view raw text
How We Race Our Two -Year -Olds BY SALVATOR _ ! I ■ . One phase of our contemporary racing sys- I tern upon which I have more than once dwelt , is the reckless way in which our two-year-j olds are being overdone — overdone systemat- | . ically, methodically and of set purpose. The , constant criticisms, heard on all sides, of i the fact that our handicap and stake horses, : I four-year-olds and upward ,of high class. I seem fast reaching the vanishing point; the j associated fact that during the past few sea- | sons the number of three-year-olds with any I pretentions above mediocrity has been SO . small as almost to be negligible— these things j have led all thoughtful observers to seek for . the cause. And, like myself, the great ma- ! jority of them have not hesitated to attribute it to the indiscriminate over-racing of our , two-year-olds — which, in effect, leaves most of them in the condition of a lemon that has been sucked dry. I Indeed, the number of our two-year-olds . that seem to be "lemons" is constantly on the , increase. But is this really the fact? Or is it due to the things that they are asked to i do — or rather, that are done with them? I SAME O.MHTIOX IX ENGLAND. The same condition obtains in Fngland. [ with the same results; which, if not entirely . , parallel, are allowing for differences of climate and opportunity. Fngland has no New-Orleans, no Tijuana, no Havana. In consequence her two-year-olds cannot receive , quite the same all-the-year-round grilling. We now have hundreds of two-year-olds that are in active training — many of them ac- , tually racing — for the entire twelve months ■ following January 1, upon which technically they become two-year-olds, although for the j ! most part lacking several months of the full age. ! This may be regarded in the light of a "running" sore — strong language, but justified — on the body politic of our turf practice. The current outcome of it is inexcusable, the ultimate result lamentable. It is a "slaughter of the innocents" in every sense of the word. How much better they do these things in France. There two-year-olds are not even allowed to race until many of ours have been through the mill for six months and have . a long line of index numbers opposite their names in Daily Racing Form ; with, as , a rule, but a small percentage of brackets. Now that the American Racing Manual for , 1! 24, with complete and carefully tabulated returns for !92: .i.; available, I have been giving this subject a sort of statistical "once over" with the purpose of discovering whether my feeling about the two-year-olds was merely an impression and perhaps not a justifiable one, or whether it would "prove up." Verification, alas, proves it up beyond dispute. 1 I If we will look back through turf history, we will find that, as a rule having few exceptions, those thoroughbreds that have been most successful have been used either conservatively or little as two-year-olds — barring, of course, those famous as two-year-olds specifically. Quite a few of them never started at two, at all. Many others raced that season only on a few occasions. I must not go too extensively into statistics, but if I were to collate those showing the ncmber of times that winners of 00,000 or more have raced at the age of two years, it would show a low average. This would be particularly true of Fngland, where good horses race far less often than with us. Fven with us, the exhibit would be most instructive. I must, however, pass on to other things. Here then, as a sort of "Fxhibit A" is a table that tells a good deal in a comparatively tmall space : Two -Year -Olds that Raced Twenty or More Times in 1923: IIorse3. Sta. 1st. Unp. Won. rVl.mh 41 5 23 .58«j Seths Flower 37 4 21 2,495 Wiki Jack .6 0 14 4,540 I.rund.-is .15 5 15 3,530 j j Julia M 34 3 20 3,875. I Honnie Jack 32 3 21 1,860! I •Idle Thoughts ,32 8 13 11,450, I Malvern 32 4 15 4,935 Duelma 30 1 22 1.285 Homer 30 2 22 1.325 Miss I.esgo 30 4 18 2.560 Odd Ketli 2! I 13 4.60C Postillion 29 5 9 5. 