view raw text
Here and There on the Turf Awkward Names for Horse. Registrar Has Little Authority. Samples of Bad Taste in Naming. Walter S. Vosburgh has presented a number of suitable names for the new crop of two-year-olds which will go to the post in 1923. Many of the youngsters have already been christened and the names registered with the Jockey Club. But there arc always some late about choosing and doubtless Mr. Vos-bughs list will be of great help to those who are seeking euphonious names for their two-year-olds. It is the thought of many to attempt to suggest the breeding when sdecting a name. Of course, this can be carried to an extreme and some of the combinations of the names of the sire and dam have been awkward. But some owners think it is well, when possible, to preserve euphony, to give as strong a hint of breeding as is possible. There have been many appropriately named horses following this general rule. Others may be just as appropriately named and when they are brought to the pest the name will at once suggest their breeding. Of course, such a practical naming can be carried to j extremes, but it is possible, if intelligently carried j out, to suggest almost any blood line from which a youngster may spring. Registrar Herkert has certain sst rules to follow relating to duplications, but he has little other authority in accepting or rejecting what is offered. Time after time, there have been names which were perilously close to du-! plications, but they were within the rules set i down for names and they had to be accepted, j j It would be well if the registrar had more to ! say in the matter of what names he would pass upon favorably. It was, to say the least, confusing when at the same time a Voladay II. and a Volady, Jr., were racing. Vale and Veil were two names that were permitted and both were fillies. Spugs and Spods are uncouth and there seems to be no really good reason for either. Sagamook and Sagamore are too close together in spelling and they have caused confusion. But it is just as well to go through the alphabet and show some of the names that arc altogether too close together. The custom of merely taking a different ini-tail after a name is well within the rule for naming, but it certainly is not a good one and it frequently may cause trouble in transmitting names. Then having a "second" is to be deplored. Of course, when a named thoroughbred is brought over from the other side "II." is taken after its name, if there is one already bearing the same cognomen. There is an Alex H. and Alex Jr. Apple Jack and Apple Jack II. are no relation to each other. Audrey A. and Audrey K. arc two crhers. Camouflage and Camouflage II. are easily confused and we have a Daniel and a Daniel A. Darnay and Darnley arc rather j i j ! j close together, but not as close as Dot and Dote. Edna C. and Edna D. arc two others. Eleanor S. and Ehanor T. are registered name3 and there are two Elmers in Elmer K. and Elmer W. Frank has been one of the popular names and the index will show Frank B., Frank F Frank G., Frank S. and Frank W. There arc two Georges in George F. and George W. We have a Grace E. and a Grace W., a Harry B. and Harry D., as well as a Hazel R. and Hazel W. There arc a James A. and James G., a Jimmie and a Jimmie B., Joe C. .and Joe S., Josephine C. and Josephine K., Mabel A., Mabel G., Mabel K. and Mabel M.; Margaret C. and Margaret N., Mary D. and Mary G., Minnie B. and Minnie H., Peggy C. and Peggy D., Ruth E. and Ruth T., Stanley and Stanley H., Paula and Paula V. These are some of the confusing names, and there are several others. There does not ap- pear to be any good reason to permit the rcgis-; tering of two such names as Good Time and Good Times. Fuse and Fusee are altogether too close together, nigh Command and High . Commander might easily be confused. Kent-mere and Kentmare have only a difference of ;one letter. There is a Last Chance and a , Last Chance II., as well as a Mayflower and a Mayflower II.; Nugget and Nugget II. Loveliest is rather close to Loveliness and there is not much difference between My Rose and My Rosie, just as Sister Sue and Sister Susie are close together. There is a Pat B. and a Patsy B., while Victor F. and Victor S. properly belong in the preceding paragraph. And still others are Topmost and Topmast, Tingling and Ting-a-Ling, Wake Up and Walk Up, as well as Wrangle and Wrangler. A more careful study of the registered names would show many others altogether too similar, but these serve to show what is permitted in the registering of names. Then there are others that should be barred for obvious reasons. How would it do for a champion to have to carry around one of the names found in the following list, all taken from the index of horses that have raced and many of which are still raci.ng: Badly Marked, Coax Me, Damfino, Wild Deuce, Deuces Wild, Do Admit, Financial Rooster, Full Again, Go On, Heads I Win, Hold Me, Houseburned, Hugme, Sweet Mama, Who Knows Me, It, So It Goes, Who Can Tell, Let Her Fly, Not Yet, You Bet, Wish I Could, Wish I Ma, Win or Quit, Winner Take All, Put and Take. There are others of like character and fortunately, these names have not been hung on good ones. Any such names would be a tremendous handicap to any horse, but some of these have actually won their way with a fair amount of success, handicap and aiL
