Spectacular Bid - 1980 Strub Stakes (World Record Time)

[dimma78]

Great viewing,we{in australia}had a topline grey horse racing in our top 1200-1400 meter races in the mid 90's called spectacular spy,one of my favourites a real tough front runner I had no idea his dad was such a champ what a horse! Thank you.

[tubeyhamster]

Interesting that Spectacular Bid doesn't appear to have been a very long-striding horse. He hardly even looks extended--in that time!

[3232rams]

Bill shoemaker said he was the best horse he ever rode enough said i loved this horse i saw him run live 4 times just a super horse.

[dravenousone]

The Bid is my all time favorite horse.. the first time I saw Eight Belles, I was endeared at her tipped tail so similar to the Spectaular one and she joined my list of horses I'll never forget.

[dunsta69]

why don't they make horses like this anymore?

[gotch09]

Well, if I can be obvious here. the Bid was, uh Spectacular.

[SECby31]

The Bid was essentially a stalker with the natural speed of a Dr. Frager - the latter aspect is in full display as he blew past Sec's kid, General Assembly (a lead horse who's no slouch in the 1/4 mile dep., as witness his still-standing Travers feat) at the Derby, and his win in the above race, obviously. That combo made him an assassin on the track. But like the person below, I shudder to think what Secretariat would have done at the same age.

[larrywheels]

i always rooted for flying paster- he gave everything- just like alydar vs affirmed- if not for affirmed -alydar would be known as a great horse. same with the paster. got to give it up for spectacular bid- he was the real deal.

[Sportsguy574]

The Bid WAS an outstanding horse, no doubt. But I agree with below, he was set up perfectly for this race/record. He basically had a blowout ride with a pacer the entire race to push him. It almost looks like it was set up that way its so perfect. Bid was no Secretariat though, Sec. did things as a 3-year old Bid never did his entire career. God knows what Sec. would have done as a 4/5 year old. Bid was great though.

[jkmooreelle]

@Sportsguy574 The Bid ran the only 1.58 mile&qtr.Set 8 track records sprinting and routing. Ended his career with a walkover when no one wanted to face him. His Florida Derby win was checked up on three seperate occasions still won by 4+ lengths. 26 for 26 from 7 to 10 furlongs! Ran lame at the Belmont and still won third.The Bid's accomplishments stand on its own merit.

[bgardiner2000]

Yep... super horse. What was his Timeform rating?

[cf1970]

@bgardiner2000 Agreed. The Bid's rating was 141, tied for fifth on the all-time list with four others, including Seattle Slew.

[bgardiner2000]

@cf1970 Tied all-time 5th... world wide... and only ranked at 10 in the US? Not sure that makes sense.

[1948BigCy]

@bgardiner2000 Tenth??? Does not make sense...Blood Horse is simply consensus of some sports writers...if you have read the Introduction, the writer is already stepping back from the rankings, saying it is impossible to judge horses from different eras...I agree

[disciple90633]

@1948BigCy totally agree. I'm 40 and been watching this sport since I was 6. In my life and humble opinion, The Bid was the most dominant I've ever seen. You could argue The Slew was better because he won the Crown, and the Slew is my fave of all time, but I say most dominant because of the track records the Bid owns and the fact that in 1980, no one even came out to face him. They were scared to death to run against The Bid.

[Prevarctor]

He was the best I've ever seen and I've seen a LOT

[schardy80]

You could easily argue that Bid is unlucky not to be higher than #10. 26/26 from 7 to 10f is pretty compelling. For mine only Dr Fager could lay claim to being as good a 4YO as Spectacular Bid.

[majestyk72]

remember ladies and gents, from 7 furlongs to 1 1/4 miles that animal was 26 out of 26! no horse will ever duplicate that.

[3232rams]

Bill shoemaker said he was the best horse he ever rode enough said the bid is and always will be one of the greatest horses of all time

[caz11533]

He was barely asked and ran 157 4 thats insane !!!!!!!!!

[snogand]

World record for the mile and a quarter!!!

[HorsesForeva95]

It's the grey That made it a world record, but Spectacular Bid won, so yeaaah ;L xD He's a good horse. Very good. :D

[rscarbro100]

@HorsesForeva95 There is no doubt he was a great horse to the 1 1/4 distance. Was very good at 1 1/2 mile as he proved in his close loss to Affirmed. I would bet if he ran that distance as a 4 year old his time would be much faster. No doubt a stronger horse at 4 than 3. I feel his ranking should have been higher. Far as the Noor & Citation race you can go to British Pathe & watch it. It didn't look like a muddy track to me.

[sedro32]

@HorsesForeva95

yeah the grey was the reason for the fast pace. making it possible for the record.

but spectacular bid was still better.

[jkmooreelle]

Bud Delp was right on about BID 's Strub Series. His finest accomplishment.

[newtonbrook]

30 years ago today

[wingowonk888]

The Bid was major, indeed. helluva horse in the early 80s to be sure. I saw the Bid stomp I forget whoall at 2-5 odds at santa anita. Speaking of which, I wish they'd post the Silky Sullivan win vs Circle E and The Shoe from early 1958. Astounding stuff. BTW privman ain't shit for knowledge.

[jkmooreelle]

If anybody doubts Spectacular Bid, they should watch this race. He looks like he is not trying all the way when coming down the lane and sets a world record that has not been matched on dirt for 29 years.

