It is a shame Zenyatta and Seattle Slew never had the chance to hook up. The resulting foal might have been the next Michael Jackson.

At least they were both great horses.

There have been a lot of bad horses who were pretty cool as well.

I remember a favorite greyhound of mine growing up who was borderline uncontrolable and would jump all over his handler in the post parade. He rarely got past Grade C though.

If Spectacular Bid didn't have such an idiot on his back in the Belmont he wins the triple crown. If he wins the triple crown "the bid" wins 1979 horse of the year!

And If Bids owners kept Spectacular Bid on the race track for a 4-year-old campaign after winning the triple crown The Bid perhaps would have closed out his race track career with a walkover and the title "horse of the century".

This is a possibility of course not a definite.

But Ronnie Franklin rode him like an idiot, Spectacular Bid loses the belmont & he loses his one encounter to Affirmed. Slew however won when it counted. He left no doubt of his greatness. Poor bid! He deserves better than 10th on the Blood horse list. Can't say for sure he was better than Slew though. But he probably was.

I wonder if a $20 win ticket on Screen King and a $5 ex ticket Bid over Screen King has any value. Old style colorful tickets.

I think it's pretty cool that prior to the '79 Derby Delp had already proclaimed Bid to be the greatest horse to ever look through a bridle and by the time he finished his career the Bid came damn close to proving him right.

Zenyatta vanquished Slew and Bid in that computer race, so they both suck.

I like how you continue to use Seattle Slew's Swaps effort as a true measure of his ability. The horse was shipping across country to run in a race only 3 weeks after completing the Triple Crown. Against his trainer's wishes.

The horse that beat Seattle Slew...J.O. Tobin. You realize he ran in the Preakness, right? Also, never mind that Seattle Slew didn't run for 10 months following the loss. Clearly he came out of the race in good shape.

You must really have downgraded Quality Road after the BC Classic.

Instead of focusing on the Swaps as your answer to everyone challenging your assessment of Slew, why don't you comment on the head-to-head between Seattle Slew and Affirmed (who toyed with Spectacular Bid), rightly brought up (even if IC was kidding) after you suggested Alydar would have beaten him in all 3 Classics?

You've already back pedaled a bit by stratifying the horse into "the 3yo Seattle Slew" and "the 4yo Seattle Slew".

I think that Bid was better, but I give Slew his due for bullying through in the Derby and (more so) for his losing effort in the Gold Cup the next season. THAT was an amazing performance.

Bid, up to 10f was the fastest thing I ever saw. He was vulnerable beyond 10f though Franklin (IMO) cost him the Belmont. Losing to a TC winner at 12f is no disgrace.

Seattle's Slew's Swaps proved nothing other than that he was a one-dimensional speed horse and he didn't fire when he was boxed in. It was a non-effort followed by a layoff. I agree.


Affirmed ran a career top Beyer of 128 (on Beyer's old scale) when he beat Bid in a match-up of 4yo VS 3yo. Affirmed got to jog through pokey fractions on an uncontested lead and barely held. No horse in history is going to beat Affirmed on a loose lead through 25 flat fractions. Spectacular Bid made it very close at a distance that wasn't his best.

When Seattle Slew (as a 4yo) beat Affirmed (as a 3yo) - Affirmed appeared to be tailing off from a very tough 3yo campaign. In Affirmed's two subsquent starts - he was 3rd in the Malibu stakes at 1/5 odds and 2nd in the San Fernando at 1/2 odds.

How do you think Spectacular Bid (at age 4) would have faired against Seattle Slew (at age 3) - I know you aren't a numbers guy but virtually every single race Bid ran at age 4 was about double digit lengths faster than every single race Slew ran at age 3.

Everybody says that Affirmed was tailing after a hard campaign but Seattle Slew was coming back after battling colitis x. I think they were both exhausted no?

Not to sound hostile.

I believe the battling colitis X wasn't until the winter late in his 3yo season or early in his 4yo season. Long after his freshening started.

Slew had a couple nice ALW wins to start his 4yo season - was defeated as a 1/9 favorite by Dr. Patches in his stakes debut as an older horse in the Grade 3 Patterson Handicap at the Meadowlands. After that he ran four great races - winning the Malboro, Woodward, and Grade 3 Stuyvesant at AQU under 134lbs - his only defeat a great 2nd place finish in the JCGC.

You do realize that Dr. Patches was a VERY talented horse? He had previously won an allowance at Saratoga ( as did Slew ) that got a very similar, if not better, fig. Plus. Patches had something Slew was about to get, Angel Cordero.

Seattle Slew, until the Marlboro Cup, was ridden by Jean Cruget. Now, Ron Franklin did Bid no favors, but Cruget was one of the worst ever. Winning the TC, much less nine or ten straight races, with Cruget is akin to walking across the Grand Canyon on a tightrope with PG1985 on your shoulders.

By the way, using the Swaps as any kind of example of Slew's talents ( and you're right, he was relatively " slow " as a 3YO ) is wildly unfair....and you know that. At least base your argument on relevent races.

J. O. Tobin broke in the air at the start and was 8th by 12 lengths after a half mile ... to that point - he had never raced further than 6fs on dirt.

Considering J O Tobin was effective as a speed sprinter - being 8th by 12 after a half mile and having to close serious ground in only his second lifetime dirt race - and first beyond 6fs probably wasn't ideal.

Here is the 2nd place finisher in that Preakness.

I thought so too; 3 weeks after the TC and the horse was rightly exhausted. Nice move there by the Taylors.

As to the Indy/Slew ?, Slew would have eaten AP Indy for lunch at any time.

Why is it bad for a front-runner to be one-dimensional (esp. when his one dimension was spectacular) and a closer not to be? I watch his Derby on replay and it's still incredibly impressive - and his GC was a real display of courage.

.....some of your finest work:D

I know Dr. Patches was very good. You don't run down a loose on the lead Seattle Slew as a 4-year-old if you're anything short of being very good.

The Swaps was the one and only time in Seattle Slew's career where he was rated off of the lead ... perhaps it doesn't point to him being a one-dimensional speed horse... and maybe he would have put in the same non-effort had he not been rated.

Spectacular Bid wasn't a one-dimensional closer - on 7 different occasions he won Graded Stakes races in wire-to-wire fashion. On 5 different occasions he won Graded Stakes from 5 lengths back or further after a half mile. But ideally - he was a presser.

for those that don't have Slew's PPs

I get what you're saying about him, theoretically, failing badly the one time he didn't have the early lead, but you have to take a lot of other factors into account, and that race ( the Swaps ) simply can't be used as a fair barometer.

The thing is, he's not your run-of-the-mill speed horse that needs everything his own way. He showed pretty definitively in the Jockey Club Gold Cup that he is fast enough to outrun pretty much anyone while also being able to carry that speed a very long way. You just don't see horses like that. Hell, as great as Dr. Fager was, and there is no doubt he is on the very short list of greatest horses ever, he got trounced at 1 1/4 when severely pressured by a rabbit. Slew dusted off two, at 1 1/2 miles, when one of them was also a Triple Crown winner, and stilled missed by a slim nose to a damn good horse in Exceller. He was not your ordinary need the lead type and shouldn't be suggested as such.

Don't know which horse was better but know which horse I would have rather owned....... SEATTLE SLEW!

Another poster on my ever growing ignore list. I feel like The Fat Man.