4 minute read
Are US Classic races getting slower?
Last autumn, owner-breeder Bjorn Nielsen discussed whether the US Classic races are getting slower because horses are not being bred for middle-distances.
Time man Simon Rowlands puts the theory to the test
LEADING RACEHORSE OWNER Bjorn Nielsen raised an interesting point in his interview with International Thoroughbred last autumn when positing that US horses are no longer being bred for a “trip”, and causing what passes for staying races in the US to be getting slower and worse.
This is a tricky proposition to prove, one way or the other, but it is certainly possible to try. This particular overview will concentrate on the US Triple Crown races over the years and consider the average speeds and closing sectionals of those races.
Neither the Kentucky Derby (1m2f), the Preakness Stakes (9.5f) or the Belmont Stakes (1m4f) would be considered stamina tests by European standards, and do not even approach the 2m4f of the Gold Cup at Royal Ascot which Nielsen’s outstanding stayer Stradivarius has now won twice.
But those distances are all in the most extreme one per cent across the US racing calendar with the Belmont Stakes being one of approximately 0.25 per cent of races run over 1m4f or further. Incidentally, 6f races are the most common, at just over 25 per cent.
A study by Mark Denny in the Journal of Experimental Biology in 2008 (“Limits to running speeds in dogs, horses and humans”) unwittingly highlighted some of the problems associated with using times and Triple Crown races to measure such things.
For instance, an adjustment needs to be made to times in the non-electronic era, run-ups (the untimed part of the race at the beginning) may vary in duration, and it is at least questionable to assume that track speed and race quality has been unchanging.
Nonetheless, while keeping those caveats in mind, certain trends can be observed. The table and graph overleaf gives the average speeds for the winners of each of the three races in recent decades.
The average speed of winners of the Kentucky Derby in the 2010s so far is the slowest by-decade since the 1940s, while for winners of the Preakness it is the slowest since the 1960s and the Belmont (run at Aqueduct from 1963 to 1967, which was ignored) is the slowest since the 1940s also.
The average by-decade speeds of the Triple Crown races combined were consistently at around 36.75mph from the 1970s to the 2000s inclusive, but has now dipped to to 36.48mph.
That may not seem like much difference, but it translates into more than half a length per-furlong, or more than 5l in total over the Kentucky Derby distance and more than six over the Belmont’s longer trip.
INCIDENTALLY, the above figures change a relatively negligible amount if surfaces described officially as “sloppy” are excluded.
Intrigued, I decided to look a bit deeper at the closing sectionals – if horses are running out of stamina in longerdistance races, you might expect it to be most obvious at the business end.
Unfortunately, due its peculiar overall distance closing sectionals for the Preakness are not directly comparable to the other two races, while sectionals for the Belmont were erratic prior to 1999.
Nonetheless, the average time of the final 2f of the Belmont increased from 25.65s in the 2000s to 25.86s in the current decade. In proportional terms, that is quite a sizeable difference for what is only the final one-sixth of the race.
The figures for the Kentucky Derby are even starker: the average final 2f in the 1990s was 25.71s, dropping to 25.37s in the 2000s, then increasing markedly to 26.17s in the current decade.
To frame it in different terms, an average leader in the Kentucky Derby in the last ten years would get to the entrance of the straight about two and a half lengths behind an average leader in the preceding decade, but from there it would lose another 4l.
There are some complicating matters which need to be acknowledged, though one of the strengths of averages is that these things tend to come out in the wash providing the data is reasonably normally distributed, which it is.
Slow finishes can be down to an overlystrong pace earlier, while fast finishes may result from the opposite. There is a ready way of contextualising this – the finishing-speed per cent measure.
This expresses a horse’s or a race’s speed at the end as a percentage of the speed for the horse or race overall.
A figure over 100 indicates that the finish was faster than what preceded it, a figure under 100 indicates the opposite. Due to various factors “par” is around 96.5 per cent for the Kentucky Derby and Belmont.
American Pharoah in the 2015 Belmont was able to set a steady pace and come home in an electric 24.32s and 100.5 per cent finishing speed.
By contrast, they went much too fast early in the 2013 Belmont, won by Palace Malice, and completed the last quarter in a painfully slow 27.58s (91.1 per cent finishing speed). The implied surface speed was almost identical both times on my figures.
Every finish of the Kentucky Derby since 2011 has been slower than that 96.5 per cent par in finishing-speed terms, though this year’s race – “won” by Maximum Security then awarded to Country House – was only fractionally so (96.4 per cent). All Belmonts, besides the two mentioned above, have been close to par, with the latest, won by Sir Winston, completing in 96.6 per cent.
In conclusion, it is possible to answer the question posed at the outset with varying degrees of confidence.
Have elite US horses got slower, as judged by the times of the Triple Crown races? The answer is “yes, but it is a recent phenomenon”.
Does that indicate a lack of stamina, or something else? Those closing sectionals are persuasive in suggesting that more horses are running on empty at the end than previously, so quite probably, yes.
Is that, as Nielsen suggested, down to breeding considerations? It is difficult to say, but breeding is, at the least, a “person of interest” in this investigation.
Are US horses simply running out of stamina? “It has to be said it looks that way, though time will tell whether or not that is temporary or permanent.”
It will be interesting to see what coming years and decades reveal!