[hammer2323me]

I went to gate and Bid came in and started kicking the gate with back foot bang bang bang--shoe yelled start the f--kin race. gate opened bid blew out of gate and shoe stood up and held him back-- three other horses ran off and down the back stretch shoe went 8 wide and blew them away-- most amazing thing a ever saw-- set track record at arlington that day 1 1/8 mile carrying 130 POUNDS 146 and change record still stands

[hammer2323me]

Went to arlington park to see him Shoe was up and Delp told him to keep him away from trouble-- during warm up Bid was half a track away while they loaded--

[hammer2323me]

if you want to see the best "bid" race check 78 florida derby, ronnie franklin didnt know what he waas doing and other jockeys were out for him, cut Bid off twice and ronnie had to pull Bid up not once but twice I was at OTB and almost vapor locked, Bid was at a trot collected himself and took ronnie along for the ride, blew them away--

[joefederico]

Yea, Bid was spectacular. I first doubted Delps excuse of a safety pin before the Belmont but his subsequent races proved otherwise. Besides, Coastal was aiming at Bid and the Belmont and was a fresher horse.

I saw Bid live at Monmouth Park where his best competition was a champion mare named Glorius Song. She finished 2nd, only 1-1/2 lengths behind but it was never even a contest as Bid was never put to a drive.

And, he beat the Paster on his own home turf 3 consecutive times. Impressive

[itsthegrip]

Flying Paster WORKED a mile for this race in 1:33 and change.

THe BID best 4 year old in History. Sorry

[jkmooreelle]

No horse in the history of horse racing from ANY era could have beaten BID at 4.

[OHRaceFan]

"Spectacular" performance. The Bid is the

3rd best horse that I ever saw. Only Dr Fager and Secretariat rank higher.

[jkmooreelle]

The record for a mile and quarter won't ever be broken. Spectacular Bid- simply spectacular

[sl7293]

This isn't necessarily so. Bid's 157.8 broke Noor's 30 year old 1 1/4 mile world record of 158.2, but Bid did that on a fast track while Noor's record was set carrying 127 lbs on a track rated muddy. Noor's then World record was one of 4 races in 1950 in which he defeated Citation. Three of those were done in world record times.

[HollywoodParkSteward]

@sl7293 Bid won 13 Gr. I stakes at 10 different tracks- Bid set or equaled eight Track and American records at seven different tracks, at distances from 5 1/2 furlongs to 1 1/4 miles, he twice He twice set Track records while carrying 130 pounds....as for Noor- Parke worked a minor miracle with him taking a horse that was had lost countless races in Europe to winning 7 of 12 in 1950- four times over Citation.

[jkmooreelle]

@HollywoodParkSteward What made The Bid so great was his versatility. His two year old season he ran primarily on the lead. Then his three and four year old seasons he came off the pace. His middle moves especially in this race is mind boggling. The Bid had the whole package!

[rinzotto]

The seventies was the greatest decade in thoroughbred history. Spectacular Bid broke some of Secretariat's records but remember he did it as a 4-year old. Secretariat retired at three. Secretariat...Spectacular Bid...Seattle Slew...Affirmed...Alydar...For­ego...Exceller...Flying Pastor...what an exciting period in Horse racing!

[sully6172]

This looks like the greatest four-horse race in history. Blazing fractions. Big-time fight for the lead through the far turns, and a stretch gear by The Bid that was immense. Hard as the track may be, 1:57:80 is utterly staggering. Only Secretariat's performance at the Belmont ranks above that. And only because of the nature and stakes of that win. One world record that looks untouchable. Just like 2:24 looks untouchable, although no doubt the Bid got within that area trotting out here.

[71sunset]

In 40 years as a full time California race goer I've seen a tremendous number of great horses run. But I'm in full agreement with Mr. Shoemaker (and who shold know better?) that none of them were as good as Spectacular Bid. Bid was like a ferrari; he had an extra gear, and all the rider needed to do was push the button to engage it. Even in the race above he all but rebroke approaching the 1/8 pole despite dueling the outstanding colt Relaunch through a sizzling 1/4 mile rounding the last turn.

[mrleroy1966]

A super horse. Buddy Delp called him the best horse that ever looked through a bridle. Bill Shoemaker called him the best horse he ever rode. The Bid was a great one!!! One of the best ever!!!!

[all66books]

The reason that the Bid seems to fly under the radar is his loss in the Belmont, plus his loss to Affirmed in the JCGC when he was 3and Affirmed was 4.

Remember too, that the 70's produced THREE triple crown winners. But for a safety pin, and perhaps a not so great ride, Bid surely would have been the fourth. He was totally dominant during his 4YO season - nobody touched him.

[XburningontheinsideX]

wow where did Rlaunch's lead go? Spectacular bid is amazing. he has such a great stride

[valenzuala]

This is one of the greatest horses of all time.  When he was "on"...there weren't many horses in horse racing history that could beat him. Maybe only Dr. Fager and Secretariat would be the only ones. An underated horse who continually flies under the radar..when talk of the greatest horses in history.

[BE109]

Fast Cal track or not,the fractions of 22-44 3/5-1:08 2/5-1:32 4/5-1:57 4/5!!!Yeah that track was probably hard,but The Bid still had to go out and do it,and my friends he did it in style. That is the world record for 1 1/4 on dirt. If the track was THE REASON,then someone would have tied or broken it since then. I doubt it will ever happen,horses like him don't grow on trees. Remember he beat some pretty good ones in this race.

[majesticbob2007]

I am not a horse racing guru, but lived during Secretariat. The horse was awesome. I also believe in the 2 cents of worth of comments made by one's who saw even MOW as HALL of FAMER Hallie Hughs and Racing horse announcer Charles hatton who both said Secretariat was the greatest. What would he had done as a 4 year old...? maybe take to the friendly skies...

