Secretariats PPs are interesting

[Stillriledup]

In all 21 of his lifetime starts, he either won by 1.5 lengths or more or lost by 1 length or more, he was never in any race where he had to win a race by a nose or a head. Which race did he show gameness? Seems like 21 lifetime starts he either didn't have to be game because he won so easily, or lost easily enough where he wasn't battling for the win.

Horses who are game by nature (not saying secretariat wasn't) seem to almost find themselves in situations to show that gameness off, it's amazing to me that as great as Sec was, he was never in the battle of his life for the win in any race. 21 shots and we never got to see him head and head down to the wire like affirmed and alydar did on a few occasions.

Two questions for Secretariat experts if you don't mind.
1) why did Turcotte not ride him in his final start, I'm guessing he was hurt but never remember hearing it

2) the lifetime pps of secretariat on secretariat dot com seem to say he lost 5 races 21 - 16 3 1 but the pps there only show 4 losses (first life start, wood mem to angle light, Whitney to onion and Woodward to prove out) was there 5 losses?

[johnhannibalsmith]

Got DQed as 2yo in the Champagne and Turcotte got days before the Woodbine race.

[FocusWiz]

1) why did Turcotte not ride him in his final start, I'm guessing he was hurt but never remember hearing itNot sure of the second question, but I seem to recall it was a suspension of some kind. I do not recall the details.

[Stillriledup]

Got DQed as 2yo in the Champagne and Turcotte got days before the Woodbine race.

Wow, that doesn't happen today, right? Don't jocks get to ride 'designated races' during suspensions?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Wow, that doesn't happen today, right? Don't jocks get to ride 'designated races' during suspensions?


I don't think so - do you have an 'example?'

[Stillriledup]

I don't think so - do you have an 'example?'

Not a specific one but I remember in California certain jocks riding one stakes race during the day, I just assumed as part of their 'days' they get to ride graded races, but I don't know for sure maybe I dreamed up the whole thing. (Which wouldn't be the first time :D )

[RacingFan1992]

I don't think so - do you have an 'example?'

The only one I could think of was for a trainer and his suspension didn't go into effect until after a certain race. It was Doug O' Neil in 2012 when IHA was going for the TC. His suspension went into effect after the Belmont but that didn't matter pretty much. I have never seen jockeys or trainers allowed to participate during suspensions.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Wow, that doesn't happen today, right? Don't jocks get to ride 'designated races' during suspensions?

I can only speak to the jurisdictions with which I am familiar as far as current rules but your are correct on that front.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I don't think so - do you have an 'example?'

Here's the Cal rule:

Damn the image was going to blow the thread off the page if I left it up for clarity's sake. So we'll just make a mess with cut and paste text.

(a) The Board of Stewards appointed for a race meeting shall, immediately prior to the commencement of that meeting, designate the stakes, futurities or futurity trials or other races in which a jockey or a driver who is under suspension for ten days or less for a riding or driving infraction will be permitted to compete, notwithstanding the fact that such jockey or driver is technically under suspension at the time the designated race is to be run. (b) Official rulings for riding or driving infractions of ten days or less shall state: "The term of this suspension shall not prohibit participation in designated races in California." However, the Board of Stewards may prohibit a jockey or a driver from participating in designated races if such jockey or driver has previously been suspended at least twice during the race meeting specified in subsection (a) of this rule. (c) Prior to the commencement of a meeting, a listing of the races designated in accordance with subsection (a) of this rule shall be submitted in writing to the Board. A copy of the list of designated races shall be posted in the Jockey or Driver's Room, and any other such place deemed appropriate by the stewards. (d) A suspended jockey or driver must be named at the time of entry to participate in any designated race. (e) A day in which a suspended jockey or driver participates in one designated race in California shall count as a suspension day. (f) A day in which a suspended jockey or driver participates in more than one designated race in California shall not count as a suspension day. (g) Notwithstanding the above, a day in which a jockey or a driver participates in one or more designated races in another jurisdiction while under suspension in California shall not count as a suspension day. (h) A suspended jockey or driver who participates in more than one designated race under subsection (f) of this regulation, or in one or more designated race(s) under subsection (g) of this regulation, shall complete his or her term of suspension on an equivalent day of the week following the day on which the jockey or driver participated in the designated race(s). NOTE: Authority cited: Section 19460, Business and Professions Code. Reference: Sections 19460, 19461 and 19520, Business and Professions Code. HISTORY: 1. New rule filed 3-8-93; effective 4-7-93. 2. Amendment filed 9-9-10; effective 10-9-10.

