I read today that the Arlington Park property was sold to the Chicago Bears, and the Churchill Downs Incorporated CEO  Bill Carstanjen was excited about what that would mean for Arlington Heights. Perhaps a stadium coming to that region will be more lucrative than a racetrack. I won’t debate that or if it’s true or not.  Carstanjen further commented on the sale of the property by saying the proceeds might be used to build another racetrack in Illinois. Build another racetrack in Illinois when a beloved track is already in existence there? I admit I don’t know the whole story since I don’t live in Illinois about Arlington Park’s continued operation being feasible without assistance like slots. I’ve heard hints it may not be. I do know that CDI is adamant that will not happen so there won’t be competition with a nearby casino it has invested in, and that is what is the track’s death knell. 

Even if CDI has branched beyond the racing industry, racing is still their primary business. To hear that they will let another track be demolished so a casino can operate is a travesty. It doesn’t sit well to hear a CEO of this company say he is “excited” about a move that will be the end of Arlington. But to hear that the proceeds will be for another track, just so it is far from that precious casino? How could one think anything but that there isn’t much thought for racing if it becomes a hindrance to their other plans. That would be more understandable if they weren’t the operator of these tracks by design, if they operated in another industry and had a chance to acquire land racetracks are on. I can’t fathom selling lovely historic tracks to the highest bidder and undermining a racing circuit in the process.

But enough of that. First, the vent; and now to honor what Arlington will always mean to me.

When I visited, I was enamored immediately. I explored every bit of the track I could that was open to the public. I even went down to a basement level floor that seemed a bit more utilitarian that contained primarily offices. Yet even there the love of the sport and the homage to racing history shone. There was a large hand-made collage on one of the walls there filled with photos of horses. 

Touches of elegance, like embossed decor reminiscent of a master sculptor’s work, were also found throughout the facility.  There was so much charm and ambience. 

I watched some races at the head of the stretch, and a band played there between races, and kids ran around in the open grassy field. It was a thoughtful touch, providing entertainment beyond racing to hold the attention of those who may not be enthralled by an entire day of racing but would still like to see it. It was one more example of attention to detail that can make a day out memorable, for it shows people considered the whole experience from beginning, middle, and end. And that is what made me think of wanting to share this track with my nephew in late July this year.

I looked back at my photos from that visit today. That’s the first time it hit me strongly what this track being gone will mean when that becomes reality. 

I’ve faced some challenging times lately. I haven’t paused to think of this track’s end more than fleetingly because there was already enough I was working through that was less than ideal, and that would hit me with another sense of loss. 

So I know what will remain are the memories of one perfect day there. No amount of corporate greed or demolition equipment can take that away. I will always be grateful I got to experience what Arlington Park was all about. It was everything a day at the races should be.

After an incredibly illustrious career that spanned years in a time when it is common to see budding talent in the racing world retire when they have only begun to come into their own, Monomoy Girl walked onto a van to begin the journey from Brad Cox’s barn at Churchill Downs to Spendthrift Farm in Lexington. But she gave every impression of not wanting to leave the racing environment, hesitating at the barn entrance and even retreating momentarily. It added a bit to the poignancy to the curtain call of her racing days, because a quick look at her stats shows if ever a horse loved to race it was her. Further study reinforces that, given that her competitive fire didn’t dim from one season to the next, and even long layoffs after setbacks didn’t alter her stepping right back into competition like she hadn’t left, most notably in 2020.

And it is a testament to the care of everyone involved with her, as has been noted elsewhere, that giving her breaks from racing contributed to her being able to stay at the top of her game, in addition to how racing was in her veins like one would hope it would be with any promising horse that arrives in a barn.

While 2021 did not play out as hoped, it didn’t matter, for it was wonderful to see the mare who had become known around her barn as the Queen return to the track.