[blusterjfk]

He was a little more than 2 fifths slower than Sec in those 2 races, and his Derby performance is still, to this day, the 2nd fastest Kentucky Derby performance in all of history. So.......YES, Sham was indeed pretty awesome. And by the way, YOU DID say it! No "ifs" about it.

[blusterjfk]

Shall I point out where you actually SAID that Sham was a great horse? You're SUCH a liar.

[bon1042]

Hi bluster... I know I'll regret getting in here. It's useless to point out the 5 wk pd in which Sec set 3 records as frame of reference re. Bid's 1:57 4/5. 1948BigCy, aka snibbornhoj aka The Hero, calls the TC a "hat trick" to bolster his argument that Citation is superior to Sec. That Sec set record in Marlboro and then an unofficial record pulling up another 1/8 for 1:57 4/5 won't mean anything to him either. cont.

[blusterjfk]

Hey bon. You won't regret gettin' in here at all. snibbornhoj is not someone I can take seriously in terms of discussion, primarily because of the inequitable methods he uses in stating his position that a) Sec is the most overrated horse in history, b) that Citation is "ignored", and c) that Sec isn't even in his all-time top 10 horses list. All 3 assertions are laughable, as are his aforementioned methods.

[blusterjfk]

In the 1973 Marlboro Cup, Sec DID in fact run an unofficial time of 1:57&4 PULLING UP after an extra furlong. ALL I EVER TALK ABOUT IS HIS BELMONT? You are intentionally neglecting to metion that I've mentioned MANY MANY more things in MANY of our previous arguments. You know, the ones where you used, by your own admission, a treasure trove of logical fallacies?

[bon1042]

As Charles Hatton put it.... "this sucker sets records pulling up... Snibborn wld have apoplexy if he read latest Nack 'Talkin Horses showing his disgust at syndicate not letting Sec run as 4 yr old, when he suggested Sec wld run with the proverbial refrigerator on his back, that we might see a 1:56+ time.

[yomamadontdanz]

the greatest horse to ever look through a bridel

[lovetravisforever]

He is my foal's grandsire!!! I wish I could have met him but I had the pleasure of working with his son. He was awesome!!!

[jargenlink]

well relaunch ran out of nitro or something otherwise he would have won this race for sure.

[BE109]

The Bid seen here putting his stamp of greatness!!!! This was a super horse, at age 4 he probably would have beat any horse in history!

[televin]

Concrete speedway....Paster went 158.4

[BE109]

It is true that California tracks are notorious for being fast. That doesn't change the fact that The Bid put on a display in this race. He ran like a beast just about everywhere. He was a great racehorse.

[televin]

agreed

[Kiddman32]

After it became obvious I was just a fan, he signed an autograph for me, right on top of the Racing Form's cartoon of the Bid. He then told me he was gonna BEAT the Bid that day... Errrr... wrong :)

[Kiddman32]

I spotted Barrera watching the works, walked toward him... He end his crew all suddenly started speaking Spanish!  Guess they thought I was trying to "steal" some information or something...

[Kiddman32]

Not only was I there, but I went early and had breakfast there while watching horses work out; a great experience... Even better was when I spotted Relaunch's trainer, Laz Barrera, and approached him for an autograph... to be continued do to post-size limits

[71sunset]

Kiddman32 - Relaunch was trained by Willard Proctor, not Laz Barrera. The Barrera trained horse in this race was Valdez.

[Kiddman32]

Truly impressive race by the Bid; and I was THERE!!

[ALYSHEBANDTHEBID]

"but the Bid gets the lead" gotta love the Bid, this video just shows who is number one. Bid4ever

[nshtt]

You are right, he should be higher then 10th but, Secretariat's Belmont run was probably the most amazing run in Horse Racing history.

[nshtt]

The best guitarist aren't the fastest however, the fastest horses are the best lol. Window dressing? Sham, was window dressing? You must count Mississippi slow because I just rewatched the race and got to 4 Mississippi being generous. Here nor there I'm not arguing Sec. was the best ever(although he could be), I'm writing that race was probably the most amazing in history. 31 lengths at Belmont Stakes no matter how fast the track, is something to appreciate. Just an Opinion. Merry Christmas!

[blusterjfk]

Hey there, snibbornhoj! Do you REALLY want to get into this with ME again? Understand that THIS TIME if you get nasty, cf will boot you. Ok. First, Bid's WR at 1-1/4m is NOT as impressive as Sec's 1.5. Sec equalled that mark pulling up after the 73 Marlboro. 2nd, Do you have ANY CONCEPTION of the kind of distance 2 FULL SECONDS means in horse racing?

[blusterjfk]

Fleet's time doesn't even approach Sec's, and no other horse EVER has set WR's pulling up. I'd like you to explain why you keep bringing up the same things when we had this EXACT SAME DISCUSSION, at considerably more length, many many months ago!

[blusterjfk]

If that is in fact true, why is it that NO horse has come ANYWHERE NEAR Sec's Belmont time. No horse has officially come very close to Bid's 1&1/4 time, either. THAT INVALIDATES you assertion (that ALL TIMES have gotten better) on it's face. You are wrong, and I've just provided actual empirical evidence to demonstrate it. Your unwillingness to simply ADMIT your mistakes is your biggest weakness.

[bon1042]

bluster, weren't there reports contradicting the freakish Belmont track claims that said there was considerable evidence that the track had slowed thru the week and on Saturday too? Actually didn't you mention it also? How come AWSIDOOGER, (maybe he's been in Vegas too long, remember Jimmy the Greek's odds on Secretariat?)and snibborn are focusing on lengths as in 31 as so important, seems to me 2:24 flat is the key. OMG there she goes again TIME TIME TIME!!

