Secretariat - Belmont Stakes 1973

Uploader: neojappy
Video Description: I think this is one of the most famous and awesome race in U.S. In this race, Secretariat, an outstanding big chestnut horse, wins by 31 length(!!!), making the world 12F record, achieving triple crown.

Tags for this video: Belmont horse racing Secretariat Stakes
See more videos uploaded by neojappy

What do you want to do next ?

Play Casino Games - 10% Cash Bonus, more than 75 great online casino games
Bet on Sports - 10% Cash Bonus, Live Lines Inferno, Comprehensive Betting Advice
Play Backgammon - 20% Cash Bonus, popular $50000 Backgammon Tournaments
Play Internet Poker - 110% Cash Bonus, $175000 Guaranteed Poker Tournaments
Bet on Horses - 10% Cash Bonus, Horse Betting Toolkit, Featured Race of the Week
Play Online Bingo - Free $6 Bonus. Bingo Tourneys, Slots, Video Poker, Keno games

Subscribe to our newsletter - Learn how to make $200 per day playing roulette

Related Videos


SECRETARIAT: SUPERHORSE in The Preakness	Super Horse, Secretariat	SECRETARIAT - 1973 Kentucky Derby

Secretariat Belmont Stakes 73' & extended post race coverage	Secretariat's Triple Crown - Part 1 - Sportscentury	Secretariat's Triple Crown - Part 2 - Belmont Stakes

Share This Video:

Comments on this video: Show || Hide

Read some comments

From 1mile up ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

From 1mile up Ruffian wasn't even close to as fast as SECRETARIAT. The evidence is plain: he was a full second (5 lengths) faster in the Gotham, 1:33&2, than she was in the Acorn. He was 4L faster than her 1:47&4 in the Mother Goose over 9f when he ran at ARL, and she was on the rail for that whole race, and SECRETARIAT was 4-5 wide for almost the entire race, yet he still ran 1:47flat; he also ran the Marlboro Cup in 1:45&2, 12L faster than her best at 9f. Both were on fast tracks, too.

At 1+1/4 miles the ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

At 1+1/4 miles the diff is even more startling: Ruffian's mile+1/4 split in the 1.5m Coaching Club American Oaks, run at Belmont on a fast track was 2:03&1. SECRETARIAT's mile+qtr spl in the Belmont Stakes, also on a fast track and also 1.5 miles, was 1:59! That's 21L faster than Ruffian at the exact same point of reference on the same track. He also ran 1:59&2 in the Kentucky Derby. Nothing in her chart remotely suggests Ruffian could run a mile and a quarter that fast.

Ruffian ran 1.5m in ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

Ruffian ran 1.5m in the CCA Oaks on a fast track at Belmont, SECRETARIAT ran 1.5m in the Belmont Stakes on a fast track at Belmont. In other words, they ran the same distance on the same track in the same conditions. Both had the lead at every single point-of-call in their respective races 2Bcont'd

Ruffian's splits in ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

Ruffian's splits in the CCA Oaks: 4f- :49flat, 6f- 1:13&2, 8f- 1:37&2, 10f- 2:03&1, 11f-2:14&3, and a final 1.5mile time of 2:27&4. SECRETARIAT's spl over the same conditions? 4f- 46&1, 14L faster than Ruffian, 6f- 1:09&4, 18L faster, 8f- 1:34&1, 16L faster, 10f- 1:59, 21L faster, 11f- 2:11&1, 16L faster, a final time of 2:24, 19L faster than Ruffian. He also ran 2:37&3 pulling up an extra 8th of a mile, which is an unofficial WR, even today. All of that proves he was MUCH faster than Ruffian.

Your claim that " ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

Your claim that "she broke or = a track record each time out" isn't true. What IS true is that she broke or = a track/STAKES rec each time. That's a big difference. A track rec means it's the best time at that distance at that track, period. A STAKES rec means it's the fastest time in that race, which is big because her races were all against fillies (except for her tragic breakdown, of course). 2Bcont'd

The track rec she ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

The track rec she set were all at 5.5 or 6f when she was two, that's why I can agree that she might have been faster at those dist when SECRETARIAT was 2. Ruffs times in the Sorority, Comely, Acorn, Mother Goose, and CCA Oaks were all stakes records, NOT track records. The Comely was 7f at Aqueduct in 1:21&1. The TRACK record for that distance at Aqueduct is 1:20&1 by Dr. Fager in the 1968 Vosburgh, and he did with 139 pounds! Her CCA Oaks = STAKES rec. The track rec is 2:24 by....SECRETARIAT.

On the other hand, ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

On the other hand, SECRETARIAT not only set 2 World Records, but he also twice set world records pulling up. Great as she was, Ruffian never did anything close to that. No horse ever did. You also say "she sure as hell could've", meaning she could have won races by 31 lengths. What evidence do you base that on? That she wasn't asked for all she had? Well, in the Belmont SECRETARIAT wasn't asked for anything. Who knows what the time/margin would have been if he had been? 45? It's not relevant.

Also, it should be ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

Also, it should be noted that Ruffian didn't have filly-challenger, whereas Sham rose to that occasion on the Derby and Preakness. You take Sham out of those races and SECRETARIAT wins each of them by 10.5L. Also, SECRETARIAT did what he did in races that were all open to males AND females. He also beat older horses, older champion horses. It's not a knock against Ruffian that she didn't do these things, rather it's further evidence that comparing SECRETARIAT to Ruffian is not fair to either.

