Sham's injury in '73 Belmont

[Glimmerglass]

[QUOTE=Kyzteke;3730368]
Since you obviously aren’t that familiar with horse racing, go back and review some records.

Secretariat lost only 1 race, plus I think he was set down once for a jock disqualification.[/QUOTE]

21 starts 16-3-1

Again I think people too often inflate ‘the legend’ beyond what it was.

By comparison, Citation at the end of his 3-yr season had a career of 29 starts 27-2-0. One of those 2nd places was under Calumet orders (at the age of 2) when racing against the filly Bewitch, his stablemate, who also set the track record. Calumet rules were such that if a 2 or more Calumet horse were in the same race then the horse in the lead in the final turn was not to be challenged. Calumet didn’t see the value in wasting their horses against one another in some all-out duel. The other was against Saggy in the Chesapeake Trial Stakes at 3.

[mortebella]

[QUOTE=Glimmerglass;3730545]
21 starts 16-3-1[/QUOTE]

:lol::lol::lol:

I think the phrase is “hoist by your own petard,” Kyzteke.

[mortebella]

also…

These are the reports I was referring to…Secretariat’s defeat by Onion. http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1087658/index.htm
You WILL note he banged his head on the gate. Perhaps YOU’D like to go back and read some reports, Kyzteke. I later remember it being claimed he lost a tooth. Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t. Maybe the claim was never very widely put about. No matter how you slice it, it wasn’t much of an excuse and the tank was pretty empty; that was how it looked to me, and that was all the point I was making. I’d like to remind people I started this thread off poking some self-deprecation at my memory, being fully aware that sharing MY opinions about Secretariat were inviting the aforementioned big ol’ can o’ whoop-ass, and take a minute to postulate my view of this board as a place where folks of different stripes can come together for CIVILIZED discussions. If you can’t dig it, Kyzteke, I’m sure there’s a sandbox at a local kindergarden that’s just your size.

What I got stirred up about, and the crappy book on Sham brought a lot of it up, was Sham didn’t finish dead last that day, not after the kind of races he ran in the K. & P., without some kind of reason. Was it unwise for Pincay to send him after S. right from the start? Probably. But he was still better than every other horse there. That kind of precipitious plunge in performance - okay, in a horse that could run a Derby like his BLEEDING ALL THE WAY - bespeaks a significant physical problem. So anyway, what we’ve now managed to dig up is he fractured his cannon bone - the point of contention is they found it in July. But it’s certainly conceivable that a hairline fracture happened during the Belmont. I just was after knowing what the actual history on all this was, and that’s been answered, so thanks to those who filled a knowledge gap. And thanks also to folks who shared memories! That’s VERY cool!

(To TB Collector, this is too odd: my horse’s favorite treats are bananas & peppermints, too!)

[lesson_junkie]

Mortebella-which book do you refer to?

[Fluffie]

@Blue Domino;3729313

I can’t recall an offspring or grandget of Sham ever doing anything spectacular, and subscribed to Bloodhorse and TB Times for many many years.

For the record, I have a grandson (or great-grandsone–can’t remember offhand) of Sham who is a wicked-awesome hunter.

[mortebella]

[QUOTE=lesson junkie;3730680]
Mortebella-which book do you refer to?[/QUOTE]

The book is “Sham: In the Shadow of a Superhorse,” by Mary Walsh. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1593305060/ref=s9subs_c1_14_at1-rfc_p_si2?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-1&pf_rd_r=11ARVW9PM0WKZ3W1QDG7&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=463383351&pf_rd_i=507846

I call it a crappy book (it’s been discussed in this thread a little and elsewhere, I believe) because the research is thin and there are some factual errors. I just feel if you’re “trying to set the record straight” so to speak, to the extent that you’re writing a whole book, why waste the chance? :sadsmile:

[Neighland]

I think Sham was a hell of a race horse, and had the misfortune of being born the same year as Secretariat…there was no doubt he was a superhorse in my mind…I believe Sham to have been every bit as great as the other TC winners, in fact he had the second fastest Derby time till Monarchos. That is an incredible feat, and as I said it is just a shame he was born the same year.

I don’t think he sired anything grand, but I do believe he made quite an excellent broodmare sire.

I had a Sham daughter, that produced a daughter for me and the daughter produced a super nice Hanoverian cross gelding. She never did very well at the track a place or two and that was it!!

Attached is my Sham mare out of a Tom Rolfe mare w/her filly.