[blusterjfk]

That's AT LEAST 10 full lengths. So, when you say that 2 other horses have run the Belmont in 2:26, that's another way of saying that Sec is 10 lenghts better than ANY OTHER HORSE that's ever run the Belmont, and he was 3, AND he wasn't asked for anything. That's why Sec's WR is unparalleled, and why your claim that Bid's WR is equally impressive holds NO MERIT WHATSOEVER!

[bon1042]

Remember in bio before Wd Meml when Jimmy Jones saw Sec for 1st time and said "he's as big as 4 yr old," and Johnny Nerud said "he's bigger than Citation ever was." Wonder if Jimmy's (his Dad?) comment that Sec cldn't drag a wagon or some such remark, was made after Sec lost the WdMeml. How gleeful he must have felt. Must have relished making those snide comments.

[blusterjfk]

What's the "one mississippi, two mississippi" thing? NO HORSE has ever had a day like Sec had when he ran the Belmont. Ever. Your act is really wearing thin. I think you're a moron (sorry, cf).

[blusterjfk]

What precisely is UTTER NONSENSE? Are you ACTUALLY trying to say that any other horse has had a day like that? I've exposed your MO before, but apparently you think you can get away with it again, so here it is: You unfairly denigrate Sec to build up your case that Citation was the better horse. You're not gonna get away with that here. Once cf sees you're pulling this crap here, you're gone.

[blusterjfk]

Ummmm. . . ok. First, it was the race to CLINCH the Triple Crown. 2nd, it was 2&3/5th's faster than the WR. 3rd, it was the 3rd long-distance race in 5 weeks. 4th, he did it all on his own. 5th, he set an unofficial WR being SLOWED DOWN, after the race. NO COMPARISON? That's a truly astounding statement. Idiotic, really.

[blusterjfk]

I abhor you referring to me as a "Secrephiliac" when in fact ALL I've done is that to try to make you adhere to logic and reason in making your cases and stating your positions. I've never criticized Citation, Bid, or MoW. Quite the opposite. YOU however, denigrate Sec any chance you get, and you ADMITTED that you view all this as a pissing contest. You're a hypocrite, and I despise hypocrisy.

[blusterjfk]

In Sec's day, NO horse ran in such intervals; therefore that's parallel. What IS parallel is the TC, because the races were run at the same distances, with the same weights, and at roughly the same intervals.

[bon1042]

Re. 1948BigCy's ref. to argument at other site w/other "Secrephiliac", that you are more knowledgeable. Wonder if it's Amazon reviews of Nack's bio. If so he hasn't apparently been back since his 7/07 response and shld check it out re. R.A. Cardenas last response to him. You shld too, it trumps old Bruce I think.

[bon1042]

Hypocrite?? Snibborn pointed out 1st time on Bid Arcaro "took full blame" for Bid's loss. But Sec's 3 losses, no "excuse", such as Wd Meml a puss-oozing quarter size blue abcess rt upper lip at bit(kept fm Turcotte)fighting virus/fever which weakens a horse,yet 2nd in Whitney (Turcotte protested running him);sub'd for Riva bec of sloppy trck in Woodward w/only 2 light workouts for MOW in 2-3wks thinking he cld win anyway. Yes, hypocrite.

[bon1042]

I meant Citation here not Bid.

[blusterjfk]

In addition, Sec's margin of victory in the Belmont was quite a bit more than "one miss, two miss". Sham was a fantastic horse, as YOU YOURSELF have pointed out in your pathetic attempts to shoot down Sec in OUR previous arguments as snibbornhoj. Are you now pretending they didn't happen? What a joke.

[blusterjfk]

When Bid set this mark, did he beat the existing WR by 2&3/5th's? Did he do it in the race to clinch the Triple Crown, which was also the 3rd long distance race against stakes-winning horses in 5 weeks? The answer to all those questions is NO, and THAT'S why Bid's record, though VERY impressive, gets "scant" attention compared to Sec's Belmont, as if you REALLY needed to be told.

[XxemoxqueenxX]

Spectacular Bid was I've said before, truely what his name implies.

"The best horse to ever look through a bridle."

A bold statement at the time and though some might still question wether he was THE best, he's for sure one of them.

[ALYSHEBANDTHEBID]

just shows you what the Bid can do with a good jocky, no question he is the best

[superemperador1]

i believe the Bid was as good as any horse and definetly the best to lose the triple crown because of a rider mistake(pin or no pin!!)

[AwsiDooger]

More from Thoro-Graph:

"Jerry also confirmed a statement he made in an earlier conversation with me that the tracks today have a higher percentage of sand in them than they used to-- the theory being to make them slower and therefore safer (he isn't sure it does make them safer, by the way), and more importantly, so that they dry faster."

[AwsiDooger]

More from the Thoro-Graph site. (BTW, it's stupid we are limited to 500 characters in a comment)

"There was a day Jerry was out sick, and miscommunication resulted in less cushion being put down than he wanted. Najran ran the 1:32 mile that day."

[AwsiDooger]

Here's from that Thoro-Graph site:

"I just had another conversation with NYRA track superintendent Jerry Porcelli, and I want to get this stuff out there while it is still fresh in my head. The implications are pretty obvious.

1- When Secretariat was running, the cushion at NYRA tracks was between 2 3/4 and 3 1/4 inch. It is now about 4 inches.

