As main track records fell throughout the two-day Breeders’ Cup festival at Keeneland – four in Breeders’ Cup races and two in undercard stakes – the only thing faster than the final times was the speed with which condemnation for the surface piled up. The criticism came mostly from concerned fans, but also from some of the sport’s most respected observers.
Steve Haskin, a member of the prestigious National Museum of Racing’s Joe Hirsch Media Roll of Honor, wrote in his Breeders’ Cup essay for Secretariat.com, “Keeneland, or whoever was in charge of such things, decided, as some racetracks tend to do on big days, that track records equate to quality, and on Breeders’ Cup day the track had somehow turned into a paved highway.”
Eclipse Award-winning journalist Marcus Hersh, of Daily Racing Form, tweeted after Gamine’s performance in the BC Filly & Mare Sprint: “Broke the track record by 1.12 seconds. It's a shame this has to be done to the track surface. We can appreciate greatness without making things so fast.”
Former Horse Racing Nation editor Brian Zipse tweeted of the Saturday races: “There were races run on dirt at five different distances yesterday at Keeneland and four track records were broken. A horse died. Do the powers that be in racing think this is what we want?”
Another Eclipse Award winner, Jeremy Balan, of BetAmerica, tweeted: “Why. Must. We. Always. Gear. Tracks. Up. For. Big. Days.”
You don’t have to dig too deep to find even harsher comments from punters and fans. The influential writers cited above, however, have watched hundreds of thousands of races and know the enigmatic inner workings of this sport as well as anyone can. If these guys believe surfaces are smartened up for illicit gains then a problem exists, whether it’s one of deception or perception.
If you’ve never considered how track maintenance can help a horse run faster, think about jogging on the beach. First, imagine you’re laboring across the dry, loose sand up by the boardwalk. Then, try gliding across the wet, packed sand by the water, where waves have been rolling in and out all morning. Conceptually, these are the extreme ends of a broad spectrum that can drive track superintendents, horsemen, and speed figure adherents to fits of madness.
Accusations of ‘souped-up’ or intentionally sped-up dirt tracks on major racing days go back decades.
The most infamous of this century was 2001 Kentucky Derby Day, which resulted in three track records and history’s second-greatest sub-two-minutes in sports, with Monarchos nearly equaling Secretariat’s hallowed 1:59⅖.
Todd Pletcher, who trained runner-up Invisible Ink, said, “They might as well run on Fourth Street.” And Joe Orseno, fourth with Thunder Blitz, referred to the Churchill Downs main track as a “concrete superhighway”.
A range of somewhat plausible theories for these lightning-fast tracks come up over and over. For instance, marketing-minded executives believe fast times will garner more attention. Or shady trainers can pay off track superintendents to create a speed or rail bias. Or powerful breeding farms want jaw-dropping performances to help fill the books of soon-to-be stallions. Alas, evidence of anything nefarious has been hard to come by.
Was the main track at this year’s Breeders’ Cup faster than usual? By most measures, yes.
Was it the result of intentional and careful manipulation by the tractor drivers? Probably not, but conspiracy theories are more fun than ambiguity, and in 2020 they’re practically the American way.
Facts …
One of the main themes of this year’s Breeders’ Cup was established right from the start as the first undercard race on the Friday program produced a new track record for 6½ furlongs. Highly Motivated, trained by Chad Brown, stopped the timer in 1:14.99, just .06 faster than Limousine Liberal had managed in 2016.
Not all track records are created equally, though, especially at Keeneland, where record-keeping was reset when a reconfigured dirt course with wider turns and a longer stretch replaced a synthetic surface as the outer ‘main’ track in advance of the 2014 Fall Meet. Main track records from Keeneland’s prior history, whether on dirt (1937-Spring 2006) or Polytrack (Fall 2006-Spring 2014), were declared not comparable.
Keeneland’s two meetings each year are very short by U.S. standards. A typical Spring Meet in April is 16 days and the standard Fall Meet is 17 days. Only 205 cards had ever been run over the current surface entering this year’s Breeders’ Cup.
Certain distances that are staples of the Breeders’ Cup are rare occurrences at Keeneland. One mile on the dirt, for instance, is a two-turn affair with a short run to the first turn that seemingly leaves outside horses at a disadvantage. The distance requires an alternate finish line and is used sparingly. For most of the track’s history it was not used at all. Meanwhile, the American classic distance of 1¼ miles on dirt would be facing extinction even at premier tracks if not for the Kentucky Derby, Breeders’ Cup Classic, and a smattering of other tradition-bound Graded stakes.
This limited sample size issue is best exemplified by the second track record to fall on Breeders’ Cup Friday’s undercard. When Rocketry set a new standard at 1m5f in the G2 Thoroughbred Aftercare Alliance Stakes, he improved on the previous record by nearly five seconds. That sounds sensational, of course, but probably less so knowing that the distance had only been used once before, in 2017, when rain forced a 1½-mile turf allowance to be shifted to the main track.
