may be a bit more than last two, i just dont trust dutrow.

[quote=Danzig]what has he done, really, that has sealed the deal?[/QUOTE


career wins such as arkansas, preakness, BCC & Dubai World cup and the fact that he is still racing, i cant recall such a stellar 2yo, 3yo, and 4yo performances in recent memory(say last 5-years).

danig what does curlin have left to prove.... Who could he beat that he already has not with the exception of big brown.... if he gets beat in the classic this year would his star be a little dimmer? IF he won again would it get brighter? I say no on both accounts. The horse won a TC race, the bc classic, and the race in dubai. They tried him on the grass and only had mixed results. He probably couldn't compete on a euro track with their top horses. So what exactly does he have to prove? What race could he run in and win that would make you think more of him?

beat me to it bernadini.

I don't like the ***** mentality that has poisoned the sport. He has a chump record.

well, since the bar has been set so high (last five years, really?) i guess nothing. staying in training doesn't make him a good horse. he also suffers from a lack of top quality competition. his defeat on turf was turned into 'well not so bad' since he lost to a bc turf winner-yeah, cause red rocks is such a monster....
i think curlin is a good horse, but he also his getting lauded, receiving credit, where it's really not due, due to the fact he's the only decent, classic distance older horse out there. that doesn't make him good, any more than big brown is good because everyone else is bad!
i have been a fan of racing for 35 years. i've seen what is good- i am unwilling and unable to lower my standards so that i can somehow applaud something that really deserves no more applause or attention than the maiden 2 yos who gave me a 78 dollar ex at arlington park a couple weeks ago.
had some of curlins peers remained ( and obviously he has no control over who stays or who retires-i understand that) and made thing interesting, and he still managed to reel off these victories, i'd give him some serious credit.


but having two horses, who most years would be also rans, somehow get called something they aren't, because they are the top of a rotten heap--no, not from me.

i'm glad big brown stayed around since the tc, i'm glad curlin stayed in training. maybe others will do the same, it would be nice. with the downturn in the sales, maybe we'll see more do it as well.

did Curlin race at 2?

I like that Curlin kept racing when the others were sent to the shed too soon.

BB people are talking turf since Curlin is done with that experiment.

Couldn't agree more with this post.

[quote=Bernardini]He didn't run at 2.


Is he an excellent racehorse? Yes. He'll soon be the all time moneywinner, which says something... but he's far from a superhorse. He has exactly three career wins that really impressed me... the Preakness in a desperate rally, the BCC over a very good field, and a dominating performance in the World Cup. There have been just as many dull performances as great ones. I'm not going to lower my standards of "great horse" just because he's the last one standing in a horrifically bad year.

Horses of the last 5 years, Ghostzapper would have eaten him for breakfast at any distance on any track.