Secretariat's Preakness Time Under Review...

[twogunsid]

From bloodhorse.com: Hold all tickets.The Maryland Racing Commission has agreed to conduct a hearing to consider “compelling” evidence based upon advances in modern video technology regarding the long-standing controversy surrounding Secretariat's winning time in the 1973 Preakness Stakes (gr. I) at Pimlico. The request came from Penny Chenery, the owner of Secretariat, and Thomas Chuckas, president of the Maryland Jockey Club. The meeting will be held June 19 at Laurel Park beginning at 1:00 p.m. (EDT) and is open to the public.

The electronic timer in use at Pimlico for the 1973 Preakness recorded a winning time of 1:55—a clocking that quickly became the source of controversy after two independent clockers from the Daily Racing Form had individually hand-timed the race at a much faster 1:53 2/5. In the days following the Preakness, the stewards at Pimlico, and later the commission, concluded that there were “extenuating circumstances” attendant to the electronic timer’s recording. As a result, the official time was subsequently changed to that reported by Pimlico’s official hand clocker--1:54 2/5.

Read more on BloodHorse.com: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/70513/secretariats-preakness-time-under-review#ixzz1xcco5W5N

[trumad]

1. Seems if they have a film of the race it would be easy.

[twogunsid]

2. They tried that back in '73...

and were denied the record. I think it was CBS that compared Canonero II's race to Secretariat's race.

I don't know what's changed that they would give him the record now.

[Kingofalldems]

3. I remember Andrew Beyer wrote more than one column on this

He was sure Secretariat was much faster.

[twogunsid]

4. This has been a non-issue for a long time...

I don't know why they are revisiting the time issue. Even if they change it, Secretariat would be one of 3 horses with the Stakes record time and a full 1 second slower than track record holder Farma Way.

Just odd to me.

Beyers is a Secretariat fan because he gave Secretariat the biggest Beyers figure he ever recorded. He sells his figs to DRF so he has a vested interest in the recorded times. He and writer Bill Nack are good guys but I tend to disregard what ever they say about Secretariat.

Thanks for replying. I wasn't sure anyone would give a shit about this. I just thought it was oddball horse racing news.

[Kingofalldems]

5. He wrote about this long before Beyers figures came out

Actually within one day of the Preakness as I recall. He wrote for the Washington Post at that time.

[twogunsid]

6. Wasn't it the Washington Daily News?

I don't think he started at the Post until the later '70's.

Anywho, all I'm saying is this is something MD has looked at before and I don't know why it's an issue now.

You are right, Beyer has been making the argument for Secretariat from the beginning.

[twogunsid]

7. My last reply sounds kinda dickish...

I wasn't trying to sound that way, King.

Here's what I wonder. If this is done for Secretariat, and they already had a hearing back in '73, do we now go back and look at every questionable result that video is available for and change those results? Like, Genuine Risk's Preakness? Or is this a one time deal for Secretariat?

[Kingofalldems]

8. No , you're cool with me

I have been trying to remember and I think you could be right. Beyer did work for the Daily News (I actually delivered the Daily News as a kid). Anyway Secretariat came along just as I got interested in racing and I used to read Beyer religiously. As I recall the clock at Pimlico was always suspect and Beyer really harped on it in his columns.

[twogunsid]

9. OK...Good...

I guess you can tell I'm biased against Secretariat.

[trumad]

11. Why not?

I for one want accuracy.

[twogunsid]

12. The short answer is....

I'm not a Secretariat fan.

He was a great horse but he gets a lot more credit than he deserves.

[twogunsid]

16. The longer answer....

No other horse gets the kind of consideration that Secretariat is getting. They already held a hearing in '73 and modified the time for him although they did not give him the record for the Preakness. DRF has always listed his time according to their clockers so it's not like he hasn't been credited for that time and the Official Chart reflects it.

Secretariat was a great horse. I think his Preakness was a better race than his Belmont. He didn't break well and he passed the field on the first turn then ran down Sham entering the backstretch. It was an awesome display.

Still, the whole deal feels like favoritism to me.

[joeybee12]

10. Cross post from GD...it's now been reviewed and is 1:53 flat

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002831349

[twogunsid]

13. Just read the thread....

sounds like a popular decision in GD.

Of course, I just found out he was a failure at stud. The things a person can learn in GD.

[Kingofalldems]

14. I guess the poster never heard of Risen Star

[twogunsid]

15. Or Lady's Secret. Or General Assembly.

or his broodmare sire credentials. AP Indy is out of a Secretariat mare. Gone West, out of a Secretariat mare. Or Storm Cat. Or Summer Squall.

He wasn't a sire of sires like Slew but he still got some pretty good Stakes horses.

[twogunsid]

17. Maryland has opportunity to further revise history

http://www.drf.com/news/hovdey-maryland-has-opportunity-further-revise-history

This is not the first time the Maryland commission has found itself in the center of a racing hurricane. As long as the commissioners are erasing the mistakes of 1973, I would like to suggest they might want to revisit a couple of other decisions that could have sent racing history in very different directions.

For starters, they ought to take a look at that 1980 Preakness again, specifically the head of the stretch, where Angel Cordero straightened the turn with Codex and packed Genuine Risk and Jacinto Vasquez past the middle of the track. The stewards ruled there was no offense, and the Maryland Racing Commission let the order of finish stand.

The Pimlico stewards maintained no contact was made between Codex and Genuine Risk, as if that was the only measure by which interference could have been called. In fact, the stewards were acting out of custom, practically handcuffed by history. To that point, in 104 runnings of the Preakness, 105 runnings of the Derby and 111 versions of the Belmont Stakes, there had never been a single winner disqualified for a racing infraction. And there hasn’t been since.

Such a footnote flies in the face of statistical probability. Many major races with nearly the historical clout of the Triple Crown events have had winners taken down, including the Travers, the Hollywood Gold Cup, the Arlington Million, the Jockey Club Gold Cup, the Spinster, the Woodward, the Whitney, the Champagne, the Blue Grass, the Beverly D., the Alabama, the Yellow Ribbon, the Sword Dancer, the Florida Derby, the Strub Stakes, the Wood Memorial, and the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile Fillies.