072 l Seths Alibi 29 I 17 3.535 I livron 2S 1 18 2.106 :| 1 Last in- L»f« 28 I 15 2.17:i i Little lair 2S 6 14 5.57! 1 Ijuen Catherine 28 4 10 3.095 Roman tiirl 28 3 14 4.2!* Saisie , 28 2 23 950 ■ Al Hotfoot 27 6 12 4 070 1 Husiriesslike 26 1 18 1.311 Castilla 26 1 20 655 , Apology 25 3 14 3.142 • i lielle Isle 25 4 11 3.180 [ Charlotte ■ 25 1 19 1 .020 CtMll— t C.irl 25 I 16 1.765 Krederi. ktown 25 I 13 3.790 , tlWI White 25 5 14 2.450 Ouida 25 .. 24 125 , tloldmark 24 .. 19 S25 I.ee Adrin 24 1 8 2.690 Modest 24 1 16 3.100 . Whiff 24 2 13 2.050 First I-ady Harding 23 2 17 2.100 1 Hilarity 23 7 7 7.H45 i Joe iatti 23 20 2 M I.ady Celia 23 2 17 1.275 l.oiiard • 23 .. 21 265 tmbrage 23 6 8 5.550 ; Trafalgar 23 3 14 2 3:15 J Virgin a II 23 1 14 1.090 Aunt Jane 22 6 9 ."..".•;: -, Itessie Wright 22 7 9 3.499 || NCWiC 22 I 12 1.755 •Brscaiala B I 8 17,690 j .lady* V 22 .. 21 10 Cold leaf 22 1 16 S2". l.adv Audrey 22 I 14 4.752 ; l.agoon 22 3 15 1.711 I I. Hie Thistle 22 1 14 1.120 •Nellie Mem 22 4 10 12.515 Rum 22 2 12 1.750 . Red Mill 22 1 17 775 J Strut Miss l,i/./ie 22 4 12 5.9W Anna Hortori 21 2 12 2.000 | I.alsam l.ake 21 20 4 M ! liainra 21 5 7 4.940 Chief Arehee 21 2 11 2.K5II 1 •foment 21 2 14 .i.MO I •Past Ma.k 21 7 7 11.050 Friday 13th 21 4 15 3.200 i Ureal Northern 21 1 12 1 .3K4 , II. T. Waters 21 I 13 !l.25 » II, leu took 21 3 9 3.555 " Patsv Howe 21 1 12 1.165 I Peggy 0 21 4 11 MO : Keply 21 6 I 0.300 The Poet 21 2 18 1 .6 Ml Without 21 1 10 2.. 130 A. J I.uja 20 2 12 2.120 A. Lester 91 1 15 Ml Mine. Miss 2t 2 15 1450 I I mi. nation 21 14 365 •Desschee 20 7 8 9.S20 J Eventide 20 3 8 3.870 Fleet Pi hltt SI 20 6 6 5.350 • Qtarsta May 21 .. 17 2.V j La4j Ijsick Uret 20 and 11 2,765 ; . , I I . j . , I . , i I [ . , , , ■ j ! ! . , , 1 I j j I I I l I :| 1 i 1 ■ , • i [ , , . 1 i ; J -, || j ; I . J | ! 1 I i , " I : I J • j ; Horses. SJs. 1st. Unp. Won. •Lord Baltimore II 20 7 7 26.305 Mitau 20 1 12 1.800 Pathan 20 5 11 4.100 Princess Jane 20 1 18 705 Sarko 20 4 8 4.175 Sir Clen 20 1 11 1.575 Sleigh Bells 20 5 9 2.730 Sir, pliant 20 .. 10 2.070 Vanity Ba- 20 1 16 1.325 •Stake winner. There are eighty-eight two-year-olds in the above tabulation, of which eighteen raced twenty times in 1923, while fifteen raced twenty-one times, thirteen raced twenty-two times, eight raced twenty-three times, four raced twenty-four times, seven raced twenty-five times, two raced twenty-six times, one raced twenty-seven times, six raced twenty-eight times, three raced twenty-nine times, three raced thirty times, three raced thirty-two times, and one each raced thirty-four, thirty-five, thirty-six, thirty-seven and forty-one times respectively. The total number of races in which they started was 2.019, making the average num-I ber of starts for each one practically twenty-three. The number of races they won was 2C7, or an average of three each — on a per-I centage basis, practically 13 per cent. They were unplaced in no less than 1.2 40 of their 2.019 starts, a percentage of slightly over G . Kach of these two-year-olds ran unplaced on the average something over fourteen times. KANUE OF WINNINGS. Their winnings run all the way from 2C ,30." Lord Baltimore II. starting twenty times and winning seven down to 100 Cladys V., starting twenty-two times, without a win .and twenty-one times unplaced; this latter record being in a way excelled ? by that of Ouida, which won 25, starting twenty -j five times without a win and running unplaced twenty-four times. In "sizing up" these "facts and figures" the first thing that strikes the analyst is: What a tremendous amount of absolutely useless effort ! A lot of eighty-eight two-year-olds racing 2.019 times in a single season and being uplaced 1,2«1 times ! Some fourteen of them winning less than ,000; while nineteen others, making a total of thirty- three, won less than ,000. In the "Manuals" tabular resume of the "Race Horse Records for 192.3," it is interesting to turn to those