I don't really know ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

I don't really know what you mean when you say "she was putting up faster times than he was and she hadn't even started a race". First of all, I've demonstrated that she did NOT put up faster times than SECRETARIAT except for 5.5, 6f, and once at 7f but her 7f race was on a fast track, his on a sloppy track. All of his other times were faster than Ruff on the same tracks under the same conditions. I have no clue what "she hadn't even started a race" even means. Does that mean he did? Confusing.

Ruffian's margins ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

Ruffian's margins were absolutely stunning but again, she had no challenger whatsoever among fillies. SECRETARIAT beat a very good Stop The Music, by 8L in the Laurel Futurity at 2, beat Riva Ridge, an older Derby and Belmont champion, by 3.5 in the Marlboro, beat grass CHAMP Tentam in the Man o' War the first time he ever raced on grass, beat Big Spruce, Kennedy Road and others by 6.5L in the CanIntn'l, and on and on. Then of course he won the Belmont by 31 without being asked for a thing.

From a logical ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

From a logical perspective I feel that there's just no way to credibly make the case that Ruffian was better than SECRETARIAT. The truth is that she wasn't as good as a number of great colts. There's no way she could beat Dr. Fager or Spectacular Bid, or Seattle Slew, and many others. I believe that you make your claim based not on evidence, but on emotion. I've layed out my case in as much detail as I can summon, and feel it's overwhelming. I don't demean you, and haven't been mean-spirited.

So I've now come ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

So I've now come full circle: in your original comment you stated "...truly an amazing colt. but Ruffian was better." There's no way to logically make that case in a convincing fashion. I posted a reply to that comment with one word: No.
I implore anyone who reads this comment to please read all of the previous comments I've made where I have methodically laid out precisely why that statement is not true. Please do that before responding. I love Ruffian. She was not as great as SECRETARIAT.

No. ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

No.

First, thank you ... ( 5 days ago by Kellsexi)

First, thank you for flooding my email inbox with all your stupid replies.
Ruffian simply was better. Ruffian was NEVER asked for all she had, Secretariat sure was. Was Secretariat undefeated? I dont think so. Secretariat never sparked a minus pool (meaning to some people, he always wasn't a sure thing). And what I meant was, when she first started racing, she was putting up phenominal times, people said that her times were so good, not even older or stakes horses could come close.

You cant say she ... ( 5 days ago by Kellsexi)

You cant say she couldn't have, because she never raced them, you cant ever say "Oh well that horse couldnt beat that horse." And don't say "Well you think she's better and they never raced." I am saying she's better based on fact, not in a race. People said that about Foolish Pleasure, "Oh he cant do a mile and an eighth, or he cant win the Derby." But he did.
It's obvious that she had better wind than he did, and that she was faster.
Fighting over this wont help. But i am telling the truth.

Getting nasty with ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

Getting nasty with me is a mistake. I never referred to you, or anything about you, as stupid.

I never said a ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

I never said a sinlge solitary thing about Foolish Pleasure. I want you to directly to respond to this question: Both SECRETARIAT and Ruffian raced 1.5 miles at Belmont over a fast track, do you say that Ruffian was faster? If so, how?

The fact that he ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

The fact that he wasn't undefeated means absolutely nothing. I want you to explain when it was that he was asked for all he had. If you think it was in the Belmont Stakes you're wrong. Also, I refer you to the 1974 Sorority Stakes, when Ruffian's jockey repeatedly went to the whip in the stretch. I counted at least 6 seperate times. Tell me seriously, how is that NOT asking her for all she has? I'm rather offended that you would refer to my logical rebuttal to your statements as stupid.

Because Ruffian ... ( 5 days ago by Kellsexi)

Because Ruffian never gave all she had, she just simply put on a burst of speed. Again, Ruffian was never asked for full blast, otherwise I think she would've pulled away so fast it would've made your head spin.
And dear, when it floods my email inbox, it is stupid. And trust me, I am not getting nasty, nasty would be using words im sure you dont want to hear. And I did not refer to you as stupid, rather the replies.
Ruffian was simply the better horse. Sorry if your opinion is different.

Explain to me how ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

Explain to me how it was that she wasn't asked for that burst of speed? The jockey whipped at least 7 times? Your position is not supported by any evidence. Again I ask you: both horses raced at Belmont park on a fast track over 1.5 miles, do you say that Ruffian was faster? If so, how?

...So you just ... ( 5 days ago by Kellsexi)

...So you just automatically think that because she was hit she ran as hard as she could?
The reason Ruffian was behind was because she popped a cold splint. So even if she was hit, she couldnt give very much because of her leg.
And yes, I do say Ruffian was faster.
Because she was never asked for speed in that race. The only race she was asked for her semi- best was the race against Hot n Nasty.

When does ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

When does continuously whipping a horse 6-7 times not constitute asking a horse for all he/she has? If that is not, then what is? Also, again I ask you this question: Both horses ran at Belmont, both over 1.5 miles, and both on a fast track, how can you possibly say that Ruffian was faster?

Also, are you still ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

Also, are you still saying that Ruffian broke or equalled TRACK records every time out? Do you acknowledge that that's not true?

That's what my ... ( 5 days ago by gfn02)

That's what my whole point was: that it's possible to revere and recognize that both of them were great, but at the same time recognize that, by any method of measure, SECRETARIAT was faster. Feel free to come on over to my channel and explore my project, as I think you'd like it :)

Tell a friend:

URL
Embed Code