Why Aren't Horses Getting Faster?

If you're as well connected as you say you are, then where on earth did you get the idea that the sport is no longer referred to as National Hunt? Or that a large number of races are won by Selle Francais? The AQPS racehorses are still anything from 80% upwards thoroughbred, certainly not purebred SF. I don't doubt at all the difference that jumping makes, heaven knows I've watched enough of it in the past to realise that. Take this year's Gold Cup though - Long Run was possibly the worst jumper in the field. But he won because of his huge engine and ability on the flat.

The 'general rule of thumb' you talk of (1lb per length) does apply to NH racing but not so on the Flat over shorter distances. In fact, I believe in sprint races, the handicappers tend to go 3.5lbs per length. In the 10 and 12f races I referred to, without splitting hairs too much or arguing over what "small" means, I think you'd have to go a long way to find anyone who doesn't think those 3 won those races on merit. Sea The Stars famously dossed when he hit the front and won all his races by a length or two, Zarkava had to be produced late so similarly never won by big margins and Curlin beat mostly 3 yo's that day with the older horses (only getting a 5lb pull incidentally) all well in arrears. But once again, that was only in reference to the "3yo's are the equivalent of 14 or 15yo humans" comment

What is the National Hunt Festival called these days? Can you point to one piece of promotional literature which references the National Hunt Festival?

There isn't any big announcement that I can point you to that says "National Hunt racing is now to be referred to as Steeplechasing", but there was a decision made when foxhunting was banned to distance the sport from its roots, and one of the methods used is to sideline the name "National Hunt". Have a look through the BHA website and tell me how many times the sport is referred to as "jump racing" and how many times they talk about "National Hunt racing". In the entire rule book, the only mention of "National Hunt" is in reference to "national hunt flat races".

In France more jump races are won by Selle Francais than by TBs. There was a time when AQPS horses were being brought by British owners, and they were winning a lot of races, but since the Euro has increased in value you don't see it so much.

Don't think I ever claimed that they were purebred SF? Since they aren't purebred TBs, they are SF, and they'll be SF until the end of time - that's the way it works.

Really, the worst jumper in the field - how many times has he fallen? How many times has he Unseated Rider? Compared to say, Denman, for example?

:-)

Handicaps aren't weight-for-age.

Including me, but the WFA scale is intended to level the playing field, not gve one crop an advantage over another.

I don't think anyone would argue that Diamond Stripes or Lawyer Ron were the standout horses of the '03 crop (might have been a different story if Barbaro had been in the field). Certainly Curlin could only beat the horses who turned up, but those who turned up (at least as far as the older horses) weren't very good.

The reason that the WFA scales only gave Curlin a 5lb allowance is that the Breeders' Cup Classic is over 10 furlongs, while the Arc is over 12 - you get different WFAs for different distances.

No Horse Play wrote:

Humans are getting faster due to several factors: drugs, improved training methods, improved technology, etc.

Why aren't horses - say the 3 year-olds that contest the Triple Crown races, not really any faster today than they were decades ago? Like humans, they have drugs, improved technology and training methods.

Is it due to a limited talent pool for horses?

Because they are doing a better job at reducing drugs, and they have little monkeys riding them, who slow them down and race them.

Horse racing is more advanced. Their surfaces have been consistent, they have been boosted for longer, and they have been mating for results. Humans have been randomly hitching up.

Start breeding the humans and watch them go.

Look at the PV guy Hooker - both his parents were international athletes.

No Horse Play wrote:

Humans are getting faster due to several factors: drugs, improved training methods, improved technology, etc.

Why aren't horses - say the 3 year-olds that contest the Triple Crown races, not really any faster today than they were decades ago? Like humans, they have drugs, improved technology and training methods.

Is it due to a limited talent pool for horses?

Because they are doing a better job at reducing drugs, and they have little monkeys riding them, who slow them down and race them.

Horse racing is more advanced. Their surfaces have been consistent, they have been boosted for longer, and they have been mating for results. Humans have been randomly hitching up.

Start breeding the humans and watch them go.

Look at the PV guy Hooker - both his parents were international athletes.

wow, you're belligerent. Let's address these one by one:

- Just because the official Cheltenham festival doesn't refer to itself as the National Hunt festival, that doesn't mean the whole sport has lost its name. What does the Punchestown festival site call itself? Even the BHA link you posted earlier referred to it as National Hunt. Steeplechasing, once again, is only half of the sport. NH consists of Steeplechasing and Hurdling

- In france they have specially designated AQPS races. Unless you can provide me with evidence that they win the majority of races where TB's can also run then, I'm sorry, I simply don't believe that stat.

- SF by name maybe, but The Fellow's breeding that you posted earlier, 7 of his 8 great-grandparents were Thoroughbreds. That makes him more TB than SF in my book.

- Long Run has limited experience with British fences and is getting better, but is far from a polished jumper. In that particular race, he undoubtedly had the patchiest round of jumping of all the main protagonists. If it's "ALL about the jumping", then how did he win?

- I know handicaps aren't weight for age, but they work on the same basis, i.e. levelling the playing field. Ergo, the same lbs per length ratios obviously apply

- Why am I even debating this with you? I know Lawyer Ron et al weren't wonder horses. For the gazillionth time, this was in reference to a comment by someone else that 3yo's were the human equivalent of a 14 or 15 yo. This clearly isn't the case. As you yourself have pointed out, they probably don't peak until a few years later, but the very best 3 year olds can beat the older horses, and probably would still do so without their wfa allowance.

