view raw text
ENGLISH NOTIONS OF TIME TEST. "Vigilant" of the London Sportsman descants upon the time test in that paper, ne says: "It has more than once been stated in this column that the time test Is not of much practical value where racehorses are concerned, except to afford evidence as to whether a race was truly run or not, but it Is obvious that the nearer we approach to best possible times the greater must be the value of the time test. Formerly, when races were run at a slow pace fpr three parts of the distance, the time in which they were done was obviously of no. sort of importance; but now, when in most cases a race Is a race from the raising of the barrier, we may rightly enough think more about the time than we used to do. Nothing quite explains away the fact that moderate platers often make excellent time, but that argument would tell equally against the timing of pedestrians. All sorts and classes of men run 100 yards In 10 seconds and a fraction, and yet if they raced together some would evince immense superiority over others. It must be that the better class horse or man gets his adversaries demoralized before they have gone half way, and so from that point onward he has no occasion to put on full pressure; hut be that as It may, the subject of timing horse jraces becomes yearly more Interesting, for year by year the average time of races improves, and thus more closely approximates a test on which reliance may be placed. There is always, however, the uncertainty as to whether courses are correctly measured. Those -which are measured along the middle of the track are manifestly Incorrect, unless they are straight miles, for horses hugging the rails round the corners do not cover the full reputed distance. I cannot but think that there must be some peculiarity of this kind at Ascot, for it is almost incredible that Pradella can have really galloped two miles in 3 minutes 19 2-S seconds with eight stone four pounds on her back. That she galloped ttie Ascot Stakes course in that time is absolutely certain, and the question Is: is that course really two miles, measured some three or four feet from the rails? They have for long run races in Australia with a view to time, and on turning to the records ot the Melbourne Club two miles, I find that, since the institution of that .race in 1801, the winner has on thirty-one occasions exceeded 3 minutes 30 seconds In covering the course, and the fastest time In which It was ever done was by Carbine In 1S90, whose record is 3 minutes 28 1-4 seconds. This w,as a very remarkable performance, for Carbine carried ten stone five pounds to victory, tielng at the time live years old; but between that time and Pradellas 3 minutes 19 2-5 seconds there Is a vast -difference, working out, roughly speaking, into at least 150 yards, for Pradellas time meant 12.7-10 seconds per furlong; If the reputed distance is really correct. I cannot but think under the circumstances that the Ascot measurements are . misleading. That Pradellas race was a very fast one, but that she really cut S 3-5 seconds off the record I cannot bring myself to believe. There is, as I have already stated, no question about the time having been correctly taken, for three watches coincided exactly, and a fourth was only 1-5 second out. What I should like to have cleared up is the actual distance. Terhaps someone who knows will kindly favor us with the facts.