[AwsiDooger]

I want to end this debate. Notice I'm not posting it on all the Secretariat videos. But it's point blank true that track conditions vary dramatically and you can't use final times to specifically evaluate ability, from year to year or even day to day. Notice the info on one site. Google this, Thoro-Graph Archives - Getting Faster pt I

[AwsiDooger]

One final comment: Do you realize how rare it is for a 3-year-old filly to equal or break a major track record? Almost unheard of. That's how fast Belmont was playing on Marlboro day '73. Desert Vixen won by 11.5 lengths in a hand ride yet still ran 1:46 1/5. And this at a VERY common distance, 1 1/8. They literally run that distance every day, and it's a staple distance for stake races. She won the same race a year later as a 4-year-old but 2/5 slower.

[gfn02]

I realize how rare that is, yes. That in no way establishes anything about them intentionally speeding up the track. When SECRETARIAT ran in the Arlington he ran way wide the whole time and yet was only a 5th off the track record there. Same thing for the Laurel Futurity when he was 2, and that was in mud. That's evidence of his speed, I think.

[AwsiDooger]

But let's give full benefit of a doubt. It's 4.76. That still means the 31 lengths is garbage. It would take more than a 6.51 lengths per second pace to make 4.76 turn into 31 lengths, by the mighty Twice a Prince at the end of a mile and a half. LOL. What planet is that?

[blusterjfk]

I have said that I will examine your assertion by trying to blow up the official photo finish of the race; I believe you have something here. What I want to know is why you're so harshly sarcastic that I want independent verification? What's the problem with that?

[AwsiDooger]

Davidowitz also said the time to Twice a Prince is clocked at 4.70 to 4.76 seconds, not the 4.3 I use. Again, I appreciate the input but I can't buy it. I've timed this dozens of times and it's 4.3. I used to time 40 yard dashes for pro day before the NFL Draft. And the 4.3 range wasn't being disputed here or elsewhere. I'd love to have the rest of my life timed by the person who came up with the 4.76. It would be a 10% bonus for nothing at all.

[AwsiDooger]

I'll post here the info I put on one of the '73 Belmont videos. Racing writer Steve Davidowitz responded via email and said the correct guideline is 1 second = 6 lengths. I dispute that. It's a 20% jump from conventional wisdom and doesn't fit at all if you look at race after race and calculate margin based on time to the place horse. It might be true early in a race, or sprints, but certainly not the end of a mile and a half.

[blusterjfk]

You're use of logical reasoning on this point is entirely proper and worth considering. I don't think there is a shred of evidence concerning your other, more important assertion, namely that they suped up the track to help Sec win the Triple Crown. That horse didn't need any help. The tracks happened to be fast, and he took advantage.

[AwsiDooger]

I forgot to comment on the betting aspect. Every year the sportsbooks put up over/unders. Once track conditions are known they can move wildly, either way. In Monarchos' year the number flew down. It was something like 2:00 3/5 for the over/under at post time, the lowest I've ever seen. So the 1:59.97 was hardly unexpected. No one was pretending it was a great effort. Monarchos simply took advantage of extreme track conditions.

[gfn02]

I used to live in Vegas and in my current job spend quite a bit of time in Atl City, so I know about the gambling. I do not pretend to know what went on for the 2001 Derby. All I do know is I've found nothing to indicate the track was intentionally sped up specifically for SECRETARIAT.

[AwsiDooger]

These posts were prompted by Desert Vixen, a 3-year-old filly who ran 1:46 1/5 in the Beldame on Marlboro day in '73, tying the track record. She was excellent but never set or equalled another record.

I researched this in college. Seven of 11 dirt track records broken within two weeks either way of the Belmont Stakes. Many were broken again in the fall. The race before the Belmont was a record. Prove Out ran 2:25 4/5 in the Woodward. It was a freakishly fast year. Denying that is foolish.

[gfn02]

You're kidding about Prove Out, aren't you? The track was sloppy that day and he ran the race of his life! And easygoer13's comment was in response to me referencing the extra 8th SECRETARIAT ran in the Marlboro. Look, the horse set track records at Aqueduct, came a fifth from one in mud as a 2yr old (Laurel), and set another one in the MOW on turf. I don't think he needed any help. And I resent your implication I'm foolish bc I don't believe they intentionally sped the track up.

[blusterjfk]

False! They were prompted by a comment referring to Sec easing through Marlboro. You certainly haven't mentioned Desert Vixen a single time until now!

[AwsiDooger]

Final times depend on many criteria -- quality of horses, pace of race, the trip/ride, track conditions, and how competitive the race is, i.e. if asked to run to the wire.

You can't use time as a sole criteria. Otherwise you'll get garbage like Proud Clarion as a great Derby horse. He was a stiff who won in 2:00 2/5 in '67, one length ahead of legendary Barb's Delight. The track was wet fast that day, very fast. They ran the final quarter in 24 3/5.

[blusterjfk]

Ok fine, but the point is that he STILL didn't run it in 1:59&2! And nobody has since. By the way, what evidence do you have that they suped up the track at Churchhill Downs other than publications simply reporting that "The track is fast"? Furthermore, what evidence you have of ANYONE involved in preparing the track or an actual track official saying the intentionally did it for Sec's benefit. The points you make about other criteria -- I agree with.

[AwsiDooger]

I don't know how a Spectacular Bid vid turned into a debate like this. Actually I do. Many racing fans think Secretariat was the only horse ever and go out of their way to make excuses for him. He was an awesome horse but hardly invincible. Tracks were absurdly fast in '73. I've been following this since I was a kid. I'll point out Slew's flaws and Bid's flaws and Secretariat's flaws and everything else. The rest of you can bury your heads in the sand.

