view raw text
--------------------------- Here and There on the Turf Futurity Winners Dont Win Derbys Precocious Horses Score at Belmont Stayers Account for Downs Classic Fillies Get Little Consideration - t No winner of the Belmont Futurity ever has captured the Kentucky Derby, although the countrys most important event for two-year-olds has been run continuously with the exception of two years since 1888, and the Churchill Downs classic has not suffered I a break since its inception in 1875. This has caused a reader, Michael Mulroy, of New York City, to inquire: "Year after year the usefulness of Futurity -winners as a betting proposition as three-year-olds and over make me ask you to go over the records as far back as you can and find out for yourself how much money each one of them won after the Futurity. About forty years ago, I read an article in the Morning Telegraph entitled The Hoodoo of Futurity Winners, and the writer named every Futurity winner including the first, whom, I think, was Proctor Knott In starting his article, he pointed out the fact that every Futurity winner wa3 always favorite for the Kentucky Derby. "He completed his article by saying that according to past performances anybody was safe to lay 10 to 1 the Futurity winner would not run 1-2-3 in the Derby, and I have taken notice of that statement ever since, realizing it is a fact, although, of course, I am not including Man o War. My only reason for calling your attention to this is that after you go over the records and find this to be a fact, you will include it in your column about this time of year, as I think the public should know." Several sound reasons may be advanced as to why no winner of the Futurity has gone on to take the Derby, and it is curious that none has done so because it could have happened just as well as not. Numerous Derby winners have been horses which proved victorious in other important two-year-old events, while three thoroughbreds, "namely Sir Barton, Zev, and Reigh Count, took the Churchill Downs classic after having finished second in the Futurity. Another Gallant Fox ran third in the rich Belmont race, only to triumph in the popular three-year-old event the ensuing spring. In determining the reasons why a Futurity-Derby double is yet to be scored, the first that should be advanced is the wide difference in values existing between the two races over a long span of years. In its the Futurity was worth more than inception, around this 0000 to the winner, hovering SSSunt unUl 1907, when New York racing to about times. Dropping into trying M?000 ran net to the winner for several years to be abandoned in 1911 theturity had S ? I? the and -as revived fgowta J winners of 5,060, climmng son with a purse Sly thereafter until the record sum ot 05,730 was taken by Whichone in 1929. Since then the trend has been downward, with Pompoon collecting 5,630 last autumn. Aristides garnered ,850 in winning the inaugural running of the Derby in 1875, and not until Donerails triumph in 1913 did the sum exceed ,000. During the war years, the purse was double and under the management of Matt Win the Derby prize grew until Reigh Count took down 5,375 in 1928. The race carries added money of 0,000 again this spring, as it did in the peak years. Only a scattering few of the Futurity winners sought victory in the Derby during more than half of the history of the latter event because the prize was not tempting enough and the traditions which had been built up around the Louisville special had not as yet touched the feelings of Eastern sportsmen. During the past twenty years, however, horses which went after the Futurity were trained for the Derby the following spring. The Futurity, being a race for two-year-olds, is more apt to be won by a colt which has reached the maturity of its speed at that age, whereas the Derby, a distance contest for three-year-olds, finds horses whose developments were still being continued as possessing an advantage. Exceptions in both cases are prevalent, of course. Furthermore, a filly is almost as apt to win a Futurity as a colt, because at that period in the lives of thoroughbreds there is less distinction between the respective abilities of the two sexes. In the last twenty years the Futurity has been won by five fillies, the Derby by none. Year after year the number of fillies aimed for the Derby seemed to have decreased as trainers have come to the conclusion that the Derby training grind is too rigorous on the lassies. These, to the writer, are the reasons why Futurity winners are not Derby winners. It is not exactly a Jinx. As to the Futurity winner being the future book favorite for the Derby, aften he is the best two-year-old of the year, as was the case with Pompoon last season, but has the son of Pompey reached the peak of his capabilities or will he continue to develop, which he must do to win the Derby?
