I notice that the latest articles at both
Bloodhorse and
DRF which initially mentioned Roseben winning 19 in 1905 have been editied to remove those references.
Looks like the wagons are circling to defend an inaccurate narrative.
I say that Citation doesn't hold the record, because the people involved in racing when he ran in 1948 did not see him as setting the record.
Take this paragraph from on page 4 of the 1949 American Racing Manual in "The Review of 1948 Races" by Evan Shipman:
The story is quickly told. Citation, in whom trainer Jimmy Jones and owner Warren Wright had every confidence, swept the platter clean. The husky bay broke the jinx that forbade a Futurity winner to go on and capture the Kentucky Derby; he won the "Triple Crown"; he was in training from early February until mid-December; he scored in 19 of his 20 starts; his only defeat was as much of a fluke as when Upset turned back Man o' War in the Sanford Memorial; he earned more money than any horse ever won in a single season; he delighted the public and he fascinated the severest critic. In short, Citation is a phenonmenon for whom any lover of the thoroughbred horse can be grateful.
Citation
is credited with a record ("he earned more money than any horse ever won in a single season"), but not the one we're now being told is the important one. In fact, that one, 'the most wins in a year,' isn't mentioned at all, either in this article or the one on his being named Best Horse of the Year.
Why would that be? Maybe, because the turf writers and public didn't see Citation's 19 wins as being a record breaking performance at all. And if the people who were most familar with the landscape of racing in the first half of the 20th century didn't see it as a record why should we?
