Am I the only one who thought Bernardini ran very well in defeat to Invasor?
I mean if you needed validation to how good Invasor was, you got it the following year, no? Its not like Bernardini got beat 5 lengths and he got beat by a horse like Da Tara. It was close and I think JJ may have moved a tad early on Bernardini. Doubt it cost him first, but you never know.

you're not the only one. he was good, much better than Big Brown imo.

Don't try to tell that to all of the parrots around here who thought Bernardini 'buckled' for whatever reason.

I'm ok with the flack. There is no evidence of me discussing things "I have no idea about." However, my record shows that I am not afraid to ask questions that "I have no idea about."

Oh and I know horse racing was around before 2005. Wasn't Birdstone a great horse in 2004? :)

He did run very well. He just didn't run as well as he did in the Preakness.

No, and no. Not even a close call, IMO. And further, it is unlikely that either Big Brown or Curlin will do enough before retiring to be "great" in the sense that Cannon Shell is talking about. There's very little chance of seeing another horse like the true greats unless it's a gelding.

Roller Doc, I suggest you spend some time at YouTube and search for Dr. Fager races. (after reading at least the Wikipedia entry.)

--Dunbar

Thank you for the suggestion.......It is on my to do list.

most?! most agree that alex was great? his recovery and win in the preakness was amazing, but he is not, and was not a great horse.

this post explains a lot. a ton.

war emblem. or maybe monarchos.

dude, you have no idea what the level of competition is-especially since you concede you've never heard of dr fager, one of the greatest horses of all time. not of the past couple of years, of ALL TIME. big brown isn't even a horse compared to dr fager. he doesn't belong in the same breath, let alone the same BREED!
big brown wouldn't be any faster if mother theresa owned him and the pope rode him. he's an ordinary horse, but he's better than his peers. that doesn't make him great.

i agree. if bernardini got 'exposed' in the bcc, then how could anyone then make the case that invasor was a very good horse?! after all, he only won by a length.
people tend to belittle competition, and then think it helps make the case that their horse is somehow so good, since he beat such bad horses. cracks me up.

sure he did. he just had a faster competitor that day than in the preakness.

OK Danzig, I will yield to your description that Afleet Alex's win and recovery in the Preakness was "amazing" or their thesaurus meanings like
astonishing, astounding, fantastic, fantastical, incredible, marvelous, miraculous, phenomenal, prodigious, stupendous, unbelievable, wonderful, wondrous

So I stand corrected.......he was not great. I guess his Belmont romp and Kentucky Derby just miss were just as mediocre.

you also need to buy bloodhorses top 100 of the 20th century.

thoroughbred champions was a site that had bio's of some of the greats from the past, not sure tho if it's still active.

but at least check out dr. fager's mile race in which he set the world record (still stands today) carrying well over 130 lbs, something unheard of in north america these days. and he did it well within himself, the jock sitting chilly the whole way.
then there's his one grass race, he detested the surface. got passed and battled back several times, and managed to win even tho he was slipping and sliding, spinning his wheels...

Who said Big Brown compares to Dr. Fager? Not me. And while me not knowing Dr. Fager explains a lot, there is no way a flunkie like me will agree that Big Brown is an "ordinary" horse. And as much as you don't want to associate Big Brown with any history, unfortunately you can't.

Here's a few....Winning Kentucky Derby with fewest starts in the modern era. Winning from Post 20 vs. 19 others since early 1900s. Faced the most opponents in the the triple crown races. As a sidenote, he won FL from the outside.........All this is not ordinary. Plus he has done all of this with very unpopular connections.

