view raw text
KENTUCKY RACING IN HIGHLY PROSPEROUS CONDITION Tracks at Louisville, Latonia and Lexington Established New Record for Distribution in Stakes and Purses During the Season Just Ended . 4. Kentucky racing prospered during the season just closed as never before. The figures presented below sivak eloqueutlj- of the strides that the sport has made during the past few years in the commonwealth that produces more thoroughbreds than any other section of North America. In the short space of live .vo.irs, thanks to the wise policy that is being pursued in the government and management of the sport in Kentuekj-, the racing associations that operate the four licensed tracks at Louisville, Latonia and Lexington have been able to actually more than double the amount of money distributed among horsemen in sMfces- and purses. The record in this respect for 1909 was GS,215. This years figures are 39,750, which breaks all records for Kentucky. Tlie prosperity that is reflected in these figures was by no means confined to the horsemen. Tlie racing associations enjoyed their share. The conservative policj of short meetings that marked the racing of the preceding year was adhered to. with the result that the 1913 racing schedule fell one daj- short of that for 1912, even though an additional meeting at Douglas Park was included. This j-cars schedule embraced 10S iv.eing daj-s, as against 109 last year, 11G in 1911 and 112 in each of the two preceding j-ears. The result was a series of snappj- and brilliant meetings at all the tracks, spring and fall. The charge cannot be brought and sustained that the sport was overdone anywhere. One of the most striking features of the season was the astonlshinglj- liberal "patronage that attended the fall meeting at Latonia, in the face of continuouslj- inclement conditions. This is taken to indicate that the Latonia management, by painstaking effort, has succeeded in regaining the public favor that was a great factor in the success of Latonia racing j-ears ago, but which, for various reasons, had been more or less withheld of late. There has always been much sentiment of a healthy sort in connection with Kentuekj racing. Tlie Kentuekj- Derbj- is an event that arouses interest far out of proportion to its intrinsic value. This is largely because of the historic associations with which the race has been invested with passing years. Within the past two or three years other events have lseon instituted that bid fair in future years to vie with the Derby in public interest. In fact, the Kentucky Endurance Stakes, the third running of which took place this season, is alroadj- doing so. It was one of the most talked about races in America this season and, though it did not turn out so gloriously or satisfactorily this season as in its former runnings, that was not the fault of the New Louisville Jockey Club, but rather furnished an object lesson of the decadence of the art of properly training horses to race four miles. The Kentuekj- Endurance Stakes was the headliner of a series of long-distance races run during the fall meetings, with