Derby Trail Forums
Page 2 of 7 < 1 2 34 > Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Which horses were truly great? (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24377)

DogsUp 08-06-2008 01:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23
If Curlin were brilliant enough he could have certainly had the chance to make the list with his accomplishments. A champion 2yo that developed into a champion 3yo and was brilliant in both seasons could also make the list. There could always be another great gelding. So there is definitely the possibility of seeing another great. Just cause of the lure of the breeding shed I don't think we should drop our expectations.
Expectations should be changed based on the times. Look at MLB. They change the expectations of pitchers elected to the Hall of Fame. We do not see too many complete games these days. That used to be a criteria and now it isnt. There is always room for movement when it comes to expectations. But it is your list so it is your rules.

TheSpyder 08-06-2008 01:30 PM
Chuck according to an earlier thread today you are suppose to be negative. You're giving out too much positive carma here.

Spyder
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
You could easily include them especially if you compare to what we consider great 20 years later

Cannon Shell 08-06-2008 01:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DogsUp
Expectations should be changed based on the times. Look at MLB. They change the expectations of pitchers elected to the Hall of Fame. We do not see too many complete games these days. That used to be a criteria and now it isnt. There is always room for movement when it comes to expectations. But it is your list so it is your rules.
Who has been elected with lowered expectations?

RollerDoc 08-06-2008 01:30 PM
Alydar would be on the bubble of the Top 25. He should be included in this category for not only his excellent racing accomplishments, but breeding resume as well.

Antitrust32 08-06-2008 01:30 PM
Question (could be a dumb one)...

Is it tougher to get an "All Time Great" today compared to the days of Colin and whatnot.. because the # of foals there are these days are way more than the # back in the good ol' days??

SentToStud 08-06-2008 01:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
Not as a race horse. He was hurt fairly early in his career wasnt he?
He bowed out after winning the Queens plate. In a span of 7 races he won the Flamingo, Flor Derby, Blue Grass, KY Derby, Preakness and Queens Plate. Ran 3rd or 4th in the Belmont.

SniperSB23 08-06-2008 01:30 PM
These are all nice horses being mentioned that no one is going to have a problem with calling great. I just don't think any of them fit in that top tier with the horses I've mentioned. You could pretty much just list anyone that is in the Hall of Fame if you want to include every horse that can pass for great but what fun is that.

Cannon Shell 08-06-2008 01:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpyder
Chuck according to an earlier thread today you are suppose to be negative. You're giving out too much positive carma here.

Spyder
Ok

They are SOOOOOO....great they would win every race these days and set world records and free t shirts for all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SniperSB23 08-06-2008 01:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32
Question (could be a dumb one)...

Is it tougher to get an "All Time Great" today compared to the days of Colin and whatnot.. because the # of foals there are these days are way more than the # back in the good ol' days??
I would think so.

Antitrust32 08-06-2008 01:32 PM
Personal Ensign HAS to be on the list.

Cannon Shell 08-06-2008 01:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32
Question (could be a dumb one)...

Is it tougher to get an "All Time Great" today compared to the days of Colin and whatnot.. because the # of foals there are these days are way more than the # back in the good ol' days??
I dont know anyone who is familar with Colin and racing of the 1910's

Antitrust32 08-06-2008 01:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
I dont know anyone who is familar with Colin and racing of the 1910's

I just threw out a name...

SniperSB23 08-06-2008 01:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32
Personal Ensign HAS to be on the list.
Let me ask you this? How many males in the history of this sport would have gone 13 for 13 if allowed to run in the same 13 races as Personal Ensign? I think a lot more than the 22 horses I listed. If she were male would she be regarded as highly or is she so highly regarded because she was so great for a filly?

Sightseek 08-06-2008 01:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
I dont know anyone who is familar with Colin and racing of the 1910's
Then they didn't read the recent article in the Blood-Horse. :D In seriousness, this horse carried an absurd amount of weight by today's standard and off only a few days of rest...I'd definitely include him, but I'd also include a few others that were mentioned in this thread and not 'added'.

10 pnt move up 08-06-2008 01:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32
Miesque, Ladys Secret, Inside information, John Henry, Ruffian, Cigar, were all elites of the elite IMO..
there is no way Inside Information can be on that list and not have Azeri.

Antitrust32 08-06-2008 01:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23
Let me ask you this? How many males in the history of this sport would have gone 13 for 13 if allowed to run in the same 13 races as Personal Ensign? I think a lot more than the 22 horses I listed. If she were male would she be regarded as highly or is she so highly regarded because she was so great for a filly?

so she cant be on the list because she didnt run against males?

Cannon Shell 08-06-2008 01:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sightseek
Then they didn't read the recent article in the Blood-Horse. :D In seriousness, this horse carried an absurd amount of weight by today's standard and off only a few days of rest...I'd definitely include him, but I'd also include a few others that were mentioned in this thread and not 'added'.
Did someone really old write the article?

SniperSB23 08-06-2008 01:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32
so she cant be on the list because she didnt run against males?
She did and beat them in the Whitney. I just think that if you just treat them all as horses and ignore their sex she wouldn't be in that top tier.

Cannon Shell 08-06-2008 01:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up
there is no way Inside Information can be on that list and not have Azeri.
Why? II would have hammered Azeri

Cannon Shell 08-06-2008 01:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23
Let me ask you this? How many males in the history of this sport would have gone 13 for 13 if allowed to run in the same 13 races as Personal Ensign? I think a lot more than the 22 horses I listed. If she were male would she be regarded as highly or is she so highly regarded because she was so great for a filly?
its hard to win 13 in a row regardless of competition


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:05 AM.
Page 2 of 7 < 1 2 34 > Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.