10F isn't a marathon........

[WinterTriangle]

....but it might as well be. To me, 10F is really the minimum of a truly classic distance race.

Wanted to continue this conversation outside of the Rachel topic, as it really didn't belong there:

geez, i don't think i'd want to lay the blame for the lack of top horses out of the phipps stable at shugs feet. i believe he's old school and think he would not participate in juicing which would hurt them in being competitive with those that do juice.

i don't know enough about the phipp band of mares, but their young horses don't seem to come out blazing like some of the more prominent young horse outfits. you take a guy like wesley ward and his young horses that always come out blazing. .

Lemme know when Wesley Ward gets in the HOF for winning classic distance races, or when he can train a Kelso, Sea Bird, or Makybe Diva or something even close. ;) Or when he even begins to approximate Shug or Charlie Wittingham types.

What we have now is people looking for a fast return on their purchases, instead of the great racing families we used to enjoy in the US, who knew how to breed---- for some stamina. Who didn't think 10F was a marathon. :) And understand that getting true classic distances is about stamina (and speed, but that which can be carried over a distance surely). And you have to build that...... Horses can come "blazing" but the kind of speed that can be carried over a classic distance is built....and it takes patience and time. You start out training for speed and gate acceleration...then the real work begins if you're gonna have a 10F+ champion. To me, to accomplish this rightly, you need a horse with durability....because this takes time, and the horse needs experience. We can't do this in a framework of retiring horses at 3 or 4.

Adhering to the necessity to win early, and win often, and retire early does not work with 10F+ distances......doing so probably just gives you a horse in bad condition who doesn't last.

SO WE'RE BACK TO PHIPPS and racing families like them: ALL THIS REQUIRES FUNDS. :) So it's obvious why it isn't a training strategy that is used a lot anymore.

US racing is shortening up distances--- either to match the attention spans of it's up-and-coming younger fans--- or to match the reality that breeders don't find stamina commercially significant, and few trainers care to train for it. Lukas wanted to shorten the distances of the TC races! :bang:

10F+ no longer defines the Classic distance for US racehorses, it's been shortened to 9F. (While Yeats was winning the Ascot Gold Cup, we were having congressional hearings about how drugs were ruining our sport. ) The Suburban is just one of many races in the US that have been shortened, (Mother Goose, JCGC, etc.) As a fan of classic breeding and classic distances, I am disheartened. I am a fan of speed, too, but I consider real speed as that which can be carried over a distance, unless the horse is a sprinter. :)

Sid Fernando has a good article on this below. So does Jay Leimbach.

I have always found it odd that the *preservationists* always say how they want to keep dirt, because of *history*, but seem to have no problem shortening distances. These things don't add up to me. :confused:

Needless to say, I'm a fan of Phipps breeding, and so be it, for all the reasons I gave. And also of Shug, who is an old school and very honest trainer who has the patience that is required to train horses for long careers, not these make-money-quick types. (Haskin once said that stayers are something akin to plow horses here in the land of speed.) I'm into toughening the breed and giving them stamina and durability....durable enough to have long careers.

I don't bet on pure speed in classic distance routes, and I never will. The horse has to be able to get to the wire, and run past tiring horses* (who are vulnerable at the distance) So...... you really don't need to be super fast to run past horses who are gasping in the final stretch, do ya. ;)

Shug saw that very clearly on Sunday and I'd say he "handicapped" the race rather perfectly. :)

Anyway, here's Sid's and Jay's articles---I agree with a lot of it:

http://sidfernando.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/the-tale-of-the-suburban-cap-and-mall-culturally-significant/

http://fmitchell07.wordpress.com/2009/06/08/understanding-stamina-and-classic-performance/

[Charlie D]

While Yeats was winning the Ascot Gold Cup,


Gold Cup is not a Classic Distance, so it is probably irrelevant to the thrust of your argument WT

8f, , 12f, 14f are the Classic Distances in UK, 8, 10, 12F in France and Ireland and using these races (Arc, Derby, St Leger etc ) would have probably been better.


Other than that OK :)

[WinterTriangle]

Gold Cup is not a Classic Distance, so it is probably irrelevant to the thrust of your argument WT

8f, , 12f, 14f are the Classic Distances in UK, 8, 10, 12F in France and Ireland and using these races (Arc, Derby, St Leger etc ) would have probably been better.


Other than that OK :)

Thank you, Charlie, for getting the jist of what I wanted to say, even though I admittedly sometimes get a few details wrong (and then the conversation sometimes turns into getting beat up over the trees rather than the forest.)