[summerhorse]

[QUOTE=Neighland;3731015]
I think Sham was a hell of a race horse, and had the misfortune of being born the same year as Secretariat…there was no doubt he was a superhorse in my mind…I believe Sham to have been every bit as great as the other TC winners, in fact he had the second fastest Derby time till Monarchos. That is an incredible feat, and as I said it is just a shame he was born the same year.

I don’t think he sired anything grand, but I do believe he made quite an excellent broodmare sire.

I had a Sham daughter, that produced a daughter for me and the daughter produced a super nice Hanoverian cross gelding. She never did very well at the track a place or two and that was it!!

Attached is my Sham mare out of a Tom Rolfe mare w/her filly.[/QUOTE]

Beautiful mare! I was actually a Sham fan back then (I was 11). I was so disappointed when he lost but can’t take anything away from Secretariat either.

[DMK]

@Glimmerglass;3729428

I myself think that Secretariat, while a great horse undoubtedly, has a Paul Bunyon-esq legend and myth about him that overshadows what the real horse accomplished and also failed at. We’ll never know what would’ve happened had Spectacular Bid, Citation, Dr Fager or Kelso would’ve done against Secretariat. All ran with an insatiable internal drive mixed with physical ability the likes of which are found in such a precious few horses that it would be impossible to predict the outcome.

Now with all due respect to a lot of great horses, I think anyone who doubts the greeatness of Secretariat is just not on the same wavelength with most of the great horseman who judge such things. He was (and I quote ) … a tremendous machine

C’mon there is a reason why he sits 35th on the list of 100 greatest athletes, period and #2 on the Bloodhorse’s list of 100 greatest racehorses, and it’s not because the great racetrack writers and trainers of this century thought he’d likely lose to Citation, Kelso or Dr. Fager or the Bid if they all ran their best race in the same field (although I’d surely give the nod to Citation as the only one to come close).

Hell, even Bill Nack (granted, he comes with a bias) said this about the #2 placing:

Author Bill Nack commented regarding the outcome of why Man’OWar was selected #1 in the The Blood-Horse poll.[INDENT] “I spent two days on the project. The final results were skewered when, I am told, one of the judges put Secretariat fourteenth on his top-100 list. I don’t know who this particular voter was—individual voting has remained a secret on that panel—but it was an idiotic judgment that should have been dismissed out of hand. Had I known any voter would do such a thing, I’d have put Man o’ War in fourteenth place just to counterbalance the loony. That would have leveled the playing field. Here was a horse who had broken three track records in all three Triple Crown races, including the controversial Preakness clocking, two of which records (Derby and Belmont) still stand today; whose 31-length Belmont Stakes victory, in which he earned a Beyer of 137, is by consensus regarded as the greatest performance by a racehorse in history; and yet here was a voter who concocted a list suggesting that Secretariat would have finished last, behind 13 horses, in a field made up of that voter’s first 14 horses on the list. It warped the voting and thereby tainted the list.”[/INDENT]
It’s also worth noting that while I think Sham was a really good horse who might have been viewed as a great horse in another year (woulda coulda shoulda), he does not make the list, period. Again, these are not people without knowledge on the voting panel, so I’d have to agree that from a rank of 2 to a possible highest rank of 101 for Sham is a long, long way from where the perceived talent of Secretariat lies. Maybe that’s not fair and surely it is partially due to him being so thoroughly whupped by Secretariat in the Belmont, but short of getting in the way back machine and changing history I’m not sure what’s available other than the opinions of some fairly knowledgable professionals and some folks on the interweb tubes.

[Glimmerglass]

[QUOTE=DMK;3732568]
Now with all due respect to a lot of great horses, I think anyone who doubts the greatness of Secretariat is just not on the same wavelength with most of the great horseman who judge such things. He was (and I quote ) … a tremendous machine :D[/QUOTE]

I respectfully disagree if that suggests he was head and shoulders above anything short of Man O’War:)

The role that television and magazines had, the charm of Penny, and the extraordinary effort in the Belmont all add in his favor to keeping his name in so many people’s minds as beyond great … not necessarily because they actually watched any of his races.

One could argue that human nature influenced by spin and popularity comes into play and as such those other horses of equal talent but less charming auras with the connections will never get a fair break. Few would say that the late Bud Delp was widely popular - a rascal who was good for a quote and a talented trainer - he was in sharp contrast to the beloved old trainers who rarely spoke or commented on their horses. The Meyerhoff family couldn’t compare to Penny … they were a very wealthy family and rather quiet. Then there is Ronny Fraanklin and even the steely Bill Shoemaker, enough said about both.

The point is that Spectacular Bid on paper with the track records, stakes records, and versatility exhibited is amazing. He was used without reservation and often.