She last ran in April, on the comeback trail once more after another break for minor setbacks. While she wasn’t going to be in the gate for the Breeders’ Cup, I eagerly awaited the news of where she would race and hoped it would be close to me. I had followed her career since she was a 3-year-old awaiting her turn to run in the Ashland at Keeneland and see if that led her to Kentucky Oaks glory, which it did. It was thrilling to see her victorious in her first race after her layoff last year, coincidentally on my birthday, and then finish that season with a resounding Breeders’ Cup Distaff win. Then Spendthrift bought her at auction and worked out an arrangement to lease a portion of her 2021 racing rights to My Racehorse to make available to shareholders. I jumped at that chance to be even in a small way involved with the horse I’d admired for years. And that is why I couldn’t wait for her next race this fall, to try to have the perks My Racehorse offers for shareholders that would probably mean more with Monomoy Girl than any other horse, like lotteries to be in the paddock prior to her race and other race day hospitality.

But then, it was over. While it was unfortunate her attempted return was cut short by a non-displaced fracture, the main takeaway was she would not need surgery and her connections did the right thing by her as they always did. Though they noted she may have been able to come back from that, she had raced longer than many of her contemporaries ever did, and she didn’t owe anyone anything. There is a moment, when retirement is sudden, that adjustment from hopes of what might be achieved yet have to be slowly released. It is bittersweet. But above all, there is gratitude for seeing such a bright star.

On a balmy fall day, when the wind blew briskly through the trees, Monomoy Girl walked forward to the van she had initially hesitated to approach. I have no doubt she had felt that competitive fire again and was not ready to walk onto another van without a race to help quell it. And when I saw that, I thought of the line from the song “Angel from Montgomery”:

“Just give me the one thing that I can hold on to”

That has been the racetrack for Monomoy Girl, and for those who admire her, know her, and care for her, she has been there “to hold on to,” about as sure a thing as the racetrack can have. And maybe in a uncertain world facing a pandemic, “one thing to hold on to” means even more.

This is not meant to sound like a eulogy for the star mare, though it may have veered to that territory. It is more that the emotion of seeing her leave the track caught me off guard for how she was reluctant to go. It is not a requiem for Monomoy Girl, at all. It is a gentle goodbye to the career she had.

She arrived at Spendthrift in the afternoon, looking phenomenal, fit and gleaming with health and appearing to crave the grass before posing tall and proud like the Queen she became known as. It will be a beautiful retirement, in the lush pastures and in the sun, running for her own whim.

And I look forward to meeting her when she acclimates, as Spendthrift has graciously offered to those who bought lease shares through My Racehorse. The curtain rises on the next chapter, which will include an Into Mischief foal if all goes as planned.

In a 1970 interview, Peter Burrell spoke of his observations about racehorse breeding. As the director of the National Stud in Newmarket, England, for seven years by that point and a Thoroughbred owner and breeder himself, Burrell was well-qualified to remark on solid theories for successful breedings and even why the formula to create a top-notch racehorse was difficult to formulate or duplicate, even as many breeders attempted that feat.

I once visited a farm in central Kentucky where the stallion manager mentioned that every attempt to produce a top racehorse is breeding for an outlier. Even knowing how tall the odds are stacked for a horse reaching the upper tier of racing just to be competitive at that level, alone become a graded stakes winner, I had still never considered it in terms of breeding for outliers but of course that is what is happening. And that is why any breeder involved long enough realizes the element of luck has its role as much as good planning, given that even full siblings to top horses may not have anywhere near the talent of a more illustrious horse produced by the same sire and dam.

Burrell elaborated upon that outlier thought I heard a stallion manager express, and it was interesting to read his observations from his 1970 interview. The question posed to him in the interview was specifically about difficulty in breeding a Derby winner, which is 1 1/2 mile race in England.

Burrell answered, “The Derby distance and course require a very special kind of horse. It is the distance, really, I think, that is so crucial. The nub of it is this: it is comparatively easy to produce horses that can go really fast for distances up to a mile, even up to a mile and a quarter. It is also comparatively easy to produce horses which will stay distances of two miles or more at a good pace. But what you are asking here in a Derby winner is a horse who can go very fast for more than a mile and a quarter. A good Derby winner can sprint and can stay a mile and a half. You are asking, therefore, for a very special, a very peculiar type of animal.

