Colins Ghost

Sketch of Guttenberg Race Track from an 1892 newspaper article

Has anyone ever heard of the Guttenberg Race Track? I hadn’t. I came across a description of the track in an article about winter racing in the National Turf Digest from 1927 and, with a little digging, uncovered a number of interesting sources about the short-lived racing facility.  Turns out, it made quite an impression on those who were there during its brief history.

Remembered not for the quality of racing but for the time of year that it operated — it filled a void in the New York area for live racing when the major circuit shut-down for the season at the end of December.

From 1885 to 1893, the Gutenberg Race Track hosted the only true winter racing during the era (that is, racing where it was actually winter).  The track was located in, what is now, North Bergen, New Jersey, across the river from Manhattan.

In 1927, the NTD described Guttenberg as follows:

“…the track was reached only by ferry and stage or horses cars, ‘The Gut’ had a grandstand that was protected by big windows of glass and mammoth stoves that made a pretense of providing heat, but the betting ring was big one and the fields were ample to attract lively speculation, there were few occasions when weather halted the programs and form reversals did not surprise the players.”

An article published in 1892 in the Lewistown Evening Journal in Maine, under the headline “Of Winter Racing : It is Practiced Regularly on only One Track” offered a comprehensive description of the track soon before it closed:

“Guttenberg, N.J. [is] the only spot or locality on the habitable globe where horse racing had gone on without a single day’s interruption throughout an entire winter season….It must be a blizzard of uncommon dimensions to cause a postponement of the daily Guttenberg races, and the snow must fall thick and fast that can get the better of the all night track shoverler and render the race course impossible to race upon…”

“…Betting upon the races has become a business with a large number of New Yorkers, and although the city poolrooms ‘attend to the wants’ of a great many, there is still a large contingent of bettors who prefer to visit the track.  The daily attendace throughout the winter seldom falls below 3000 and on Saturdays and holidays there are frequently from 10,000 to 12,000 persons present, the price of admission being uniformly one dollar…”

“…The receipts of the [North Hudson Jockey] club independent of admissions are obtained from the rental of bookmaking stands at the steep price of $100 a day for each bookmaker, between twenty and thirty bookmakers being constantly on hand…”

“…There are probably, including trainers, jockeys, stable boys, and helpers generally, at least 1000 souls who live and make their permament homes at Guttenberg…”

Four years after the first thoroughbred meet, in the fall of 1889, Guttenberg underwent major renovations.  The track was reconfigured from a half-mile to a full mile; the grandstand was enclosed and “fitted up with enormous heaters.”  The betting ring was expanded to accommodate an “army of bookmakers.”  The article in the Lewistown paper stated that everything during this renovation ”…was arranged with an obvious view of the permanency of winter racing as an institution.”

The article implied that vagaries existed around the existence and enforcement of gambling laws in the state of New Jersey.  It reported that arrests had been made at the track but “…bookmakers and officials arrested are quite as promptly released on bail by a justice of the peace, who has established a convenient court in an unused stable just outside the track.”

It concluded on this positive note:

“The Guttenberg people, apparently calm in the assurance that they will not be seriously interfered with by the authorities of Hudson county, N.J., claim to be entirely indifferent as to whether the legislature does or does not legalize their money making business.”  Read the full article here

Indifference to the possibility of legislative action proved to be the wrong attitude.  The article downplayed the serious legal issues surrounding the track — making one question the intent and/or competence of the author.  Arrests of pool sellers, bookmakers, and track management had started as early as 1891, putting the operation of the track on shaky ground soon after the winterization of the facility.  The end came in 1893 when a bill passed the state legislature that banned winter racing in New Jersey.  In the words of one legislator “winter racing is an inhumanity and none but the confirmed gambler will patronize it.”  That year, Guttenberg closed its doors forever to horse racing.

[Sidenote: It seems the bill that closed Guttenberg was not the same bill that would eventually end all racing in the state of New Jersey.  It is no coincidence, however, that the enforcement of anti-racing statutes that shuttered the original Monmouth Park also came in 1893.]

GUTTENBERG’S POST RACING LIFE
In 1910, the great grandstand at ‘The Gut’, constructed to keep race patrons warm during the winter months, burned in a fire described as “a spectacular blaze” that “illuminated” the river and was “clearly seen from Manhattan.”    By that time, the track and facilities were owned by an old innkeeper who lived in part of the facility and devoted the track to “automobilists.”   The clubhouse was burned down to its foundation.

Memories of the racetrack remained in 1919. When the land was sold at auction, the notice in the New York Tribune read “At Last, The Old Guttenburg[sic] Race Track Property to Be Sold in Seperate Lots.” (see right)

In 1957, Audax Minor, the race writer for the New Yorker, wrote this in an article about the troubles with winter racing in the northeast:

“….it gives old stagers, who are always grumbling that the younger generation is a bunch of softies, a chance to recall their days in the nineties at Guttenberg, a Jersey track, just across the river from Seventy-second Street, that used to run all winter. (It was a sort of open-air horse room, where you could also bet on the New Orleans and California races.)  No matter how hard it snowed at Guttenberg – and there were blizzards in those days – a crew merely shoveled a wide path around the track for the horses, and the races went off on schedule.”