the Louisville Cup, which preceded it at Douglas Park, and tlie Latonia Cup. run on the closing day of the season, as supplemental features. This series of long-distance races is a distinctive feature of Kentucky racing that cannot be duplicated elsewhere in America. As in previous years, the Latonia Jockey Club led the other associations in respect to amount of monoj-distributed, as a natural result of the greater length of racing time at that course than at any other. The following tabulation sets forth In a general way the results of the year on the various Kentucky courses: s: x a g ss s s! si o y s sf 3f 3 g 3g i gff Sff Sp g " o 58" S Si" Iff El g oo in n 3.n si 2- 5ti andm -M, : a g S and SSsa eymi... 5, a 9 ?. off . . 1 " i r ? - . o : : 2 o - ? S : : : : : ? : : s ;. . : : 8 Churchill Downs Spring 13 79 95 150 $ C9.5G3 SO 20 29 12 12 .38 Churchill Downs Autumn 10 02 SO 125 57,001 25 12 25 0 0 .40 Latonia Spring 2t 140 109 2 131,450 54. 34 OS 14 IS .37 latonia Autumn IS 10S 114 171 S3.2S5 39 15 34 17 0 .30 Lexington Spring 11 00 S7 149 41,970 30 19 IS 10 11 .4 Lexington Autumn 9 55 77 US 2.1,910 22 10 17 5 12 .40 Douglas Park Spring 12 73 95 350 75,955 20 17 30 7 4 .30 IXUgbis Park Autumn 11 Of. 77 123 52,955 IS 21 27 O 2 .27 Totals and Grand Percentage 10S 055 :19,750 244 154 25S 77 70 .37 Dead heat. All of the Kentucky Iracks except Lexingtou distributed more money than in the preceding year. The showing of the various organizations in this respect from 1909 to 1913, inclusive, is as follows: Organizations. 1909. 1910. 1911. 1912. 1913. New Louisville Jockev Club $ 78.750 44,539 70,900 19,030 27,225 Latonia Jockev Club 17S,9G5 171,750 225.3S5 182.S15 217,735 Kentucky Association 10,500 39,710 00,454 07,725 05,880 Douglas Park Jockey Club 75,220 128,910 Totals GS,215 55,999 02,799 45,390 39,750 Tlie following tabulation gives data as to the number of races and racing days and tlie average daily distribution in which latter item tlie Douglas Park Jockey Club wrested supremacy from the New Louisville Jockej- Club, which had hitherto been the leader: Racing Races Davs Bun Daily Ay. Daily At. Daily At. Daily Av. Daily At. Track. 1913. 1913. 1909. 1910. 1911. 1912. 1913. Churchill Downs 23 141 ,540.32 ,441.40 ,310.15 ,9S4.5S ,531.52 Latonia 42 254 2.40G.2S 3,180.55 4,097.91 4.251.S1 5.1S4.17 Lexingtou 20 121 1.5C0.00 2,481.87 3,022.70 2.S21.S7 3,294.00 Douglas Park 23 139 1HH -U 78.89 5,004.78 Totals and Gen. AT...10S G55 ,394.09 ,178.50 ,9S9.05 ,051.93 ,997.77 It was E. B. Bradleys good fortune to win more money in stakes and purses than any owner whose horses raced over the Kentucky circuit. His stable earnings amounted to 2,220. J. N. Camden, thanks to the prowess of his good young racers, came next with earnings of 0,050, while Adair and Baker follow with a credit of S,721. The following tabulation shows the record of the 1G4 owners who won 00 and over on the Kentucky tracks: Owner. 1st. 2d. 3d. Amt. Bradlej", E. R 25 24 2S 2,220 Camden, J. N. 21 12 11 20,050 Adair and Baker . 