Alas I don’t expect to convince anyone otherwise as to their opinion

[DMK]

You will not get any argument from me that the Bid was a whole level of awesome. I would even have to think long and hard as to who belongs at the top of the list: Secretariat or Man O’War. I just think its a bit of a jump to #3 regardless of which one occupies slot #1 or #2, and I think that generally speaking, when you assemble people who make a living at this sort of thing, that’s the ONE thing they tend to agree on. I’m not sure that makes them more right, but it does mean they made more of a living at this business than I could hope to. Mind you, it’s still just their opinion, my opinion, your opinion and then again someone else’s, what with us not having access to the wayback machine 'n all that.

But I do respectfully beg to differ about the charm of Penny Chenery and the presence of media in 1973. That’s just a moment in time and heaven knows the press that surrounded the great racehorses of the 40’s and 50’s was as pervasive in its own way (not to mention the incredible popularity of the sport at the time). But I think we can all agree that not one of those things influenced how Secretariat or the Bid or any other horse on that list (or not) ran their races and set any records that may or may not be standing today.

[mortebella]

I am also of the persuasion that much of the opinion of Secretariat is a conflation of multiple forces of the time, and that the record alone, and the horse himself, don’t justify the cult-like status. Not arguing he’s a good horse. Just would argue that he’s THAT MUCH BETTER than many others, as so many people seem to think. But hey, somebody had to be #2 on that list. And Man o’ War would’ve beaten the snot out of him

[dressagetraks]

Regarding Secretariat, who definitely was a great horse, I can’t resist throwing in an almost-never-cited statistic regarding my personal favorite:

The total winning margin of the Triple Crown races - all three winning margins put together - was identical for Secretariat and Count Fleet. And Count Fleet ran on tracks which in 1943 had surfaces which were maintained on a shoestring because of the war and gas rationing. Tracks tried to run their equipment as little as possible to groom the surface. I submit that no other Triple Crown winner had to run over surfaces in poorer condition than did Count Fleet. Hertz always blamed war rationing and the resultant track conditions for Count Fleet’s career-ending injury. There is no question that Count Fleet suffered an injury in the Belmont, enough of one that the thought of pulling up crossed his jockey’s mind, and Count Fleet pushed on with his typical bullheadedness and finished out the race anyway. It is my personal opinion that that injury cost him at least half a length in margin, with the addition of which he would hold the total margin of victory record single-handedly.

However, we all have our opinions, and none of them at this stage can be proven to be the final answer on who was best.

Back to Sham, I met him at Spendthrift Farm once. A beautiful horse.

[mortebella]

It’s a good point you make, Dressagetraks, about opinions. It’s fascinating to me to look at all the stuff that’s available on YouTube now that I grew up reading about and NEVER thought I’d see - Count Fleet being one great example, Citation, Whirlaway, Assault. What I’d give to see footage of Display!!! I think we do tend, as a way of assimilating information, to rank it and since the nature of horse racing is competitive anyway… Nah, we’ll never have definitive answers, but it’s loads of fun to sit around and think about, as opposed to, let’s say, the economy I also think about the role weight imposts play, and how long a horse’s career was, and how these skew the reputation, if you see where I’m going. Like, I don’t think losses you can put down to a weight impost should count the same exactly as a loss at 2 or 3 where the playing field is level, weight wise. But I certainly would never just sit down and make a rubric for all this kind of thing because that would be…too much like accounting!

I am glad you met Sham, and it sounds like he enjoyed a nice retirement. I’m happy for him.

[gholem]

I actually think one of secretariat’s best races was the Man O’War. It was his first race on grass. I don’t think he gets enough credit for being able to run on both dirt and grass. The main challenger, Tentam, was a great 4yo turf horse who definitely had heart. He makes a run at secretariat about half way through and gets up to his hind end when secretariat realizes he’s there and pulls away. He then makes another move near the top of stretch and secretariat pulls away from him again.

When you see that, it says to me that BOTH horses have heart, one just got better genes for running.

The time for the 1.5 miles was 2:24.6, I think. Pretty close to his dirt belmont time - it wasn’t a complete fluke. And the turns on the turf course are tighter.

The race: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNHJkz5K6uk

[Jumpin_Horses]

[QUOTE=EventerAJ;3729266]
Obligatory Secretariat Belmont Video

Can’t mention the big red name without linking that footage.

I’ve seen it a million times and it still gives me chills to hear "HE IS MOVING LIKE A TREMENDOUS MACHINE!!!"[/QUOTE]

… SECRETARIATs ALL ALONE!!!

yea, baby… Secretariat’s run still brings tears to my eyes… I worship that horse… I DO… to this day… (I know, Im weird… ) IMO - he was the most amazing horse that ever lived… next to my mare, of course.