Now this is where the natural processes insist on coming into the breeding process. With all animals, nature is always trying to produce a norm. When the breeder mates a sire and a dam whose combined qualities give him the peculiar progeny he requires to win the Derby, nature, as usual, steps in and tries to arrange that the progeny are not peculiar but revert to normal type. This is the probable reason for the disappointing results from mating Derby winners with Oaks winners. A possible method of breeding for the Derby would be to put a sprinting mare, let us say, to a staying stallion, hoping to produce a great intermediate. The records show that overwhelmingly the chances are that those two animals will produce stayers like the sire, sprinters like the mother, or something not very conspicuous between.

…In your quest for a Derby horse, which is in a sense a freak horse, nature is working not with you, but against you. This is the process known as ‘retrogression to the mean.’ “

Reading Burless’ comments, which he said had basis in scientific principles that could have been elaborated upon further but basically boiled down to the retrogression statement above, it made it more evident how extraordinary it is when a horse like Man o’ War or Secretariat comes along, given nature’s “preference” for a horse to be ordinary. Perfect still, to be what the species is intended to be, but not necessarily what a racehorse breeder may have hoped for. And yet, some breeders have still found better than average success with certain crosses in producing a fairly consistent number of outlier horses. As a pedigree enthusiast, it is intriguing to read of insights into breeding like this.

Another point I found worthy of reflection was made by James Gill to conclude his book Bloodstock: Breeding Winners in Europe and America. He wrote, “People engaged in the breeding, training and riding of horses are forever telling the punter that his sport is really an industry, as, indeed, he knows it must be, when, year in, year out, he sees all the good three-year-old colts syndicated by their prudent owners and packed off to stud in the hope that they will sire other horses too good for all but the briefest racecourse careers. Yet, not so long ago, Paul Mellon and John Hislop showed that it is still possible for sporting owners of great horses to achieve on the track a glory which will live in the racing man’s memory long after he has forgotten the dreary succession of half-tried colts dispatched, on accountant’s orders, to the stud. The day the grey men convince the public that racing is an industry, pure and simple, is the day that it will die. And then there will be some hard-up breeders.”

Reading Gill’s comment, it is definitely more common that top horses are retired young to perpetuate the breed, hopefully. Those will naturally get noted more because they attract media and fan attention. With racing at all levels, from claiming to graded stakes, there have to be horses running beyond age 3. No immediate future for them in breeding, supposing they are not geldings. So, it does not seem that this trend of retiring many top horses young is creating hard-up breeders. I’ve also seen evidence of how slim the profit margin can be even in top stables from race earnings alone; it is not an easy business to make ends meet in and it is possible standing a promising young horse will pay greater dividends than racing him.

And, as much as fans identify with top racehorses to feeling a marginal sense of ownership borne of affection, it must be remembered these horses are private commodities and owners don’t owe it to racing to keep them in training if insurance costs and risk outweigh reward. I too greatly appreciate when horses have long careers like Whitmore, Cigar, Monomoy Girl, and Zenyatta, purely from a fan standpoint. It is truly one that seems to identify racing more as a sport than an industry (especially given that often such moves as racing horses beyond age 3 can be referred to as a “sporting gesture”); even so given the value of horses at the top level there is no doubt it is an industry. Most owners love to see their top runners have fan followings, but economic realities dictate having horses race beyond three is not always practical. Still, I identify with what Gill wrote. When a horse appears to just be coming into his own and enthusiasm has built with each race, it is hard not to miss that horse on the track and wonder what further heights he might have reached. I always look forward to progeny of horses I liked but it is still hard to top getting to cheer on a favorite horse through more than two seasons of racing.

Sources:

The Faber Book of the Turf. Edited by John Hislop and David Swannell.

Bloodstock: Breeding Winners in Europe and America. James Gill.