Anyway, we all concentrate on our favorite kind of racing, and that is what we get good at? I am often pretty clueless in sprint races, and even 7F and milers. (Munnings, etc. I can never figure these out!).

Some people are good at all of 'em, god love 'em, I just have to concentrate on a few tracks and a few distances/surfaces.

PS lemme know what you think about the articles.

[DeanT]

You make an excellent contribution to the board.

I will get to this after I dissect everything :)

Nice post.

[Nikki1997]

Great post and great points, WT .

It was a grand thing when our horses could go fast and long .

When the last of our cup races-, the JCGC shrunk from sixteen furlongs, to twelve, to ten, I remember two schoolgirls hitchiking in the rain in their miniskirts to see Shuvee do it for the second time .

Twelve furlong races were more common than ten furlongs now, and the Gallant Fox was thirteen, if memory serves .

Mikki

[nearco]

Gold Cup is not a Classic Distance, so it is probably irrelevant to the thrust of your argument WT

8f, , 12f, 14f are the Classic Distances in UK, 8, 10, 12F in France and Ireland and using these races (Arc, Derby, St Leger etc ) would have probably been better.



Chuck, the Irish Classic distances are exactly the same as the English, well technically the Irish Leger is actually 14f, not the 14.5f the English one is, but they are more or less the same.
The French "Leger", Prix Royal Oak G1, is 15.5f. Of course, whether there ever was a true triple crown in France and whether the Grand Prix de Paris or the Prix Royal Oak was it's 3rd leg is a matter of debate.

Japanese Triple Crown 8f, 12f, 15f
Aussie Triple Crown 8f, 10f, 12f
Argentina TC 8f(dirt), 10f(turf), 12.5f(dirt)

[Cratos]

....but it might as well be. To me, 10F is really the minimum of a truly classic distance race.

Wanted to continue this conversation outside of the Rachel topic, as it really didn't belong there:



Lemme know when Wesley Ward gets in the HOF for winning classic distance races, or when he can train a Kelso, Sea Bird, or Makybe Diva or something even close. ;) Or when he even begins to approximate Shug or Charlie Wittingham types.

What we have now is people looking for a fast return on their purchases, instead of the great racing families we used to enjoy in the US, who knew how to breed---- for some stamina. Who didn't think 10F was a marathon. :) And understand that getting true classic distances is about stamina (and speed, but that which can be carried over a distance surely). And you have to build that...... Horses can come "blazing" but the kind of speed that can be carried over a classic distance is built....and it takes patience and time. You start out training for speed and gate acceleration...then the real work begins if you're gonna have a 10F+ champion. To me, to accomplish this rightly, you need a horse with durability....because this takes time, and the horse needs experience. We can't do this in a framework of retiring horses at 3 or 4.

Adhering to the necessity to win early, and win often, and retire early does not work with 10F+ distances......doing so probably just gives you a horse in bad condition who doesn't last.

SO WE'RE BACK TO PHIPPS and racing families like them: ALL THIS REQUIRES FUNDS. :) So it's obvious why it isn't a training strategy that is used a lot anymore.

US racing is shortening up distances--- either to match the attention spans of it's up-and-coming younger fans--- or to match the reality that breeders don't find stamina commercially significant, and few trainers care to train for it. Lukas wanted to shorten the distances of the TC races! :bang:

10F+ no longer defines the Classic distance for US racehorses, it's been shortened to 9F. (While Yeats was winning the Ascot Gold Cup, we were having congressional hearings about how drugs were ruining our sport. ) The Suburban is just one of many races in the US that have been shortened, (Mother Goose, JCGC, etc.) As a fan of classic breeding and classic distances, I am disheartened. I am a fan of speed, too, but I consider real speed as that which can be carried over a distance, unless the horse is a sprinter. :)

Sid Fernando has a good article on this below. So does Jay Leimbach.

I have always found it odd that the *preservationists* always say how they want to keep dirt, because of *history*, but seem to have no problem shortening distances. These things don't add up to me. :confused:

Needless to say, I'm a fan of Phipps breeding, and so be it, for all the reasons I gave. And also of Shug, who is an old school and very honest trainer who has the patience that is required to train horses for long careers, not these make-money-quick types. (Haskin once said that stayers are something akin to plow horses here in the land of speed.) I'm into toughening the breed and giving them stamina and durability....durable enough to have long careers.