[Prytanis]

Turcotte got days when his mount got DQed 4days earlier.
He didn't appeal the suspension and he also missed
Riva Ridge's final race,the JCGC the day before!
BTW Riva Ridge finished last.

[Stillriledup]

Turcotte got days when his mount got DQed 4days earlier.
He didn't appeal the suspension and he also missed
Riva Ridge's final race,the JCGC the day before!
BTW Riva Ridge finished last.

Times have changed for sure, could you imagine telling the owner of a triple crown winner that you have to select an alternate jock, no way that flies in 2015.

[cj]

Times have changed for sure, could you imagine telling the owner of a triple crown winner that you have to select an alternate jock, no way that flies in 2015.


Jockeys use the appeal process to avoid missing important races these days.

[BlueChip@DRF]

Secretariat Lifetime PPS (http://static.drf.com/PPs/triple-crown-winners/Secretariat.pdf)

[Stillriledup]

Aah, I didn't see the stewards stole a win from him, that's the answer to my 2nd question.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Aah, I didn't see the stewards stole a win from him, that's the answer to my 2nd question.

I guess my first reply was too wordy. :lol:

[whodoyoulike]

In all 21 of his lifetime starts, he either won by 1.5 lengths or more or lost by 1 length or more, he was never in any race where he had to win a race by a nose or a head. Which race did he show gameness? Seems like 21 lifetime starts he either didn't have to be game because he won so easily, or lost easily enough where he wasn't battling for the win.

Horses who are game by nature (not saying secretariat wasn't) seem to almost find themselves in situations to show that gameness off, it's amazing to me that as great as Sec was, he was never in the battle of his life for the win in any race. 21 shots and we never got to see him head and head down to the wire like affirmed and alydar did on a few occasions...

I just recall watching maybe 3 or 4 of his races on TV and he seemed pretty competitive in those. I didn't see his first race but, I think he slammed into the gate as it opened which contributed to his loss. I think his style made it look like easy wins.

[tucker6]

I just recall watching maybe 3 or 4 of his races on TV and he seemed pretty competitive in those. I didn't see his first race but, I think he slammed into the gate as it opened which contributed to his loss. I think his style made it look like easy wins.
No, he got mugged coming out of the gate. Almost went down.

[Stillriledup]

I guess my first reply was too wordy. :lol:

I had a brain fart, I was reading that as your response to question number 1 and didn't put 2 and 2 together :D

[dilanesp]

It's entirely possible that Secretariat didn't have any "heart"-- that if he got into a competitive situation, he just gave up. Some horses are like that, who knows? It's a skill-- horses like Affirmed really did dig in when they are challenged. (Some horses only performed well when challenged; Buckpasser famously would slow down if he pulled away too soon.)

I tend to favor that explanation over the one usually given by his fans, which is that he was supposed to go undefeated and every race he lost had an excuse.

[PICSIX]

Secretariat Lifetime PPS (http://static.drf.com/PPs/triple-crown-winners/Secretariat.pdf)

You've got to love the Belmont Stakes comment, "Ridden Out" :lol: :lol:

[Stillriledup]

It's entirely possible that Secretariat didn't have any "heart"-- that if he got into a competitive situation, he just gave up. Some horses are like that, who knows? It's a skill-- horses like Affirmed really did dig in when they are challenged. (Some horses only performed well when challenged; Buckpasser famously would slow down if he pulled away too soon.)

I tend to favor that explanation over the one usually given by his fans, which is that he was supposed to go undefeated and every race he lost had an excuse.

The one race where he 'battled' he lost to onion. When you are incredibly great, you don't really have to be game I guess. The thing that interests me is that in his 4 physical losses, he wasn't really super close to winning, so to me, that's a large enough sample to say its odd that a horse who won so effortlessly and by such large margins in every other rsce wasn't in battles in his losses, could he just have not been in the mood to run those days?

Now someone can say that there were only 4 'non battles' but in all his races he won, there wasn't really a battle. All 21 races and zero battles.

[Stillriledup]

You've got to love the Belmont Stakes comment, "Ridden Out" :lol: :lol:

The loss to onion should have been "lost tearjerker" :D

[johnhannibalsmith]

The loss to onion should have been "lost tearjerker" :D

Not bad. :)

[dnlgfnk]

Secretariat's (#4 in debut) first few races, plus '73 Marlboro...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Khpjhzld7nw

...not sure what people are looking for. In the latter race, he eyeballed Riva Ridge all around the stretch turn to midstretch before demoralizing Riva. I remember a race where Niatross was such a force that it seemed every other horse in the stretch broke stride. I'd rather witness Secretariat's move on the first turn at Pimlico, or the Niatross race, then a blanket finish.

