late Mr E. Cutts, one of the old school who knew that to win races over a journey a horse had to do the work. Now-a-days they work or try a horse a mile and a quarter or perhaps up a mile and a-half and guess how they will set a two mile course. That is why the bulk of a field running in a two mile race are spread over half a furlong or so when it enters the final and sixteenth furlong. Nelson was a great stayer. He won three Auckland Cups, one as a five-year-old, again as a six-year-old, carrying 8.3 (both races oyer two miles and a quarter), and again with 9.12. He also won the Dunedin Cup, two miles and a distance, ran second to Spade Guinea, 6.10, when carrying 9.10, in the New Zealand Cup, won the Auckland Plate, two miles, and was beaten a short head by Trident in the Australian Cup. He also beat good fields at weight-for-age oyer a distance in Australia, and ran several creditable races over a distance again, the best of his day, in both New Zealand and Australia. He was a true stayer, and was a particularly fine type of horse, standing over 16 hands, and to the casual glance looked even taller than the height named. He was, taken all round, one of the best performers ever seen on the Australasian turf, and was always regarded as a big horse. Vanguard, who won the Dunedin Cup, two miles and a distance, and the New Zealand Cup, was a big horse, and so ware the triple crown heroes Manton and Euroclydcn. Waiuku, who could stay and also go fast, was another big horse. He won the New Zealand Cup and three Thompson Handicaps. Many other big horses that could stay well and win important races were Record Reign, Liberator, Canteen, Bridge, arid one of the best horses that ever carried a saddle was Warstep, who really proved herself a champion. Wairiki was a great horse, and he ranked amongst the big brigade, and so did Achilles, All Red, Bobrikoff, Mata, Zimmerman, Masterpiece, Advance, and perhaps the “greatest Roman of them all.” Amythas, is a big horse and a particularly great horse as a racehorse. Another massive horse who neve- displayed bis real worth in public yvas Gipsy Grand, who grew to quite a giant, but unfortunately had his turf career shortened as the result of an accident. He was really one of the greatest horses the writer has ever seen in a long connection with racing. Other great horses such as Maxim, Los Angelos, Merrie England, Carbine, Multiform, Altar, Uniform, a few that occur to memory, ali presented the appearance of going 16 hands or more, but whilst some of the greatest stayers ever seen ran to plenty of size, so did some of the very best sprinters. Machine Gun was a giant and a freak ot speed, and nothing more brilliant has been seen than Conjueror, Goldspur. and Blazer, all of whom could go like a flash of lightning. Desert Gold ami Gloaming, two recent day champions, lack nothing in size, and it may be taken as a sure thing that all the very best horses associated with the turf are generally big in figure as -yell as racing form. Great stayers such as Tasman and I emnleton were medium-sized horses, but all the experience of racing goes to prove that “a good big ’un is always better than a good little ’un.” EARLY RACING. The early racing of tyro-year-olds and the distance over which they should be permitted to race has latterly attracted considerable attention as a result of the motion which is to endeavour to amend the rules so that two-year-olds can Me raced over less ground than five furlongs. It is gener-ally-recognised that racing two-year-olds is detrimental in many cases to a horse’s subsequent career, but then, again, very many cases can be quoted where horses started their racing careers early in the season and yet went on and won for sever al years. The case of Whakawatea is a most exceptional one. He started early, and, if memory is not at fault ran 19 races during lbs first season, but nevertheless threatened, like Tennyson’s brook to go on for ever. In all probability he continued for fully three times the length of the average horse’s racing career. Another notable case was that of The Bard", who won 16 races as a two-year-old in’ England, and yet was capable of proving one of Ormond’s most formidable opponents in his second season. Coming nearer home, Gladsome ran 16 times as a two-year-old, and continued to train on for another three or four seasons. Granting that two-year-old racing is an evil, it admits of an easy remedy if racing clubs would do their