I don't bet on pure speed in classic distance routes, and I never will. The horse has to be able to get to the wire, and run past tiring horses* (who are vulnerable at the distance) So...... you really don't need to be super fast to run past horses who are gasping in the final stretch, do ya. ;)

Shug saw that very clearly on Sunday and I'd say he "handicapped" the race rather perfectly. :)

Anyway, here's Sid's and Jay's articles---I agree with a lot of it:

http://sidfernando.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/the-tale-of-the-suburban-cap-and-mall-culturally-significant/

http://fmitchell07.wordpress.com/2009/06/08/understanding-stamina-and-classic-performance/

And you are a very honest poster; thanks for posting

[Charlie D]

nearco. I forgot the Irish St Leger,:eek: but no real surprise, as i don't really take much interest in races over 12f :)

[nearco]

Winter Triangle, I think a more relevant point is that the American classic distances represent distances that are very very rarely attempted by American racehorses. Of the the 30,000 odd foals born every year, probably 29,500, hell maybe 29,900, will never race longer than 9f, and most won't go longer than 8.5f.
By contrast the classic distances listed above for other countries are distances attempted every day of the week by horses in those countries, even the slow cheap ones.

[Charlie D]

By contrast the classic distances listed above for other countries are distances attempted every day of the week by horses in those countries, even the slow cheap ones.




Correct, maybe US should have loads of Cheap Claimers at 10f, 12f, 14f, 16f :)

[HuggingTheRail]

Where will the decrease in distance stop? Soon, anything with a turn will be considered a marathon?

[CincyHorseplayer]

If 10-12-14 furlong races were commonplace it would ruin your niche WT!

There wouldn't be too much of a need for breeding angles if most of the entrants had actual races at such distances to judge them on.For newbies at such it would,but that's how it is now.

Personally I like all distances except 5f or less.

[csperberg]

here is a link to an SI article from their vault that is 49 years old talking about too much sprint racing. I find it interesting that 49 years later we are still complaining about it.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1072369/index.htmApril

I have a thread called Tales from the Vault look it up if anyone wants to check out some more links I have put up there, there are some very interesting reads going back 50+ years

[RXB]

Where will the decrease in distance stop? Soon, anything with a turn will be considered a marathon?

We're getting there. :(

Kudos to the original post in this thread, and also to SonnyP's quoted comment regarding Shug.

[Steve R]

....but it might as well be. To me, 10F is really the minimum of a truly classic distance race.

Wanted to continue this conversation outside of the Rachel topic, as it really didn't belong there:



Lemme know when Wesley Ward gets in the HOF for winning classic distance races, or when he can train a Kelso, Sea Bird, or Makybe Diva or something even close. ;) Or when he even begins to approximate Shug or Charlie Wittingham types.

What we have now is people looking for a fast return on their purchases, instead of the great racing families we used to enjoy in the US, who knew how to breed---- for some stamina. Who didn't think 10F was a marathon. :) And understand that getting true classic distances is about stamina (and speed, but that which can be carried over a distance surely). And you have to build that...... Horses can come "blazing" but the kind of speed that can be carried over a classic distance is built....and it takes patience and time. You start out training for speed and gate acceleration...then the real work begins if you're gonna have a 10F+ champion. To me, to accomplish this rightly, you need a horse with durability....because this takes time, and the horse needs experience. We can't do this in a framework of retiring horses at 3 or 4.

Adhering to the necessity to win early, and win often, and retire early does not work with 10F+ distances......doing so probably just gives you a horse in bad condition who doesn't last.

SO WE'RE BACK TO PHIPPS and racing families like them: ALL THIS REQUIRES FUNDS. :) So it's obvious why it isn't a training strategy that is used a lot anymore.

US racing is shortening up distances--- either to match the attention spans of it's up-and-coming younger fans--- or to match the reality that breeders don't find stamina commercially significant, and few trainers care to train for it. Lukas wanted to shorten the distances of the TC races! :bang:

10F+ no longer defines the Classic distance for US racehorses, it's been shortened to 9F. (While Yeats was winning the Ascot Gold Cup, we were having congressional hearings about how drugs were ruining our sport. ) The Suburban is just one of many races in the US that have been shortened, (Mother Goose, JCGC, etc.) As a fan of classic breeding and classic distances, I am disheartened. I am a fan of speed, too, but I consider real speed as that which can be carried over a distance, unless the horse is a sprinter. :)

Sid Fernando has a good article on this below. So does Jay Leimbach.

I have always found it odd that the *preservationists* always say how they want to keep dirt, because of *history*, but seem to have no problem shortening distances. These things don't add up to me. :confused:

Needless to say, I'm a fan of Phipps breeding, and so be it, for all the reasons I gave. And also of Shug, who is an old school and very honest trainer who has the patience that is required to train horses for long careers, not these make-money-quick types. (Haskin once said that stayers are something akin to plow horses here in the land of speed.) I'm into toughening the breed and giving them stamina and durability....durable enough to have long careers.