[blusterjfk]

This is completely irrelevant and therefore not worth a reply. I didn't utter one word about him being invincible. All I did was provide evidence countering your claim that the track was "superfast", and that's it! To assume from that I think he was invincible is bunk. And what's with the "bury your heads in the sand"? Are you pouting b/c someone took your Tonka?

[gfn02]

Ok, you better hold it right there. Since it was my comment about easing through the Marlboro that started this little thread, that must mean that I'm one of these fans that "think Secretariat was the only horse ever and go out of their way to make excuses for him." Really irritating because all I'm doing in my project is being positive; I haven't ONCE denigrated (or even offered my opinion about) another horse in the whole history of my account! So seriously, BACK OFF!

[AwsiDooger]

It had nothing to do with you or your excellent project. I apologize if you took it that way. But I stand by my comment. Many younger fans look at Secretariat as 31 lengths better than the planet. I see that on message boards. He was an exceptional horse, maybe the best ever, who benefitted from extremely fast track conditions in all three Classics and during the fall at Belmont. That's what I'm saying. Also, the Belmont margin is inflated by about 9 lengths.

[gfn02]

Well I am prepared to accept that you didn't specifically mean me, no problem. However, as part of my project I have done quite a bit of research. I have the 90 minute original broadcasts, and they do reference the tracks being fast. But there's nothing in there about it being "superfast" at all. Nothing about them intentionally making it that way bc of SECRETARIAT.

[blusterjfk]

What do you care if they think he was 31 lengths better than the planet? How's that hurt you? What we (knowledgeable fans) know is that he has PROVEN through history that he was AT LEAST 9 lengths better going 1 and a half miles on dirt than any other horse that day! That's got nothing to do with the number 31; as you say, once Sham pulled back the rest of the field wasn't gonna challenge. If Sham stays healthy of course he doesn't win by that much!

[AwsiDooger]

We can't post links on YouTube. Here is a segment:

"During the 1973 racing season at Belmont Park, an astounding seven new speed records were made on the main dirt track and one was tied.

It was reported by the Daily News and the NY Times at that time that during the spring of 1973, the Belmont Park track stewards had ordered the main dirt track to be scraped, rolled and pounded to make it uncompromisingly speed-enhanced for Secretariat's attempted 25 year-drought Triple Crown."

[JohnFPorcaro]

cf1970 As always THANKS!

The Bid was my all time favorite.

I followed him closely as a 2 year old when he won what I considered at the time a 2-year-old fall Triple crown by winning the Young America at the Meadowlands,

The Champagne at Belmont,& the Laurel Futurity in Maryland.

The Belmont Stakes was a heartbreak.

For that matter so was The Jockey Gold Cup against Affirmed.

Flying Paster was a good sport. He reminds me of the saying "always Bridesmaid, never a Bride".

[cf1970]

Hiya John, good to hear from you again. Thanks for your kind words. Glad you liked it. The Bid...all I can say is wow. Take care.

[jumptheoxer]

Flying Paster [1976 - 1992] was a highly respected West Coast bullet of a closer. He won 3 graded stakes races at 2, then at 3-yrs old won the Hollywood Derby (G1) and Santa Anita Derby (G1) and at 5-yrs old he took three graded stakes wins. In the '78 Kentucky Derby he was asked to take the lead early which simply wasn't his style.

What is amazing is Shoemaker not even going to the whip once on Bid in the Strub for that final 1/4 mi!

[cf1970]

Yep, I have a lot of respect for Flying Paster as well. He was one tough and very formidable cookie. Upon seeing this race for myself the first time, I too was astonished that Shoe didn't touch The Bid. It's proof positive that Bid truly was a magical horse. I was pleasantly surprised by the light gray in his tail, never noticed that in previous footage of him. Wonderful. Thank you for those fine comments, I very much appreciate your input anytime. Take care

[flatonia]

Flying Paster's handlers at the very least, were good sports.

Very much appreciate the work you do to bring us these historic videos. Thanks a bunch!

[cf1970]

That's a good point. The Paster's handlers were very good sportsmen, they appreciated a good horse race and rivalry. It's my pleasure to share these fine races with everyone. Thank you for watching. Take care.

[AwsiDooger]

Darn it, one of these days Flying Paster is going to put his head in front of Bid at the finish...

Thanks for posting this Spectacular Bid series. I had just started college in California and remember all these races. Makes me sick he didn't win the Triple Crown although I rooted for Coastal at the time.

I still give Paster credit for running in all these races, trying different tactics but never enough.

[cf1970]

I was very happy to do it. The Bid is my second favourite horse. I figured why keep these great races to myself? Glad you liked it. The Paster was a very fine horse, without a doubt. Take care.

[gfn02]

That's an absolutely incredible performance! What a horse; it just astonishes me that SECRETARIAT ran that same exact time as a 3 year old AND did it easing through the '73 Marlboro.

[cf1970]

Yep, The Bid was fantatastic alright. Big Red's accomplishment IS astonishing. Absolutely unheard of as far as I know. Take care.

[easygoer13]

The 1973 Marlboro was indeed a record but was at nine furlongs, not ten. Secretariat never ran a 1:57:4 ten furlongs. The great mare Desert Vixen set a nine furlong record winning the Beldame on the same card, and then Secretariat broke the record a race or two later in the first-ever Marlboro Cup, defeating his great stablemate Riva Ridge.

[cf1970]

To clarify, gfno2 & I meant that Secretariat eased and was timed in an extra furlong in an unofficial 1:57 4/5 in the '73 Marlboro. I will send you a message with the referring link, if you so request, as youtube seems not to allow weblinks in comments. Hope that helps for now. Take care.