Thank you for the suggestions and I will check them out. Looks liike I am going to be one busy guy.

how is saying a horse is not great saying a horse is mediocre? he may have been the best that year in that crop, doesn't mean he was great.

i was at ap the other day, they had an allowance race on the card with horses who ran similar beyers to what big brown ran on sunday. are they great?
if anyone is still speaking of big brown 20, 30, 50 or a 100 years from now, i'll stand corrected. too much to ask?
kincsem ran a few centuries ago. man o war ran when world war one was happening, and colin ran vs man o wars father. yet those horses are still mentioned today. 50 years after man o war retired, 30-some years after he died, a horse ran at two who was compared to man o war, the question was asked if he was big red come back to life-30 years later that debate still rages as to who was better, secretariat or man o war. That is the definition of greatness.

as for the florida derby, i've said (more than once) that i thought big brown ran well there, in kentucky as well. that's why i said i didn't think he ran that well on sunday, it doesn't compare to how he ran in april/may. but those efforts don't make him great.

OK that was a fair challenge and I have no comeback. You didn't say mediocre, I did. At the same time, I think you are equally as off by using the word ordinary for Big Brown. At least he's got to be a "good" horse?

But I do pledge this to you and everybody else who is not a believer in Big Brown. If Big Brown wins the Breeders Cup Classic....he will be considered a great horse.

huh?

Not sure why you are stumped? So he would not be great IF he wins two Triple Crown Races, Two Grade One Races, and the BCC?

Why would he be "great" if he beats more bad horses in the BC? The only way you could even make an argument for him being "great" - which in my opinion is a waste of time anyways - is if he were to face Curlin and beat him on dirt. . . which he could never do.

i don't think he's anything special, as i don't think he has proven himself. he's been a beneficiary of a down year. most years he'd be an also ran, so why should he get a pass because he's a brighter spot compared to the rest of the crop this year? it doesn't work that way. some crops are great- the crop which included iron liege, bold ruler and round table for one, the crop which included secretariat and forego is another-or affirmed and alydar to name a few-some are deep-such as last years with three winners in three classics, with any given saturday and hard spun playing spoiler at times. some are like this year, which is absolutely a down year. big brown, when compared to good horses the last few years, is not great, or even very good. as for the classic, unless he faces curlin, and wins, he won't be anything more than ordinary, as we have pretty much conceded that this years older horses (other than curlin) is a joke.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

no. he'll be a multiple grade one winner, but that doesn't automatically make him great. lucky maybe, but not great.


look at it this way...if i win the powerball when it's a quarter of a billion dollars, i'd be rich. does that mean i'm the equivalent of warren buffet?

I'm pretty certain that Big Brown will be in a race featuring the best of the best which is the whole purpose of this race. Hopefully this weeds out the bad horses.

did you bet him in his first start..on the turf ..i did ..hes ok but any top 3 runner in ANY TC RACE IN THE LAST 10 YEARS WOULD SMOKE HIM.

There's no use arguing with a clueless Big Brown groupie like you. . .

Arguing.....Look who's talking Mr. Huh? Great argument on your part. At least you are good at insulting.

I have bet him five races so far. The last five. I missed the Allowance race if I am correct but not sure if that was his first.

If there was a way to bet against your Top 3 TC in the last 10 year statement, I would take some serious cash from you. You are really putting all 30 of those horses or duplicates against beating Big Brown every time? C'mon.

There's no use arguing with you because you don't know what you're talking about. You're so in love with this horse that you bet him at 1/5, and have no historical perspective that would help you understand why Big Brown isn't "great."

HES OK . thats it..this is by far the worst year for good horses ie running even close to normal speed figs as a whole. 95 perc of the tc horses this year cant break a 102 beyer..

So I bet him at 1/5. Is that crazy?...Yes. Did I bet a fortune? No. Did having a little action on him make the race more enjoyable for me to watch on ESPNC? Absolutely! What is wrong with that? Plus he won. And if he didn't, then no big deal because I have won hundreds on him this year. I'd still have a plentiful surplus.

Historical perspective is something I am learning admittedly. I am not comparing him to the greats of the past or the greats of the past that I don't even know about. By standing up for his accomplishments thus far against a tenured crowd who is giving him very little respect is something I choose to believe in. Don't confuse that with being in love with the horse.

But I do love learning about this sport which I prefer over being insulted.

Then don't read it! It can't be too bad if you continue to post. Or you are really bored.

i'm really bored.

So you admit to not knowing what you're talking about, and acknowledge that others know more, but refuse to listen to them when they say this horse isn't great?