I don't bet on pure speed in classic distance routes, and I never will. The horse has to be able to get to the wire, and run past tiring horses* (who are vulnerable at the distance) So...... you really don't need to be super fast to run past horses who are gasping in the final stretch, do ya. ;)

Shug saw that very clearly on Sunday and I'd say he "handicapped" the race rather perfectly. :)

Anyway, here's Sid's and Jay's articles---I agree with a lot of it:

http://sidfernando.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/the-tale-of-the-suburban-cap-and-mall-culturally-significant/

http://fmitchell07.wordpress.com/2009/06/08/understanding-stamina-and-classic-performance/
I don't quite understand your perception of speed and stamina which, in fact, are variations of the same thing, like opposite sides of the same coin, and where one is always sacrificed in favor of the other. The real difference in quality among horses is reflected in the difference in the value of the "coin" just as a quarter is more valuable than a dime. If you plot American record times vs distance from 6 to 12 furlongs you will get an almost perfectly straight line with a correlation coefficient of 0.99998. This line is like a genetic frontier of speed where the record holders have reached the current genetic limit of the breed at their own position on the speed-stamina spectrum. Also, over the complete range, the average speed at each distance is slower than the average speed at the next shorter distance. The record holder at the 12 furlong end of the spectrum could probably never match the absolute speed of the record holder at the 6 furlong end nor could the record holder at the 6 furlong end match the stamina of the record holder at the 12 furlong end. The point is that our preoccupation with classic distances is purely cultural and has less to do with the actual physiological development of the horse. Physiologically, the greatest sprinters in history are equal to the greatest middle distance horses which are equal to the greatest routers. The only difference lies in the biochemistry and biomechanics that define the characteristics of each one's distribution describing their speed/stamina profile. Regardless of that distribution, they are all bound by the limit of the genetic frontier of speed. I'm not in any way criticizing your (and many others') preference for classic types. I am simply suggesting that it is a cultural preference and doesn't really have much to do with the inherent quality of the animal. IMHO, the greatest 440 yard Quarter Horse in history is equal in quality to the greatest classic distance Thoroughbred. They have both run as fast as a horse can possibly run at their given distance at this stage of equine evolution.

[gm10]

I don't quite understand your perception of speed and stamina which, in fact, are variations of the same thing, like opposite sides of the same coin, and where one is always sacrificed in favor of the other. The real difference in quality among horses is reflected in the difference in the value of the "coin" just as a quarter is more valuable than a dime. If you plot American record times vs distance from 6 to 12 furlongs you will get an almost perfectly straight line with a correlation coefficient of 0.99998. This line is like a genetic frontier of speed where the record holders have reached the current genetic limit of the breed at their own position on the speed-stamina spectrum. Also, over the complete range, the average speed at each distance is slower than the average speed at the next shorter distance. The record holder at the 12 furlong end of the spectrum could probably never match the absolute speed of the record holder at the 6 furlong end nor could the record holder at the 6 furlong end match the stamina of the record holder at the 12 furlong end. The point is that our preoccupation with classic distances is purely cultural and has less to do with the actual physiological development of the horse. Physiologically, the greatest sprinters in history are equal to the greatest middle distance horses which are equal to the greatest routers. The only difference lies in the biochemistry and biomechanics that define the characteristics of each one's distribution describing their speed/stamina profile. Regardless of that distribution, they are all bound by the limit of the genetic frontier of speed. I'm not in any way criticizing your (and many others') preference for classic types. I am simply suggesting that it is a cultural preference and doesn't really have much to do with the inherent quality of the animal. IMHO, the greatest 440 yard Quarter Horse in history is equal in quality to the greatest classic distance Thoroughbred. They have both run as fast as a horse can possibly run at their given distance at this stage of equine evolution.

Your point is taken, but I also wonder what the result would be if you took a moving average of record times. Say you took the record times over a rolling 5 year window, and then plotted those out for each distance. What would it look like?