Today, over a century after the track shut down for good, the area where it once stood is known as the “Racetrack Section” in North Bergen.

SOURCES, NOTES, AND OBSERVATIONS

“Of Winter Racing,” Lewiston Evening Journal, Febuary 26, 1892

“No More Winter Racing,” New York Times, March 12, 1893

“Race-Track Men Please Guilty,” June 1, 1894

“Will the ‘Big Four’ Escape?,” New York Times, April 21, 1895

“Fire Ends Old Guttenburg[sic],” New York Times, January 16, 1910

Minor, Audax, “The Race Track,” December 14, 1957

Note: The name of the track was spelled “Guttenberg” and “Guttenburg” in contemporary sources.  For the sake of consistency, I used the “e” version throughout for this article .

And don’t forget to sign up for the best Derby Prep Alerts in the business at Hello Race Fans!

THANKS FOR READING AND GOOD LUCK!

I spent the past weekend in the D.C. area for my real job and was able to spend an afternoon at the Library of Congress where I blitzed through three years of The National Turf Digest, a publication that I have quoted from in the past and one of my favorite (albeit hard to find) racing sources.

Banner from National Turf Digest, May 1927

The National Turf Digest was founded by Walter Montague in 1924. “Montee,” as he was known in the pages of the NTD, was a successful horseplayer and a more successful tout. It was from money earned from playing the horses and selling his “miracle system” that he started his popular publication with the motto: “Makes it better for the bettor”.

In the words of Raleigh Burroughs – editor of the magazine starting in the mid-1950s – the early editions of the NTD included “everything from clockers’ reports to stories of people in racing, and pictures — many, many pictures.”  The NTD reviewed handicapping methods and frequently exposed fraudulent systems for beating the races.

In 1931, Montee died in a car crash in California. That same year, The National Turf Digest changed its name to Turf and Sport Digest and survived well into the 20th century.

I’ve spent this week sorting through the few hundred digital images that I snapped during my whirlwind research trip to the Library of Congress, so I didn’t have time to put together anything too elaborate, but did want to share something interesting I found in the July 1927 issue of the National Turf Digest.

A running theme on this site is: “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” Let me know if this sounds familiar – from the pages of the NTD over 80 years ago:

“It is high time the big whigs of the turf were getting their heads together for mutual protection. For the last two years I have been sounding a note of warning…

“…There should be no delay in these matters, for there is danger lurking for the sport in unexpected quarters. I have suggested that a national body be formed somewhat on the lines of professional baseball, with a head to it having the powers of Judge Landis in baseball affairs [Kennesaw Mountain Landis was the first commissioner of baseball, appointed in 1921]….Organized baseball under the regime of Judge Landis has gone farther towards permanency than it could have obtained in years under the rule of commissioners representing the various interests of that sport. Racing needs some level-headed fellow who has the wisdom and knowledge of racing sufficient to make his rulings without prejudice and without equivocation.

“With a strong national body having jurisdiction over all the member tracks there would be many of the evils of the turf, as it is today, corrected. Disputes among racetrack managers in certain States and districts could be carried in this body for final adjudication. All the tracks would be amenable to the final decision of this higher body. There would be permissible none of the cut-throat methods now employed by racetrack owners and no chance for fly-by-night promoters to break into the sport.

“Racing interests must organize if they propose to exist. Not much longer will the public stand to be ‘limb-skinned and jayhawked’ by money-hunters that care little what brand of sport is furnished just so they get there slimy paws into the pool boxes before it is distributed to the winners…

“…Some uniform ‘take’ must be given the tracks and the ruling turf body should see that no more of the pools are deducted than the percentage which has been granted by that body.”

Maybe not the most eloquent piece of writing but clear enough to convey the idea. I am pretty certain, with a little digging, we could find a near replica of this article written in the last few years (of course, the ’slimy-pawed’ ‘money-hunters’ would be played by politicians in the modern version). This doesn’t mean that a racing commissioner is a bad idea — this just means that its an old idea.

SOURCES, NOTES, AND OBSERVATIONS
“The ‘Jedge’s Whiz Bangs’”, The National Turf Digest, July 1927
“Remember Alford: Turf’s Good Old Days Revisted,” Turf and Sport Digest, July-August 1974

I tried to find out what became of the Turf and Sport Digest. The Keeneland Library has issues up to 1989 but I couldn’t figure out if it was purchased by another publication or simply went out of business. Please leave a comment or send me an email if you know the reason why it ceased publication.

Be sure to sign up for the Hello Race Fans email list to receive Kentucky Derby and Oaks prep alerts.  The emails will keep you up-to-date on all the racing action leading up to the big day(s) in May. You can sign up here.

THANKS FOR READING AND GOOD LUCK!

