TIME 147 



ment ; but it is certain that very few persons would 

 care to maintain that Brag was the best horse of his 

 generation, or indeed anything approaching to it. The 

 object of a race is not to accomphsh the distance in 

 the least possible time, but to arrive first at the win- 

 ning-post. Nothing is more common than to read 

 that some orood horse has "won in a canter." If he 

 had galloped his best, it is obvious that his time would 

 have been considerably shorter. The fallaciousness 

 of the " test " is further increased by differences in the 

 going and in the nature of courses. If the turf is deep 

 and holding, horses are likely to take longer than they 

 would if they were galloping "on the top of the 

 ground," and five furlongs down the hill at Epsom or 

 at Brighton is a speedier business than up the hill at 

 Ascot or to the finish of the Bunbury Mile, or of the 

 Criterion course — if any five-furlong race is now run in 

 the last named. Examples bearing on this have not 

 seldom been quoted, but may be repeated here. Galopin, 

 one of the very best horses that ever won the Derby, 

 took 2 min. 48 sees. ; Sir Visto, one of the very worst, 

 took 2 min. 43f sees. ; Lord Lyon, whose excellence will 

 be dwelt on in the section on " Famous Horses," took 



2 min. 50 sees. ; Merry Hampton, a very poor speci- 

 men of a Derby winner, took 2 min. 43 sees. Wheel 

 of Fortune, one of the best mares ever known, took 



3 min. 2 sees, to win the Oaks ; Lonely, one of the 

 worst, took 2 min. 435- sees. The mighty Ormonde's 

 Leger time was 3 min. 2i| sees.; The Lambkin, a 



L 2 