[Cratos]

I don't quite understand your perception of speed and stamina which, in fact, are variations of the same thing, like opposite sides of the same coin, and where one is always sacrificed in favor of the other. The real difference in quality among horses is reflected in the difference in the value of the "coin" just as a quarter is more valuable than a dime. If you plot American record times vs distance from 6 to 12 furlongs you will get an almost perfectly straight line with a correlation coefficient of 0.99998. This line is like a genetic frontier of speed where the record holders have reached the current genetic limit of the breed at their own position on the speed-stamina spectrum. Also, over the complete range, the average speed at each distance is slower than the average speed at the next shorter distance. The record holder at the 12 furlong end of the spectrum could probably never match the absolute speed of the record holder at the 6 furlong end nor could the record holder at the 6 furlong end match the stamina of the record holder at the 12 furlong end. The point is that our preoccupation with classic distances is purely cultural and has less to do with the actual physiological development of the horse. Physiologically, the greatest sprinters in history are equal to the greatest middle distance horses which are equal to the greatest routers. The only difference lies in the biochemistry and biomechanics that define the characteristics of each one's distribution describing their speed/stamina profile. Regardless of that distribution, they are all bound by the limit of the genetic frontier of speed. I'm not in any way criticizing your (and many others') preference for classic types. I am simply suggesting that it is a cultural preference and doesn't really have much to do with the inherent quality of the animal. IMHO, the greatest 440 yard Quarter Horse in history is equal in quality to the greatest classic distance Thoroughbred. They have both run as fast as a horse can possibly run at their given distance at this stage of equine evolution.

I differ with you about speed and stamina “are variations of the same thing, like opposite sides of the same coin”

Stamina is a measure of the racehorse capability to sustain a prolonged effort over a distance. Speed of a racehorse is the magnitude of its velocity, the first derivative with acceleration being the second derivative.

Yes, it is true that any movement by a racehorse regardless how fast is construed as speed because of kinematics, but the other side of the coin doesn’t necessarily suggest stamina as much as it suggests the rate of movement.

Stamina comes into play by the racehorse as its aforementioned capability to sustain a prolonged effort over a distance.

Simply stating this, speed is time sensitive and stamina is distance sensitive

[thespaah]

Stamina is being bred out the Breed.
Save for baby races, we or at least I cannot recall 5 and 5.5f races from years ago. Now theses distances are common for older maidens and some claimers.
Another gripe of mine is a typical 9 or 10 race card will have no fewer than 50% sprint races. The rest are no longer than 8.5f...It is very rare to see a non stake race carded as 9f or longer. That applies to turf races as well.
BTW Lukas was is at the forefront of the issue of jockey weights. EVen though human beings are being born larger and the younger generations are larger in stature ,jockey weights have been level for many years. Most larger rider shave to do ridiculous things to themsleves to keep their weight down.
It is my understanding based on a tv show on HBO( JOckey) that the riders have been asking for weights to increased just a couple of pounds across the board. Trainers such as Lukas are vehemently opposed.
The point is I think that trainers of T-Bred horses think these animals are made of glass. Hence the reason for shorter distances.

[Skanoochies]

That`s why Secretariat will likely always be my favorite, speed and stamina.

1 1/4, 1 3/16, 1 1/2 on dirt, 1 1/2, 1 5/8 on turf he could run and win on them all, and of course, unfortunately he only ran at 2 and 3.

Long live his memory. :ThmbUp:

[Cratos]

That`s why Secretariat will likely always be my favorite, speed and stamina.

1 1/4, 1 3/16, 1 1/2 on dirt, 1 1/2, 1 5/8 on turf he could run and win on them all, and of course, unfortunately he only ran at 2 and 3.

Long live his memory. :ThmbUp:

You are very right; Big Red was a rare combination of speed and stamina

[Robert Fischer]

10F isn't a marathon........

Very good post WT.

You are becoming a real contributor to the forum. A horseracing analogy = you are starting to carry your enthusiasm over a classic distance. :ThmbUp:

[Robert Fischer]

funny that Ward was mentioned so quickly in this thread.

He definitely is one who immediately comes to mind with "Precocious Speed". WW also transfers this on the turf as well, and isn't limited to Early speed types, - he can get 2yos to finish in rush.

To me 6F is a cool distance for nice sprinters. I think that division also needs to include 7furlongs to add depth to the classy sprint division.
Unfortunately 6F is one of the dominant "default" distances, and you see horses with problems end up 6f claimer horses. These retread 6f races can fill cards too often.

Mile 8.5 and sometimes 7F is a nice division when the horses are classy and healthy(see a trend?).

Then my favorite is the 9F+ Division. What is a real shame IMO is when a Top Rated horse from this division who is healthy runs "down in distance"to 1-1/16th. The only time this is appropriate is when the horse is coming off a layoff and "needs a race". The trend of shortening races, particularly historic races at 10+ Furlongs is sickening and frustrating.