122--fastest Beyer over a mile since the 2005 Whitney.

There is no frakking way in hell that was one of the greatest performances of all time.

They must have heard you--it got revised down to a 121.

I am the Tard Whisperer.

It was an EPIC PERFORMANCE.

no, IC has had better performances.

IC would have crushed QR.

lol
i was talking about the poster, not the horse...

I know, but still.

I doubt you even beleive this.

Sorry. Crushed was too strong a word.

Soundly beaten would have been a better way to describe it.

Trust me, he does.

no, but it was the best preformance this year and if this horse stays sound, there will be a new sheriff in town.....sorry, rachel and zenyatta. see what happens when you put things off. this is the kind of horse that can steal some "thunder"......lol

Actually, I was assuming that it's pretty common sense and that probably only pg1985 is the only one here who thinks otherwise.

It's not like I have rabies anymore like when IC broke his maiden. I say he's better without bias.

I highly doubt I am the only one, start a poll or something. QR would have crushed him.

Ask him about Old Trieste....

Yeah, I'm sure a poll would settle that. Nevermind that most of the people who'd vote in that weren't even watching racing in 97/98, including you.

Believe me dude, IC destroyed horses that were far superior to what QR has faced.

For example, in his first try around two turns IC beat a pretty tough allowance field running a BSF of 112 (third career start). The horse that ran fourth that couldn't keep up with IC went on to run the following Beyers in 7 of his next 8 starts (I threw out his one bad race, in which he had no business being in in the first place):

109 (alw nwot1x) by 10 lengths

105 (g3 affirmed) by about 5 running 23.1 46.1 109.2 141.4. He opened up 8 in the lane before cruising home.

116 (g2 Swaps) by 12, with Grand Slam in 2nd. 46.0 109.2 134.1 147

104 (g2 dmr bc hcp) by 5. 22.1 45.4 109.3 135.1. This was against older.

He then laid off from Sept to the end of May of his 4yo year and came back in the g2 Californian, where he ran a bsf of 118.

Yes, that's 118 off a substantial layoff. 46.0 109.3 134 146.2 He won by 7 over that years BC Classic runnerup Budroyale.

That race took something out of him however, and he was laid up again, returning in Sept in the DMR BC HCP again. He ran a 104 while running 3rd by 1.25 lengths. 22.2 45.3 109.2 135.2.

He then ran back in the Goodwood (g2) and again ran third getting a BSF of 113. Clearly he was finished at this point, as Budroyale beat him by 3.25 lengths, with General Challenge finishing 2nd. 46.3 110.2 135.1 148.1

He finished out his career with a poor showing shortly after that in the Classic.

This is a horse that QR couldn't possibly have kept up with and stayed around, and yet when this horse tried to challenge IC for the lead, he was hopelessly outmatched.

Damn you!

It seems people have either forgotten, or don't even know, that fast horses ( like Indian Charlie ) used to race with some regularity. They weren't as big a deal then because there were a plethora of fast horses around. Now, when one or two surface, they are hailed as great prematurely ( or inaccurately ).

I was 12 in 97... I was just getting into the game

I figured as much.

Go into the screening room and go watch IC's races, from earliest to latest.

You'd be also well served, as Andy was getting at, to go check out some vids on Youtube of some of the great horses from previous decades.

Mem...ories....

The funny thing was that back in the 90s we thought they weren't racing enough back then. Which was true, compared to the 70s (and earlier).

Now, of course, the problem is even more ridiculous--they've practically become Breyer horses (ashamed to admit I even know of the things--damn you, AOL broads of old).

Ahh, the pardoxes of the FAST crowd.

Let me get this straight: in an era where human athletes are performing at an all time best, equine athletes are not? Of course, the latter are certainly getting their share of 'medicinal' advantages. Why is that I wonder? The accepted position seems to be that horses are no longer bred for stamina (and are certainly much more fragile). Let's buy that and then wonder why SPRINTERS of the present era are not as fast, or faster, than those of prior ones. I've made this assumption based on your comments, as I don't look at figures.

Can you elaborate?:rolleyes:

I imagine there are a number of reasons, and one could simply be the bad luck of the draw, in that there have been aberrationally few fast horses, but I imagine Godolphin plays a role in this. I don't mean this as a criticism, but they have simply purchased an inordinate amount of our high end bloodstock over the last two decades, as well as many fast horses that have appeared on our racetracks, and these horses seem to race infrequently at best. Plus, quite often these horses get shipped to Dubai, and are forgotten or rarely heard from again. Check the Dubai Winter Carnival/World Cup entrees, and you will see them littered with " I always wondered what happened to that one " type of horses. People don't even realize many of the horses they purchase.

Surely there are other reasons, or explanations, but I do think there has been a talent drain in this country. If you have spent the kind of dollars the Sheik has over the last two or three decades, you certainly should have done a reasonable job of cornering the talent market, and unfortunately ( for us at least ) many of these horses never seem to race here.

Horses are bred to be sold and hence too fashionable stallions. There arent owners who breed to race at the highest end anymore. you used to have 100 owners who breed to race and had no interest in selling at any price to anyone. The Sheik grabbed all the decent stock that has been sale.

All good points, all of which I think are true, but you have to admit it's refreshing to see a 120+ figure again.

I've seen a fair amount of equine/veterinary comparative research on this topic, and indeed, human physiology does continue to improve, (with nutrition, training methods and associated tech innovations contributing), while the equine does not... no matter what end on the brilliant to solid spectrum horses are bred. Conclusions have been drawn that they appear physically capable of only reaching a certain top end speed, and no amount of improved nutrition or training appears capable of improving that. Lowering of records in harness racing for instance, has been attributed mostly to innovations and improvement of the buggy like polymer or aluminum frames, etc. I'll try to find the studies, but they're on my home computer and I'm in Florida. This is a fascinating discussion and I can bring it up on ATR with the vet guests.

does it have anything to do with the fact that humans (unless your frow WV) dont inbreed and races horses are almost all inbred?