On Monday night, the much anticipated 2009 Horse of the Year winner will be revealed.  Whatever the result, people will be unhappy. As some have said and what I agree with is, the HOTY award doesn’t really matter in the long run.  Both Zenyatta and Rachel Alexandra are going to be remembered for what they did on the track, not for winning (or losing) Horse of the Year.  As a fan, my only interest is this: if Zenyatta losing HOTY increases the chances she races again, then I am hoping Rachel Alexandra wins (an idea I tweeted last Thursday).

As we draw closer to the big night, I have been doing some research on the early history of the Eclipse Awards.  In 1972, the second year of the combined vote* to determine the “official” end of the year awards, the Horse of the Year brought with it some hand wringing and gloomy scenarios for the sport of kings.  As most of us know, Secretariat was voted Horse of the Year for his dominant 2-year-old campaign.  In 2010, we don’t think twice about Secretariat winning Horse of the Year in 1972.  However, the view from January 1973 was not so clear, evident in the two selections below.

A letter to the editor printed in the New York Times on January 7, 1973, voiced this opinion on Horse of the Year:

“I am deeply disturbed over the results of thoroughbred racing’s consolidated poll for 1972.  Denying La Prevoyante the horse of the year crown is a marked injustice.  Here is a filly, a member of the so-called ‘weaker’ sex who, in her first year of competition, did what every owner, trainer, breeder, and other concerned parties fleetingly dream of — she went unbeaten, unsurpassed, en route to closing out the season with a perfect record of 12 impressive and exciting triumphs in as many starts…

“…It’s not that Secretariat isn’t worthy of the award, but La Prevoyante, never defeated, reached that sparsely populated plateau of total supremacy over all who opposed her…

“…The only solace I can garner from this year’s unfair outcome is that by naming Secretariat horse of the year, [his sire] Bold Ruler receives a most fitting tribute less than a year after his death.”

A few weeks later, on the other side of the country, columnist John Hall from the Los Angeles Times used the occasion of Secretariet’s Horse of the Year award to opine about the decline of American thoroughbred racing and the lack of thoroughbred “stars.”  He wrote this on the day of the Eclipse Awards ceremony held at the Century Plaza Hotel in Los Angeles on January 26, 1973:

“…There will be trophies for just about everything — all the good horses and all the good people of 1972.  From Secretariat, Horse of the Year, to Soothsayer, the steeplechaser, it will be grand.

“One notable not-so-grand is obvious, though.   Out of nine awards being presented, there isn’t a Kelso or an Exterminator or a Native Diver or an Armed in the house.

“It is another sign of horseracing’s ever-growing dilemma.  No established box-office stars in competition on the tracks.  They’re all down on the farm making big money babies.

“If you’ve been paying any sort of attention lately, you know that thoroughbred racing has become a sad case of here today, gone tonight.  Win one big stakes and run for the farm.  Who wants to risk injury or embarrassment in further competition when a name stallion can collect as much as $40,000 in stud fees?…

“…Box-office bigs such as Kelso and Exterminator, in sharp contrast, raced to age 9.   Armed and Native Diver, the Hollywood Park Hall of Farmer, were still running at 8.

“‘The reason is simple enough,’ said Frank Kilroe [Racing Secretary at Santa Anita]. ‘They were geldings whose only value was on the race course.’

“It’s something the Century Plaza gang [the attendee of the Eclipse Awards ceremony] might think about tonight once the black ties are loosened, the tuxes are put back in the trunk and the ball is over.  One of these days, there may be no party.

“When Secretariat, a 2-year-old, is Horse of the Year in the entire throughbred world, you get the idea the ship is sinking.  A 2-year-old?”

In hindsight, it sounds crazy to say Secretariat winning the Horse of the Year in 1972 signaled doom for the racing industry.  Today, it’s hard not to think of Secretariat as a two-time horse of the year winner and one of the greatest ever but, in early 1972, he was just another two-year-old with tremendous potential.

SOURCES, NOTES, AND OBSERVATIONS

“Mailbox: A Vote for La Prevoyante,” New York Times, January 7, 1973
John Hall, “Kelso, Anyone?,” Los Angeles Times, January 26, 1973

* The three entities whose combined voting to make up the Eclipse awards were Thoroughbred Racing Association, Daily Racing Form, and National Turf Writers Association.  Who said racing can’t come together?

A tidbit that I left out: The Sport and Turf Digest, a publication that had been conducting a Horse of the Year poll since 1936 but were not included in the Eclipse balloting, voted Key to the Mint as the Horse of the Year for 1972. It’s safe to say that Secreatriet’s 1972 HOTY title was anything but unanimous.

I was really bummed to hear the news on Sunday morning that the racing archive of Jim Conti (aka partymanners) was shut down by YouTube.  His collection of nearly 2000 race films were removed after – what appears to be – a false claim of copyright. You can read Mr. Conti’s version of the story at Equispace.  This is a real loss for race fans.

THANKS FOR READING AND GOOD LUCK!