RANDOM RACING REMARKS.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume II, Issue 94, 12 May 1892, Page 7

RANDOM RACING REMARKS.

[By

Pegasus.]

I very much regret to state that owing to an excess of work of a private nature, I am reluctantly obliged to give over my column of “ Remarks ” to someone who will have more time at his disposal to deal with the various sporting matters which require attention from time to time, than I can conveniently manage to find time for. I feel convinced that in order to deal successfully with these subjects much time and care is absolutely necessary and essential. Hence my proposed action in handing over my column as stated above. I have no doubt, however, of the trustworthiness and reliability of the information which will be supplied by my successor. Whilst making my retiring bow, I trust that my feeble attempts at turf writing during the last nine months have been acceptable and profitable to readers and subscribers alike. I fully intend taking any opportunity which may occur of contributing now and again to the columns of this journal, and may also insert “tips” for forthcoming events at occasional times. I notice that “ Freelance ” in a recent issue of the Melbourne Sportsman is beginning to discard the time-honoured practice of individually reviewing the different horses engaged in the various big events. Here is what he says previous to making his selections for the Sydney Gold Cup recently :— “ On the eve of a big race meeting ’tis customary on the part of the Press prophets to indulge in a sort of a preliminary canter which is made to serve as an introduction to their predictions, supposed, as a rule, to foreshadow the results of the races proper. This custom probably owes its origin to the fact that the horses themselves are cantered up the straight (and back again generally) before they are taken in charge by the starter ; but, beyond that, as a precedent, I certainly fail to see why half a column of good space in a sporting paper should be wasted by retrospective references to the records and might of beens of the past. We all know, or if we don’t, we ought to be cognisant of the fact that Carbine has won a couple of Sydney Cups, and that the “ mighty son of Musket—Mersey,” as a three-year-old earned 9st to victory in this same race three years back. If I understand sporting people aright, they don’t want to be surfeited with reminiscences ; they like to look ahead, they have no desperate desire to be reminded of what won in 1880 and what ought to have won in 1890 ; they are not anxious to ascertain their sins of omission in Democrat’s year, ’7B, and Australian Peer’s year ’BB. If they read our fulmintations at all—which contingency I believe, is extremely problematical in several instances—they wade in right away, and look for the 1,2,3, portion of the business. High-class journalism in the shape of the puff preliminary dosen’t trouble them any more than—reverting to my opening par—the preliminary canters of a field of Cup candidates affect the result of the actual race.” In this view of the matter I cannot agree with my confrere. ’Many persons have “ a fancy ” of'their own despite what sporting scribes may fancy or “ tip ” for any particular event In such cases they look to the various columns of the sporting journals for any discussion on the capabilities of their fancy horse, and, as the writers of those columns, from the very nature of their calling, have far greater facilities for obtaining late and early information of the doings of the different animals than the readers can possibly have, it follows they must depend on the individual discussion of the chances as to whether their convictions are to be strengthened or not. Many a reader that I know of has been persuaded to advantage to leave a horse “ severely ” alone from a perusal of these same items of information —information which would cost them a vast deal more time, trouble and expense to obtain if they set about it themselves. I do not then think “ Freelance” is correct in his ideas on this point, more especially with regard to the readers of his columns in New Zealand. They, I feel certain, depend in great measure upon the information set forth in the columns of himself as also those of his fellow-writers.

This, however, is only an opinion of my own, and is given as an indication of the probable views of readers as well as my own. t The item of sporting news in last week s issue re my appearance at 4 a.m. amongst the constallations in the vicinity of Paeroa is strange. Surely the discoverer returning at 4 a.m. was in a *' certain” condition calculated to cause him to ” see stars.” It would certainly have been better if the writer had not given himself away by mentioning the hour when he saw me. I wasn’t there, anyway. One item of dispute that often occupies the attention of racing men and writers is the reliability or otherwise of the time test whereby to gauge the merits of horses for any particular race. I heard certain “ horsey” people thrashing it out the other day, and it is interesting to note some of the reasons given for relying upon the time test. One of the strongest arguments I heard made use of in favour of time was to the following effect: *“ How are you to ascertain the relative merits of horses who have not previously met in any race unless you have some test; and if time is not taken what other method would you adopt whereby you could bring them together in a handicap race ?” There certainly seems to be a strong point raised by that question. It struck me that if A wins the Caulfield Guineas, B the V.R.O. Derby, C the A.J.C. Derby, &c., and these three, or more, are to meet in the Melbourne Cup, it would be a difficult matter for the handicapper to deal with them if they have not met together before, and time is ignored alto gether. I fancy a judicious dependence upon time is safer than any other test that we can have. Almost everyone looks for Marvel doing his mile in from 1 min. 40£ sec. to 1 min. 411- sec. Pretty safe to trust him for time, and if there be no other in the race that can “ cut it up” as quickly it is safe to infer he will go very near winning. So much for the time test.

A peculiar feature in the list of entries has appeared recently. Usually the Wanganui Club has extraordinarily large fields entered for their various meetings, while Auckland received middling fields only. This time Wanganui’s Steeplechase meeting has not been so well patronised as usual, and Auckland has received the splendid lists of 37 for the Hurdles and 23 for the Steeples at their forthcoming Grand National Meeting. The Takapuna Club’s fields for Queen’s Birthday are also very good indeed. In going over the programme for Wanganui, to be run on Queen's Birthday, I am inclined to think the principal event —the Steeplechase — will rest with Couranto, 1 Ost 71b; Hiamoe, 9st 121bs, and Somnambulist, 10st 51b, but as the Egmont running may throw some light on it, and at time of writing that result is not to hand, I shall reserve a final selection for the Wanganui events until next week. At present Torpedo and Tulloch reads well in the Flying Stakes, and Prestige St. Malo, and the same two for the Winter Oats. The Trial Steeples looks a good thing for Kaimanawa, Couranto, and Dangerous; Hunters’ Steeples for Dan; and Daisy Clipper O’Rourke, and Miss Cole should be best in the Hack Flat; but there is time enough to select yet.

Mr. W. R. Wilson thinks that La Tosca would have won the Sydney Gold Cup but for the penalty she had to carry. Walter Bentley informed a Wanganui Herald representative that he expects to play in that town in December next.

A meeting of the Auckland Coursing Club is called for at the Edinburgh Castle Hotel tomorrow evening. We beg to call the attention of our readers to the advertisement of Messrs. Bush and Kennedy, saddlers and harness makers, next British Hotel, Queen-street. Steeplechase and racing saddles are kept in stock and made to order, as well as ladies’, gents’, and boys’ saddles. Special promptitude is given to repairs. At the South Canterbury Amateur Athletic Club’s meeting, held at Timaru on the 4th instant, Norman L. Gurr, of Wellington, won the 100yds (nsec), the Half-mile Flat (2min 1 2-ssec), the Quarter-mile(s3 4~ssecs), the 250yds Flat (28 i-ssec), and was unplaced in the 600yds Handicap, Rutherford (40yds) and three others beating him Gurr’s splendid running was quite the feature of the meeting.