duty iu the interests of the thoroughbred, and instead of giving very rich stakes for youngsters in the first part of the season and so tempt owners to tune up babies not yet actual two-year-olds, withhold them until the back end of the season. So long as clubs endow early two-year-old racing with large stakes, just so long will owners prepare youngsters, irrespective of whether they are the quick and early or overgrown giants, to run in them. If a rule was made to restrict the value of any two-year-old race until, say, November, it would do a tremendous amount of good. Owners would then allow their youngsters more time to mature, and bring them along in their training without speeding them to win in September or October, and at a time when some of them have yet to reach their second birthday. Some horses are, nevertheless, practically fit for nothing else, as a profitable proposition, than two-year-old racing. These are compact, smallish, quick and early types, which come to hand and reach {he top of their form in their first season, whilst others of the same age are still unable to handle themselves through excessive bulk demanding more time to lick into racing shape. One notable exception is supplied by Master p.ece, who was a very massive two-year-old, and yet won the M'Lean Stakes, run in the early part of October. He, however, was galloped into a tangle when he met Culprit at Oamaru. Culprit was just the type for early racing, and she afterwards won the Welcome Stakes. Master piece trained on to become a Derby winner, and raced on for still another two or three seasons. Thoroughbreds cost good money and plenty of it, and owners are naturally anxious to get as quick a return as possible. Early foals that frame up quickly into racing shape are a good proposition, and proof of that is furnished by the fact that most of the owners who have topped or got close to the top of the winning list for the past 25 years owed a very large proportion of their success to two-year-olds carrying their colours. A really good two-year-old is a gold mine, because it can win a heap of money throughout the season without a hand capper having a chance to anchor it with weight. Hence there is a great temptation to exploit two-year-olds for all they are worth. It may be of interest to take a glance at soma of the most notable winners of the Wei come Stakes, and see how they fared in their subseauent careers. Oudsis, who won in 1882, afterwards won the New Zealand Derby, and so did Stonyhurst, the 18c4 winner. Apropos, who woh in 1885, trained on for several seasons. Silvermark won at three years, and was developing into a good horse when an attack of strangles terminated his racing career. Scmmeil, who won in 1887 and incidentally the only two-year-old capable of stretching Oarbine, met with an accident shortly after a big fio-ure was refused for him when a three-year-old. Cynisoa won in 1888, and also won ether races in her first season. She made herself famous by winning the Wellington Gup on three consecutive occasions, as well as many other races. _ Stepniak, who won in 1391, followed on with a win in the Derby and Canterbury Cup. Bombsael won in 1895, and subsequently trained on for several reasons, and finished by running second in a Melbourne Cup. Skirmisher scored in 1892, and raced on for seven: seasons, but unfortunately tins well-bred son of Vanguard proved useless _ for stud purposes, and seemed what one might term a natural gelding.. Multiform split winning honours with Sir Lancelot in 1896, and afterwards developed into one of the really o-rcat, racehorses identified witn the New Zealand turf. Multiform supplies a case where a really great horse did not shorten or lose powess as a result of early racing. Multiform won the Derby, two Canterbury Cups, and three Challenge Stakes, and no doubt could have won a lot more races if desired. He afterwards became a high-class sire. Orloff, Danube, Armlet, Surveyor, Munieet, and several winners _ol the Welcome Stakes continued m training and nept going in a manner which strongly suggested that their racing career was not detrimentally effected by the fact that they were winners of the Welcome Stakes, run in the early part, of their first season on the turf. Altogether it may be said .hat oute a large percentage of Welcome Stakes winners trained on quite . long enough to prove that when judiciously handled and capably trained early racing does not damage a naturally sound and good constitutioned youngster. As far as distance »is concerned, that great authority William Day, one of the ablest writers on the horse, held the opinion that, a two-ycar-old should not be tried at less than six furlongs, but in his day races were not run Rom end to end as they are nowadays In the days when Day wiote Ihe Racehorse in Training” horses were allowed plenty of time to get well balanced m 'their stride before being asked to fully extend themselves.