23 14 17 18,721 Yanke, W . G ...21 10 15 14,909 Applegate. II. C 8 2 0 14,787 Emmous, H. II 4 0 1 13.700 .McDowell. T. C 23 17 9 13,555 Weaver, J. T 0 5 13 12,920 MacMauus, J 19 0 23 12,900 Long, G. J 13 9 12 10.S35 Humphrey. A. P. Jr 11 17 10,527 Weir; P. D 12 11 15 10,207 Turney. A. 10 15 9 9.94 Schorr, J. W 15 15 2 9,910 Johnson, J. AV 0 5 9 9,892 Haves, T. P 2 S 4 9.SG9 Livingston, Mrs. L. A 1 0 9.750 Milam, J. C W 1" W Mackenzie, B. J U S 4 8,920 Weber and Ward 13 S 4 8.008 Livingston. J 10 10 14 ,,710 CauiC J. C 8 11 7.230 Brandt, II. B 13 3 0 0.553 Moore, M. C 0 S 4 0.S42 Ileadley, II. P S 12 11 0,010 Hendrie, G. M 7 0 4 0,499 Worthington 9 3 2 5.337 Orefer and Bender 4 2 7 4,910 loode, J. M 7 O 0 4,099 Baker, A 0 ii 7 4.09G Zimmer. J. M 4 1 0 4.510 Woodford. C 7 1 G 4,412 Bespess, J. B 1 0 4.310 Van Meter. C. C 4 :! 0 4,247 Schrelber, J 0 O 7 4.0S1 Pons. P. J 7 4 1 4.055 Oueck Stable : 7 0 4 3.913 Guthrie, B. P ..0 7 S 3,701 Marion. L 0 4 ! 3,382 Aste, A. L , 1 O 0 3.2S0 Blanch!, O. A 0 0 0 3,243 Gallaher Bros. 0 4 4 3,210 Gasser, C. W 7 0 1 3,099 Gruber. M. B 3 3 1 3,095 Oots, n G 2 2 3.025 Gaffuey, J. V 4 4 7 2.89S Weaver. W. C 0 2 0 2,811 Messervy. J. W 2 0 1 2.835 Clay Bros 0 0 2 2.790 Scott. D. W 3 7 9 2.7S4 Cowdln, K. C 4 1 1 2.777 Speuce. K 4 4 2 2.773 May, J. W 4 11 0 2.700 Hewitt. II. II. 4 2 2 2.710 Miller and Moreland i 4 5 7 2.72G Kirwan. W. A , 4 0 4 2.039 Colston, It a i 3 2,013 Owner. 1st. 2d. 3d. Amt. Young, W. J 3 5 3 $ 2,505 Brown. T. J S 9 1 2.500 Walker, P. M : 4 3 2 2.3S0 McCargo. E. L". 0 4 7 2,332 Crosthwaite and Kodgers 4 2 3 2.313 Gritlin, J 3 0 2,229 Hawkins, J. S 3 3 7 2,220 Shobe, L. C 3 9 4 2,182 .Sheridan, P y 1 0 2,103 McKenna, C. W. ...2 1 1 2,090 Doerhocfer and. West 3 0 3 2,091 Cuda, J 3 5 3 2,042 Linker, W : 2 4 1 2,025 Carpenter. T. L. 4 1 1 2,015 Grater. W 3 i 4 2,008 Hamilton. C. E ..a 2 5 1,989 Iilrsch, S 2 7 3 1.979 Williams Bros 3 5 0 1.93S Hj-ams, P 2 5 0 1,933 Perguson. A. L 3 tl 1 1.931 Marshall. B. P. 2 4 O 1,900 Sotille, S ... 4 2 2 1.S79 Colton, M. A 3 4 2 1.S32 Dunlap, A. G 3 3 1 1.S0S Hughes. J. T. 2 0 S 1.790 Nuckols, S. C 3 2 2 1,770 Graves and Innes .. 3 4 4 1,703 Spiet and Powers w 2 O 2 1,747 Keene, J. O. and G. II 2 5 3 1,740 Reidinger. C. W 3 1 0 1.G50 Bedford. S 3 1 1 1.020 Johnson, G. M 3 2 1 1.5S4 Darden, W. W 2 4 :: 1.054 Mahoney and Shannon 3 O 3 1,539 Newman. J. P. and II. S 2 1 0 l,5:iS Boss and Loonej- 2 3 2 1.4SG Plynn. T. W 2 2 4 1.484 Spreckels, A. B 2 1 4 1,454 Civiil. P. M. 2 1 0 1,438 Harrison. T. S 3 3 1 1,429 Shields, M. 2 3 0 1.410 Macias, R 3 0 1 , 1,409 McCarren. J. II. . t 2 1 1 1,319 Perkins, W 1 4 2 1.303 Veiller, S :. 2 2 0 1,274 Mead, J. II 2 1 2 1,253 Lowe. A. B 2 1 1 1,244 Deavenport, J. H 1 2 1 1.240 McCoulskey. II ..2 1 2 1,204 Wallace, W. M 2 0 :j 1,137 Crawford, W. II. 1 2 1 1.045 Hawkins. P. II. 1 3 4 1,040 Gruber and Cochel 2 0 0 975 Lewis, W. L 1 1 7 970 Howser. S. It 1 3 1 930 Benziuger. II 1 3 2 928 Madden. J. E 2 1 0 920 Moore, E. W 1 4 2 882 Egan, R. 0 0 0 4 870 Weber, W. J 1 2 3 807 Ravlwuld, W. J 1 1 4 802 Allen and Hensley 1 2 1 848 Barbeo and Haves 1 2 1 S44 Ilallenheck, II. C 0 3 4 820 Continued on second page.