Then there’s the dominant nature of the track-record-setting performances. While six main track records as a group is extraordinary, none of them taken individually is especially confounding. With the exception of Rocketry, these were very logical winners – Highly Motivated in the Nyquist Stakes plus the Saturday jaw-droppers Nashville (six furlongs in 1:07.89) in the Perryville Stakes, Gamine (seven furlongs in 1:20.20) in the Filly & Mare Sprint, Knicks Go (one mile in 1:33.85) in the BC Dirt Mile, and Authentic (1¼ miles in 1:59.19, hand-timed) in the BC Classic – winning very impressively by open lengths.
Of those, only Authentic wasn’t favored and he was the second choice based heavily on the likelihood that he would be the controlling speed, the ideal scenario for a reprise of his September Kentucky Derby masterpiece in 2:00.61 at Churchill Downs.
In the case of Knicks Go, it was his second Keeneland track record in a month, having set the 8½-furlong mark of 1:40.79 in an allowance on opening weekend of the Fall Meet. His cruising-speed one-mile fractional time on that day, 1:34.73, could have given Liam’s Map a run for his money in Keeneland’s 2015 BC Dirt Mile, run in 1:34.54.
The Keeneland turf, meanwhile, saw but one course record on the weekend, with BC Filly & Mare Turf heroine Audarya completing 9½-furlong in 1:52.72, besting the previous record by more than a second. This also is an unusual distance at Keeneland.
“Nine And One Half Furlongs (on the Turf),” as it reads in the condition book, tends to appear twice per meet, and not as stakes events. With the going much firmer than the last Breeders’ Cup in Lexington, a course record in this race was far more likely than not.
That makes four of seven track records from Breeders’ Cup weekend that were at distances used sparingly. But six furlongs, 6½ furlongs, and seven furlongs on dirt, all in one day, is still quite the feat.
… and figures
The speed figures that serious horseplayers devote lives to producing and interpreting exist in large part to account for the massive disparities in how surfaces perform – track to track, day to day, and even hour to hour. A ‘track variant’ is deployed by most figure-makers to help adjust final ratings based on whether a horse’s effort was aided or hindered by the tightness of the dirt.
Daily Racing Form’s track variant, shown in their past performances, is calculated by comparing all of a day’s times for a distance and surface against the best final times for that distance/surface from three years prior. Equibase’s variant compares to historical par times.
TimeformUS offers a simplified Track Condition Rating on a scale of 1-10 based off final times at a distance across a wide range of tracks. Breeders’ Cup Friday was rated at 9 and Saturday was 8.
“That was higher than average for Keeneland,” says Craig Milkowski, Chief Speed Figure Maker for TimeformUS and DRF Pace Figures. “During the spring, they’re usually 6-7 and for the summer meet they were more like 7-8. So it wasn’t just the horses; the track was definitely fast.”
That said, Milkowski points out that a number of U.S. ovals regularly rate as faster than Keeneland did on the days in question, they just go unnoticed.
“If they ever ran a Breeders’ Cup at Remington, people’s heads would explode when they saw the final times,” he says. “They might run six furlongs in 1:06.”
Professional horseplayer Paul Matties, winner of the 2016 National Handicapping Championship and another highly regarded figure-maker, goes a step further than most by incorporating fractional times into his variants. He calculates figures for every race date at Keeneland and found that those numbers for the Breeders’ Cup cards were remarkably easy to come to because of how consistent the dirt was.
“It was definitely the fastest Keeneland that I’ve seen in a long time,” Matties says. “Even compared to the end of the meet, which was a little fast for them, it was still probably a second faster than those days. It was definitely different, so there was some truth to what the people speaking up were saying.”
His variant was the same through both days. A fast track does not equal a biased track, however, and the more important characteristic to top horseplayers was that horses of all styles had a fair chance at winning, which nobody has questioned.
“Since they’ve gone back to dirt [in 2014], I only have a handful of days at Keeneland that have been faster,” Matties says. “That’s why there were track records. If you have a track that’s a little fast, horses like Nashville and Gamine are going to run some of the fastest figures ever run for horses in their divisions.”
Marshall Gramm, the Rhodes College economics professor who took home $492,750 for winning that weekend’s Breeders’ Cup Betting Challenge, was similarly nonplussed by whatever was going on with the dirt.
“I don’t tend to worry about the overall speed of the surface,” he says. “I’m in favor of surfaces being tight. Friday, I thought speed obviously carried, but not any more than a regular Keeneland or a regular dirt track. Speed inherently carries and the speed-versus-closer ratio was typical for a dirt track and typical for Keeneland. Saturday, I thought the track was fair and didn’t have any problem with it.”