I was watching my Secretariat vid, and he did lose a couple of races, he lost his first because he got sandwiched in at the start, then there was a couple of other ones where he got like 3rd or 4th (I suck at details), in which he had a fever, and one where he had a tooth abcess…

about Sham… I LOVED Sham… poor guy, that horse was great. he just didnt have enough stamina to run with Secretariat. but, one thing that caught my attention in the video is that Sham got the crap whipped out of him by his jockey… Ron always had his whip put away, but, Sham’s jockey was horrible to Sham. Ron Turcotte said that he could hear poor Sham just getting the daylights beat out of him, and he always felt sorry for Sham…

now, if you were Sham (and we all know TBs here) would YOU give 100% to someone who beat on you constantly? :no: IDK - perhaps if Turcotte road Sham :yes:

what do you guys think?

[DMK]

@gholem;3733063

He makes a run at secretariat about half way through and gets up to his hind end when secretariat realizes he’s there and pulls away. He then makes another move near the top of stretch and secretariat pulls away from him again.

When you see that, it says to me that BOTH horses have heart, one just got better genes for running.

That really was an amazing race - I hadn’t seen it in years (decades?) - Tentam made two gritty, sustained runs at Secretariat. How many horses have 2 runs in them, period, never mind in a 1.5 mile race? Awesome. And for all that, Secretariat pretty much toyed with him…

Just as some people adore something because of the the media hype (the “ooh pretty shiny” syndrome), I think others like to knock something down for pretty much no other reason than the media hype (the “old coot” syndrome). Just the other side of the same coin, I guess.

[WhiteCamry]

@Blinkers On;3729840

I agree. A race like that beats the crap out of the psyche of the game. A sad reality of the mental part of the sport.

That’s always what I reckoned: Sham threw in the towel on the far turn.

[Everythingbutwings]

Just would argue that he’s THAT MUCH BETTER than many others, as so many people seem to think

Aside from his incredible performances on the track, his place in history is solidified by:

Lady’s Secret
Risen Star
Chief’s Crown
General Assembly

Weekend Surprise
A.P. Indy
Summer Squall
Honor Grades

Terlingua
Storm Cat

Secrettame
Gone West

Sister Dot
Dehere

I’m sure I’m leaving out an important sire or more. When you look at the top 10 sires in the world today, a good many of them have Secretariat as their Broodmare sire.

Leading Broodmare sire in 1992

1992 Secretariat Bold Ruler-Somethingroyal; 2s 7,512,915 Claiborne, KY died 1989 A.P. Indy

[Barbara_D]

[QUOTE=Glimmerglass;3732650]

The role that television and magazines had, the charm of Penny, and the extraordinary effort in the Belmont all add in his favor to keeping his name in so many people’s minds as beyond great … not necessarily because they actually watched any of his races.
…

Alas I don’t expect to convince anyone otherwise as to their opinion ;)[/QUOTE]

To me, the Belmont is really the race that sealed it for most people (at the time, of course, it was rumored he was on Equipoise, a…dare I say it…steroid!).

Phenomenal horse, no doubt. Wow, gave goosebumps on occasion…and what a handsome, flashy package! Certainly in the top 10 of the last 100+ years, although I’d probably put him around #5.

He had weird losses - all of which later were heavy with excuses. By the time the Preakness was run, Lauren Lucien was still saying he had no idea why Secretariat ran a lackluster third in the Wood (eventually, a tooth abscess story took root). When he lost to Onion - and it was a flat-out loss - they came up with sickness as an excuse. When he lost to Prove Out? Gee, I can’t remember what their excuse was for that 4±length drubbing, but they had one.

His wins were really exciting, no doubt. He was a big old train out there and, on his day, was absolutely unbelievable. But having to make excuses for his trio of losses at 3, to me, puts him just a step behind Citation.

While many racing experts put Secretariat at #1 or 2 on their greatest list, many also don’t. Their quotes simply aren’t used in Secretariat-related articles, as they don’t help with promoting the legend.

Great? Yes. Immortal? Yes. One of the greatest ever? Yes. That’s the best I can grant him…and that’s not bad.

Secretariat also later gained this odd reputation for being the perfectly conformed racehorse, which is at odds with what was written about him at the time. Check out the racing manuals from ‘the day’ - back when they used to study everything about a horse from his hooves to the curve of his ears (back when racing really mattered and, some might argue, writers really studied horses). Secretariat, while very well put together, was no Buckpasser.