[AwsiDooger]

Belmont was freakishly fast in '73. I looked it up in college and it was astonishing, track records falling left and right, unprecedented before or since for a short time frame. The track record was broken the race prior to Secretariat's Belmont.

Major New York papers reported that during the spring of '73 the Belmont track stewards ordered the main dirt track to be scraped, rolled and pounded. Secretariat was awesome but I've never taken those '73 times at Belmont at face value.

[blusterjfk]

Here we go, and pay attention! Take a look at A) The Kentucky Derby, where the winning time was 1:59&2, and B) The Preakness, with the winning time in 1:53&2. Take Sham out of either race & Sec's margin is 10.5 lengths. So we do the math. The show time in the Derby was 2:01&4! I did some research and studied all the times in Derby history.

[AwsiDooger]

I lived it, buddy. I watched every race and followed closely, not piecing things together decades later with blindfolds on. The track conditions in '73 were inordinately fast. Do you honestly believe Sham was one of the great horses in Triple Crown history? That is asinine. He just lost to Angle Light. He ran under 2 minutes because the Derby track was like a freeway.

[blusterjfk]

Blindfolds? What exactly does that mean? And you still haven't answered my question: why didn't Twice A Prince and My Gallant have unusually fast times as well? Yes, I do believe Sham was a great horse, and Angle Light ran the race of his life in the Wood! Also, what evidence you got supporting Churchill Down's track was "like a freeway"?

[AwsiDooger]

I watched all the Triple Crown races in '73. All three times the announcers said before the race that the track conditions were very fast. I'm not backfitting years later. If we had the full 90 minute broadcasts you would see what I mean.

[blusterjfk]

They sure as heck never said ANYTHING about anyone intentionally making the tracks "superfast" in order to facilitate Sec winning the TC and again, simply because you were BORN before me has absolutely NOTHING to do with this discussion! You weren't in the race, you weren't a track official. You were a fan who enjoyed watching them. So am I. I've just done it later.

[blusterjfk]

I discovered that A) 2 min has been broken 3 times, B) 2:01's been broken 7 times, and C) 2:02's been broken 20 times. 20 times in 132 races, that's 15.1%! In other words, the horse that placed 3rd in the Derby ran a fast enough Derby to WIN 112 of the 132 races in Kentucky Derby history. And that's TO THIS DAY!!! So clearly the '73 Derby was consistently the fastest Derby EVER (Forego only finished a length behind Our Native for 4th).

[AwsiDooger]

I live in Las Vegas. They put up time over/unders on the major races. The gamblers bet heavily based on track conditions. It's ludicrous to assert the track conditions don't change dramatically from year to year. When Monarchos won the track was obscenely fast and everyone knew it. The money flooded in on the under. But go ahead and tell me you can just compare every year to previous ones, no difference. I'll laugh myself to sleep, and wish you made the betting lines.

[blusterjfk]

So, if I'm hearing you right, we're to ignore the DOCUMENTED photo and video evidence of 31 lengths & accept that THE MOST highly scrutinized and covered race EVER had a fast track (though no evidence establishes that) because of some Vegas bookies?

[AwsiDooger]

I said nothing about Vegas oddsmakers in regard to 31 lengths. The Belmont tape proves it's wrong. Use a stopwatch. It's a 4.3 second gap. The fastest horse in the history of the planet can't run 31 lengths in 4.3 seconds. That would be the equivalent of making up 9 lengths in less than a sixteenth. It takes more than 6 seconds to run a sixteenth at the end of a mile and a half.

Why are you so reluctant to concede a basic error was made?

[blusterjfk]

But you DID insinuate that the Vegas oddsmakers knew something about the track being "superfast", like they had inside information. Everyone knew the track was fast, and I'm willing to consider it wasn't 31 lengths, but I'm not willing to consider it was only 22. A simple eyeball test of that photo shows that it was more than that.

[blusterjfk]

Our Native also finished 10.5 lengths behind in the Preakness, with a time of 1:55&4. This time would've won 44 of the 75 Preakness races run since the race has been 1 mile & 3/16th's. In short, a very respectable time. So now we've established that Our Native was a VERY good horse. Now let's examine the Belmont.

[AwsiDooger]

You haven't established anything. What is this, Monty Python? You use one race and ignore track conditions to assert Our Native was a VERY good horse. LOL.

Look, I'm not denouncing Secretariat in the least. Truly phenomenal. But there are many fans who run around with blinders on in denial that the tracks in '73 were extraordinarily fast, particularly in the Belmont.

[blusterjfk]

Again, you have NO EVIDENCE whatsoever that the tracks were inordinately fast. I have provided evidence of why they were not "superfast". And Our Native was very good to run a Derby that wins 85% of all Derby's run. I resent very much your implication that I "run around with blinders on"! In addition, your snipe that "I lived it, buddy" is quite absurd b/c it's not like you were IN the race, and we can watch the video evidence here and now anytime we want to.

[AwsiDooger]

Here is a paragraph printed BEFORE Secretariat's Belmont by Time magazine, in a preview of the race. Google "The Wow Horse Races Into History" and you'll find it, if you dare:

"The Belmont track is extremely fast this year for some reason —possibly because of the unusually heavy spring rains that have packed the surface, possibly because of the particular combination of sand and loam and clay that is being used."

[gfn02]

I have that article and again, not a word about them intentionally making it faster because SECRETARIAT was going for the Triple Crown. Not a scentilla of evidence exists that indicates they took that action.