For Gramm the only bias at play was the dreaded confirmation bias. Coming into the BC Juvenile, for example, he shifted allegiances from Essential Quality to Reinvestment Risk because of a perceived rail bias he noted earlier in the BC Juvenile Fillies. That theory went up in smoke when the four colts in the first flight, racing on or near the rail, all gave way to faster finishers to their outside. Small sample sizes, Gramm points out, can make one or two results seem more significant than they are.
“Was I seeing things or was it real?” he asks. “You don’t know until you have a chance to look back and reevaluate. People see a race, they jump to conclusions, change their opinions, and then it turns out you overreacted because of one observation.”
The official response
Turf courses usually demand the most attention in advance of a Breeders’ Cup due to the demand for accurate information on their give. But, outside of Breeders’ Cup, they escape the same level of scrutiny in the U.S. as they are more at the mercy of Mother Nature than any human force. They also are not routinely seen favoring front-running speed, although it does happen. Dirt, however, is presumed guilty until proven innocent.
While Breeders’ Cup has certain standards and expectations for its surfaces, the hard work of grooming and maintaining them falls to the host tracks like Keeneland.
“We prepped the [dirt] surface [for Breeders’ Cup] in an exactly identical fashion as we did our entire race meet,” says Bob Elliston, Keeneland’s vice president of racing.
That process is as precise and meticulous as can be found anywhere. Before every season, Elliston said, the maintenance team “opens up” the main track and grooms it the same way with the same equipment. The Racing Surfaces Testing Laboratory (RSTL) – an industry-supported nonprofit that analyzes tracks using scientifically sound methods – measures key characteristics, such as material consistency, composition, depth, shear strength (resistance to a hoof attempting to propel forward), and moisture sensitivity.
The same battery of tests was performed prior to both the Fall Meet and Breeders’ Cup weekend.
“It’s all predicated on science,” Elliston says. “We keep reams of data to evaluate it.”
Keeneland also monitors morning work tabs and averages the official times in case the surface tips its hand, which in this case it did not.
“I don’t think there was anything controllable and I don’t think it was an extraordinarily souped-up surface,” Elliston says. “We did have a good bit of moisture four days out and good moisture means kind, good grip, and horses can move across it in a good fashion.”
Breeders’ Cup provided a statement unequivocally opposing any notion that the Keeneland track could have been sped up by design:
“Breeders’ Cup, Keeneland and third-party experts, including Dr Mick Peterson and the University of Kentucky, worked together for many months to have a safe and consistent racing surface and there were never any discussions on producing fast race times.”
A separate question about what conversations took place regarding expectations for the surfaces elicited further details:
“Breeders’ Cup always puts the safety of its patrons, both human and equine, first and foremost. Breeders’ Cup has continual dialogue for many months with the host track as well as third party experts, including Dr Mick Peterson and the University of Kentucky this year, with respect to track safety, including, without limitations, track surface conditions.
“For example, this year both track surfaces had detailed and thorough maintenance calendars with regular testing by the Racing Surface Testing Laboratory and the University of Kentucky Agriculture Department in conjunction with Keeneland and Breeders’ Cup. Breeders’ Cup employed TurfTrax mapping system and measuring devices to thoroughly map the turf course and to monitor its consistency and moisture levels.
“On event days, Dr Mick Peterson was in constant communication with both Keeneland and Breeders’ Cup racing teams to keep us apprised of all conditions. The racing surface and moisture levels were consistent throughout both race days. The fast times are reflective of the best horses in the world competing.”
Peterson – director of the University of Kentucky Ag Equine Programs, co-founder of the RSTL, and widely accepted as the nation’s foremost expert on racing surfaces – is a consultant to both Breeders’ Cup and Keeneland, not to mention Santa Anita Park, Churchill Downs, the New York Racing Association (Belmont Park, Saratoga, Aqueduct), and pretty much every other major U.S. track at one point or another. For Keeneland, he has data going back to the debut of the current dirt course in 2014 and for Churchill Downs his measurements date back to the 2007 Kentucky Derby.
‘Nothing burger’
“We can now show that on big days there’s no difference in the track; there is a difference in the horses,” Peterson says. “I can tell you that Churchill Downs is no different the week before the Derby than it is before the Fall Meet.”
The tests Peterson and the RSTL conduct are done using standardized protocols adopted by ASTM International, which like KFC is officially known only by the letters that once were its acronym (the American Society for Testing and Materials).
The Jockey Club is transferring a trove of RSTL data to its servers with the intention of making it more easily mined and, presumably, accessible.
Peterson refers to the notion of souped-up surfaces as a “nothing burger” but, until the data is available for public scrutiny, silencing doubters will remain a challenge. In these times, one can probably count on doubters regardless.