Trainers love their horses.

Coaches do not love their runners.

The link I posted is quite clearly titled "Guide to Jump Racing" not "Guide to National Hunt Racing". The steeplechase/hurdle argument is a distinction without a difference, I suggest you google the phrases "steeplechase jockey" and "steeplechase trainer" and see how many of those jockey ride over hurdles, and how many of those trainers train hurdlers.

The link I gave you to France-Galop has those stats, suffice it to say that both Questarabad and Rubi Ball (the 1st and 3rd rated jumpers in France in 2010) weren't running in AQPS-only races, which in any case are only run for 3 and 4 year olds because AQPS horses mature later than TBs.

Unfortunately for you, you don't make the rules - even in 1000 years time those families will still be excluded from the Thoroughbred Studbook.

The Fellow, First Gold, L'Ami, Hors La Loi III, Liberthine, Edredon Bleu, My Will, Jair du Cochet, and Mon Mome aren't TBs and never will be.

This is a specious argument; there are 22 fences in the Gold Cup, Long Run made 2 minor mistakes (neither mistake looked like causing him to fall) - I think you're on a loser arguing that those two slight errors cancelled out 20 good fences. Sorry, won't wash.

Wrong, simply wrong. A handicap is designed to give horses of differing abilities an equal chance to win the race, while the WFA is designed to level the playing field between different age groups - if it were designed to offset the difference in ability then it would have to take that into account. So the same weight per length ratios do NOT apply.

I was doing some research on the Preakness and came across an interesting article that he wrote on this topic about why horses actually seemingly are getting slower in the US.You can find it here:http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/horse-racing/the-slowness-of-this-years-kentucky-derby-field-is-unprecedented/2011/05/04/AFWww9nF_story.htmlIt's full of good stuff including this:

Andrew Bayer wrote:

Part of the explanation for the decline in U.S. thoroughbreds is the exodus of well-bred horses to other countries. Arab and British buyers began dominating U.S. yearling sales in the late 1970s. Japan remade its entire thoroughbred industry with the purchase of 1989 Kentucky Derby winner Sunday Silence. Now Australians are becoming a major force at U.S. sales.

Pedigree expert Bill Oppenheim observed, “You can’t replace class. It has been leaving America and spreading around the world. American thoroughbreds appear to be getting worse, yet in the rest of the world they are getting better.” British racing fans are hailing their undefeated 3-year-old, Frankel, who earned one of the biggest Timeform ratings in history when he won the first of England’s 3-year-old classics last Saturday.

The article also talks about how drugs may be to blame.Very interesting point he makes here:

Andrew Bayer wrote:

Modern-day horses are unable to withstand the rigorous campaigns that were common in the past, but this appears to be a uniquely American phenomenon. As a result, some experts blame horses’ frailty on something else that’s uniquely American: the widespread use of medications in racing. “We’re the only nation on the planet that allows this stuff,” said breeder Arthur Hancock, who owned Sunday Silence. “I think these medications are weakening the breed.”

The fact that horses are no faster today than they were decades ago destroys the credibility of the whole breeding business, does it not? Yet people continue to pay huge fees for champion genes.

The New uncleB wrote:

The fact that horses are no faster today than they were decades ago destroys the credibility of the whole breeding business, does it not? Yet people continue to pay huge fees for champion genes.

No! What used to occur was an occassional freakish superstar would come along. These days there are dozens of horses as good in every year's crop. It is harder for the superstar to shine as brightly because the depth is dramatically better than decades ago. Most group one class (grade one in US?)are the equal to those "once in a lifetime" superstars of the past.

What has happened is that breeders have successfully improved the breed as a whole.

I would agree that neither Mine That Bird or Super Saver were exceptional horses (except on the first Saturday in May), I'm not quite ready to say (despite yesterday's result in Baltimore, which was a tactical error IMO) that Animal Kingdom is as poor a racehorse as those two - I guess we'll know by November!

Beyer doesn't really address the OPs point though: just because Thoroughbred racehorses are worse in the US doesn't mean they are plateauing or getting worse as a breed, just that the quality of animals in the US is lower.

While I won't disagree with you about the effect that professionalizing the Thoroughbred breeding industry has had on the numbers of really top performers, another reason is simply the NUMBER of Thoroughbreds being born every year.

If you have a North American decade foal crop of 280,315 from 1970 - 1979 (Secretariat's decade) and a decade foal crop of 369,631 from 2000 - 2009, in the 2000's you simply have a larger talent pool to draw from. The exceptional horses from 30, 40 or 50 years ago are simply no longer exceptional.

I think you're an Aussie - in 1979/80 the Australian live foal crop was 15,100, in 2007/8 the live foal crop was 18,388. That is over 3,200 more animals per year which might carry the genes of a champion - much better odds, don't you think?

The Australian stats also show what happens when you raise the level of professionalism in a breeding industry; in 1979/80 39,500 mares returned 15,100 live foals (38.2%), while in 2007/8 30,693 mares returned 18,388 live foals (59.9%) - better mares, bred to better and more compatible stallions in better conditions equals better racehorses.

The guy that owns the Derby-winner/Preakness second place is a big track and field fan. The horses are not getting faster but the number of fast horses is increasing, which is why it is more difficult to win the Triple Crown.