[AwsiDooger]

I don't know if it was done intentionally. I wouldn't discount it. The sport had a 2-year-old Horse of the Year and was desperate for a superstar. Much moreso than today. Horse racing was bigger then. Many disappointments like Majestic Prince and Canonero. The year before Riva Ridge lost the Triple Crown in the mud. So they may have taken steps. I never read that in the paper but I've heard it for decades and apparently it was printed in the NY papers, via the comment I posted last night.

[gfn02]

All those points are valid. The desperation, the fact that it was bigger then, and the many disappointments. But SECRETARIAT's consistently fast times at other tracks, on other surfaces, and in adverse conditions show me that nothing was done intentionally to help him because he simply didn't need it.

[blusterjfk]

Our Native's time was an estimate. Even if it's faster, it should've been MUCH faster than that if they intentionally made the track "superfast".

[blusterjfk]

If what you're is sayin' is true, then that means that the other horses' times in the race would've ALSO had to be remarkably fast, since his claim is that the stewards made the track superfast. This obviously wouldn't affect Sec ONLY, it would affect ALL the horses! The horse that finished 2nd was Twice a Prince by a head over My Gallant in 3rd. His time was 2:30&1 since he was beaten by 31 lengths.

[AwsiDooger]

First of all, the field was woefully weak. Once Sham halted there was nothing else there. And stop buying the garbage that the actual margin was 31 lengths. That is rank ignorance. Go to the videos on YouTube and time the Secretariat hitting the line to the next horse, Twice a Prince. It is 4.3 seconds. That doesn't come close to equating to 31 lengths. It was more like 22, using the 1 second = 5 lengths proven criteria. The track chart made a huge gaffe with the 31 lengths estimate.

[blusterjfk]

Why is it that CBS confirmed, via video analysis by Sandy Grossman, that the margin WAS 31 lengths? What motive would they have? Yes, the other horses were weak compared to Sec, but that's exactly why you'd expect Twice A Prince's time to be FASTER than normal for him!

[AwsiDooger]

They didn't CONFIRM anything. They estimated and blew it. You used the 1 second = 5 lengths criteria to come up with the 2:30 1/5 in this thread. Then I pointed out it's 4.3 seconds to Twice a Prince and now you reverse your frame of reference.

Don't be a hypocrite. Racing fans should want accuracy. The Preakness time was flat wrong and so is the Belmont margin. You can't argue for only one change when both are demonstrably wrong.

[gfn02]

In several different articles and reports I've been able to unearth, it's mentioned that it took careful analysis of the video and the official photo finish snapshot. They all unanimously agreed it was 31 lengths; why fudge that?

[AwsiDooger]

I'm sure they did their absolute best, and agreed on 31 lengths. I'm more than sure it is wrong, in fact not even close to correct. I'd comfortably bet my life and my family's life on it. The time does not lie. I've looked at every Belmont clip on YouTube and it's a 4.3 second gap in every one. It's really not a big deal, other than Count Fleet's record was 25 lengths. That might be wrong also. I haven't checked a video.

[blusterjfk]

Ok, I'm willing to consider it wasn't 31 lengths. I'm gonna try and blow up that photo I have somehow and count. What I don't accept is that they suped it up at Belmont for Sec. He ran freakishly fast times in all conditions at more tracks than just Belmont. I mean, how'd he come within a 5th of the Laurel track record in the Laurel Futurity in mud (that record was held by a 4 year old, by the way) as a 2 yr old if the horse himself wasn't freakishly fast?

[bon1042]

Hi again bluster. In I think most recent Blood Horse 'Talkin Horses w/Bill Nack, 5/07 I think, he states that Secretariat wld have broken track record in Laurel Futurity "if Turcotte hadn't folded up on him." Didn't Turcotte think also that it was his most impressive performance as 2 yr old, even more than the Hopeful, which is my favorite.

[blusterjfk]

I'm not reversing a thing! I acknowledge wholeheartedly that the time 2:30&1 is an estimate in and of itself! Also, I'm tired of you getting nasty. Calling me a hypocrite is out of bounds, and I'd like you to knock that those things off.

[Bassman968]

Just for the sake of argument, 1 second does not equal 5 lengths...as Steve Davidowitz once put it, "The only horses that go that slow charge 10 cents a ride".

It's closer to 7 lengths per second, which actually supports the 31 length margin.

That is why the Daily Racing Form's speed figures are severely flawed, and no serious handicapper relies on them.

[blusterjfk]

Now here's the interesting point: The Belmont has been run (to date) at 1.5 miles 80 times since 1926, and 60(yes!) times 2:30&1 has been beaten, not tied. That's 75%!!! What can we conclude from this? Well, we can conclude with ABSOLUTE certainty that A) Twice A Prince's time was NOT a fast time by ANY stretch of the imagination, B) Our Native (who didn't run in the Belmont) was an excellent horse, and C) that Sec's time in the Belmont was NOT due to an "superfast" fast track.

[blusterjfk]

If it were, then Twice A Prince & My Gallant's times would ALSO have been fast. You would expect that their times to be something on the order of what Our Native did in the Derby, percentage wise; fast enough to have won most Belmonts that have been run at 1.5 miles since 1926. Instead we get EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE! As you can plainly see, this is NOT the case in any way whatsoever. In fact, it reveals just how STUNNING Sec's Belmont really was.

[blusterjfk]

It truly is deserving of being called the greatest performance in all of racing history, and by LIGHT YEARS! You're just one of those people who simply doesn't want to believe what really happened: That it wasn't a "superfast" track, but a superfast horse!

[blusterjfk]

Now I fully expect you to shoot back with something on the order of "I was in college back then, you were a toddler!" But sir, all you cite are newspaper reports, and farbeit for a newspaper printing something sensational that's based on no concrete evidence. I mean, that NEVER happens! Ever!!!