176 THE RACE AND ITS RESPONSIBILITIES. 



owner did not win money enough on him, and I was not 

 therefore the cause of his subsequent mismanagement. 



These instances have a lesson of their own. There is evi- 

 dently a something in particular race-courses that alters the 

 running of some horses ; and what that something is, it is 

 incumbent on the trainer to ascertain, if he can do so, before 

 engaging them. There are certain methods which readily 

 suggest themselves. Horses could be tried up hill with 

 stayers, or down hill with speedy animals ; or might be 

 galloped across the flat at Newmarket or the reverse way 

 of it : whilst on other courses, similar opportunities might 

 be found, which would give some clue to the probable per- 

 formances of the animal on this or the other race-course. 



As for the state of the ground itself, this is not less import- 

 ant : for it has often more to do with the success or defeat of 

 racehorses than many suspect or would be inclined to believe. 

 Some horses cannot run on wet ground , others, when it is 

 hard ; some again can go well on either : whilst others are 

 best when it is neither wet nor dry, but simply what is called 

 "good going," though as a rule it should be said the majority 

 are most at home when it is either one thing or the other. 



Joe Miller could run when it was hard or soft, and of this 

 power he gave two remarkable instances by winning the 

 Chester Cup with the ground as hard as a brick, and the 

 Ascot Cup (Emperor's Vase) when the course was partially 

 submerged, as has been related ; he also ran equally well 

 when the ground was really good going. Speed the Plough, 

 a very moderate horse, won the Criterion Stakes, beating the 

 best horse in the world, when the ground was very heavy 

 going. It should be noted that wet ground tells most hardly 

 against the horse least trained. Oxonian, though very sound, 

 was ten pounds better on wet than on dry ground ; which 