As for the Breeders’ Cup dirt, Peterson concedes, “The track was probably a little bit faster than it had been the last year. I was concerned that a few races started out lightning quick but they leveled off.”
Weather could have played a factor, he says, but only because of rain early in the week, not the swing from cool to unseasonably warm.
“Moisture matters; temperature doesn’t really matter until you get down to freezing,” Peterson explained. “You do have to carefully manage the cushion depth as a track is drying out, but that’s when it’s going from floated to harrowed. What we had Breeders’ Cup week was a situation where it had been maintained for several days with what we would consider normal weather.
“You had the perfect fall day, the best horses that are ever going to run across the surface, and you get some track records. I’m trying to see the problem here.”
More reactions
Horsemen can be as susceptible to conspiracy theories as any journalists or gamblers, especially in the moments after a tough loss, but also in the mornings spinning yarns on the rail. First-person accounts or hard evidence of illicit activity by track supers intent on manipulating race results, however, are sparse.
Ron Moquett, who saddled Whitmore to a popular win from off the pace in the Breeders’ Cup Sprint, is familiar with the suspicion fast times can bring on.
“I have chased fast horses on big days my entire life, and I’ve thought, ‘Gosh dang it, they sped this thing up to where nobody can win but a speed horse,’” he says. “But what I actually think happens is they get the track as safe as possible, as tight as possible, and then you have the fastest horses. I chased horses like Mitole and Roy H and I wish I could say that it was the track always favoring speed, but it was just very good horses out there setting those fractions.”
Moquett speaks not just from conditioning and chasing world-class sprinters. At Oaklawn Park, in his hometown of Hot Springs, Arkansas, he serves on a track maintenance committee that assembles weekly to critique the surface at the nation’s foremost meet run exclusively on traditional dirt.
“The track management and the horsemen all talk about their issues or concerns,” he says. “How are our horses coming back? Do they have any extra wear or tear? It’s all about safety, but I can also tell you that, if it looks like the rail is fast or the outside is deep, that comes up as well.”
Moquett entered Whitmore in Keeneland’s opening weekend Phoenix Stakes to gauge how his beloved veteran would take to the surface. What he surmised from that fourth-place effort was that he would prefer to be closer to the pace and hugging the rail.
“I was concerned when I saw two track records set,” Moquett says of Breeders’ Cup Saturday. “But the horses that were winning like that were the favorites. The concern should arise when it’s horses you wouldn’t normally expect. When should track records be set? On a Wednesday in a $20,000 maiden?”
The valiant filly Serengeti Empress ran sub-:44 half-miles in her two starts prior to the BC Filly & Mare Sprint but actually ran slower when loose on the lead at Keeneland, going in :44.27 before ceding to superstar Gamine. Tom Amoss, trainer of Serengeti Empress and a Fox Sports racing analyst, had no complaints, even if the surface was what racing people often refer to as glib.
Far-fetched notion
“What’s the point of putting these horses on a really fast racetrack as opposed to just having the track be normal?” he asks rhetorically. “You’re not wowing anybody breaking four track records. I’m not going to sit here and say Keeneland sped up their track or didn’t. But, speaking generally about big days and a lot of fast times, what’s the point? I can’t condemn Keeneland for having a faster track. As far as the Breeders’ Cup races go, it was injury-free, and I thought it was a very safe racetrack.”
The motives for a souped-up surface are even harder to ascertain in the present day, Amoss says, as final times have never been less relevant.
“You never hear anyone talk about final times from the standpoint of handicapping, but also, for that matter, for selling a horse,” he says. “Horses get bought and sold not by their final times but by their Ragozin numbers. That’s a fact.”
For many, the debate about whether tracks are being sped up deliberately comes back to that question – what’s the point? Even if the times and the frequency with which tracks play fast on big days suggest more than a coincidence, who is behind it and to what end?
“I don’t see how it helps a track for the horses to run unusually fast,” says Steve Crist, whose relevant perspectives include legendary horseplayer, former DRF publisher, and vice president of NYRA in the mid-1990s. “They may manicure it a little more than usual but not because some evil track president said to them, ‘I want every horse on this card running 1:07.’ Why would you do that? It just makes no sense. It’s one of those conspiracy theories that’s just illogical.”
The notion of souped-up tracks seems even more far-fetched in light of racing’s other persistent issues. Are we really to believe that the same major racetracks which have proven incapable of cooperating on anything positive – say, coordinating race dates, or stakes schedules, or simulcast host fees, or television rights, or even post times – have successfully executed a clandestine, multi-jurisdictional, decades-long scheme to speed up dirt surfaces? And, on the biggest days, right under the noses of tens of thousands of witnesses in their grandstands?
More likely, constituents who have endured those endless disappointments and indignities that come with playing horses or following the sport understandably find it impossible to believe that this one aspect could actually be on the level.