[dilanesp]

Secretariat's (#4 in debut) first few races, plus '73 Marlboro...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Khpjhzld7nw

...not sure what people are looking for. In the latter race, he eyeballed Riva Ridge all around the stretch turn to midstretch before demoralizing Riva. I remember a race where Niatross was such a force that it seemed every other horse in the stretch broke stride. I'd rather witness Secretariat's move on the first turn at Pimlico, or the Niatross race, then a blanket finish.

Was Riva Ridge even being ridden to win?

[tucker6]

Was Riva Ridge even being ridden to win?
Secretariat was $6M in the bag already. Riva still had upside to his shed price. Stop with the hate already.

[tucker6]

Secretariat's (#4 in debut) first few races, plus '73 Marlboro...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Khpjhzld7nw

...not sure what people are looking for. In the latter race, he eyeballed Riva Ridge all around the stretch turn to midstretch before demoralizing Riva. I remember a race where Niatross was such a force that it seemed every other horse in the stretch broke stride. I'd rather witness Secretariat's move on the first turn at Pimlico, or the Niatross race, then a blanket finish.
Precisely. Some in this thread think that a winning move against another horse always needs to happen at the wire, and that being much the best is a negative.

[dilanesp]

Secretariat was $6M in the bag already. Riva still had upside to his shed price. Stop with the hate already.

It isn't hate. In my experience, when a coupled entry runs one-two in a big stakes race, the winner is whomever the connections want to win.

I certainly don't give Secretariat any CREDIT for beating Riva Ridge. He does get credit for beating the rest of the Marlboro field, though.

[tucker6]

It isn't hate. In my experience, when a coupled entry runs one-two in a big stakes race, the winner is whomever the connections want to win.

I certainly don't give Secretariat any CREDIT for beating Riva Ridge. He does get credit for beating the rest of the Marlboro field, though.
That is true, but I do not see it in this race. Honestly, Secretariat was so much more than Riva Ridge could be. Not sure Riva needed to be held back in that race to finish 2nd.

[BlueChip@DRF]

You've got to love the Belmont Stakes comment, "Ridden Out" :lol: :lol:


Should have been "Rider not trying to fall off"

[affirmedny]

Secretariat was $6M in the bag already. Riva still had upside to his shed price. Stop with the hate already.


my recollection is they were syndicated at the same time.

[outofthebox]

Was Riva Ridge even being ridden to win?Did you watch the race? Riva was whipped 10 times and ridden out very hard to the wire. Secretariat on the other hand was only shown the whip twice, never struck. Your reply should have been was Secretariat even ridden to win. Left in his wake this day was a Hollywood Gold Cup winner, Big Cap winner, two Travers Stakes winner along with his talented stablemate.

[clocker7]

If I had to ascribe a couple of Big Red's losses to any common factor, it would be to his difficulty as a more mature colt to handle deeper tracks. As he got older, his size and relative "blockiness" worked against his favor, imo. Whitney. Woodward. And maybe a dollop of overuse late in his career figuring in.

Don't even begin to regurgitate the health or training rationalizations by his connections for those. Not buying them. The boil in his mouth for the Wood? Probably a lesser factor than a dull pace that favored his stablemate.

IOW, he wasn't a wonder horse plagued by ridiculous circumstances that thwarted perfection. No, he was just one of the all-time greats that had limitations, like the other small subset of his quality.

[mountainman]

If I had to ascribe a couple of Big Red's losses to any common factor, it would be to his difficulty as a more mature colt to handle deeper tracks. As he got older, his size and relative "blockiness" worked against his favor, imo. Whitney. Woodward. And maybe a dollop of overuse late in his career figuring in.

Don't even begin to regurgitate the health or training rationalizations by his connections for those. Not buying them. The boil in his mouth for the Wood? Probably a lesser factor than a dull pace that favored his stablemate.

IOW, he wasn't a wonder horse plagued by ridiculous circumstances that thwarted perfection. No, he was just one of the all-time greats that had limitations, like the other small subset of his quality.

Sharp post. There IS no need to rationalize or alibi Secretariat's losses. I never bought the excuses, yet consider him one of the true immortals-perhaps the most explosive, talented horse of all time. In my opinion, he ran on unrivaled ability, but when challenged or meeting with determined resistance, lacked the tenacity of an Affirmed or John Henry, two lesser greats, each loaded with heart.