divisions, given alphabetically, which show the horses that started during the season and failed at any time to land even "show money," and find there were no less than 390 of them two-year-olds. The "Manual." so far as I have been able to discover, does not give the total number of two-year-olds that started in 19J:: , so I have been at the pains to calculate them from the "Race Horse Records" and find their total to have been 1,256. It is not comforting, but not at all surprising, to find that nearly 33 1-3 per cent of them were at no time during the season able to so much as "show" on a single occasion. A tremendous amount of use, moreover, was made of some of these two-year-olds that always ran unplaced. One of them started seventeen times, two of them started sixteen times, one started fourteen times, three started thirteen times, two started twelve times, three started eleven times, and six started ten times. Tables of "Winning Two-Year-Olds" are so omnipresent that it will perhaps be interesting to give some special figures upon the non-winners, especially in relation to their "also ran" performances. As above stated, there were some 39 two-year-olds of 1923 that ran unplaced in all their starts. Here is a table of a somewhat different "slant" : TWO YEAR OLDS KCNNINC, INPI.ACKU TEN Oil MORE TIMES I.N 1923. Horses. Tnplaeed. Horses. Inplaeed. 1 24 times 9 16 timea 2 23 times 11 15 tunes 1 22 times 18 14 time* 4 21 times 22 13 times 4 20 times 37 12 times 2 19 times 36 11 times 1 18 times 52 10 times 7 17 times Here is a total of 214 two-year-olds that each ran unplaced from ten to twenty-four times ; their grand total of useless efforts being the prodigious one of 2.S72. WHY, OH WHY! Why. oh why, do owners and trainers do such things? What rhyme or reason can be adduced for racing a two-year-old that can-! not win even show money twenty times or more? Why send one to the post thirty times thai is able to win only once? Why saddlo one twenty-five times and have it "also ran" twenty-four tim*s? Why, oh why? The only answer is, of course, that these two-year-olds have cost money to begin with ; that it costs more money to pay feed and s-hipping bills, also trainers and jockeys sal-1 aries ; and, in the last phase, starting fees. In the hope of at least "breaking even" on them, they are hauled out again and again, not for what they may be able to win in purse or stake money, but in the hope that tlie long odds can be landed on them to place or show, and enough won in that way to make them profitable "propositions." Rut — how many of them ever become so? That ia something that can never be known : but if it could be, it is certain that the names on the right side of the ledger would be few indeed. FROM THOUOrOHBUM TO "DOG." IVyond this, think of what this merciless grind does to these unfortunate bantlings so far as their futures are concerned. Can you imagine a more certain way in which to turn a well-bred thoroughbred into an out-aml-I out "dog" than to race it unplaced for from ten to twenty-four times as a two-year-old? 1 Is it any wonder that these much-abused and long-suffering beasts have no hearts left in them, nor much of anything else. Once in a while nature turns out a piece of equine material that apparently could go through a iiery furnace and emerge unscathed. But these are the rare birds that belong in the clas3 of the freak and abnormality. Tlu-y are not criterions of the rank and file. It is a dismal state of affairs that the system we are pursuing has evolved into, and it must be said that the track managers are to blame for it. The remedy lies in their hands. They could curtail two-year-old rac- ing if they would. Hut — will they? Perhaps when the world begins to turn the reverse way on ita axis. As a matter of fact, they can be relied upon not only to continue in their present course, but carry it to still fur- ther extremes. That is the only conclusion that the disillusioned and informed observer »-ii by any means MTTTC at.
