Well, how could I possibly know all of those other things for 100% sure? They never happened. I'm obviously not a psychic or I would be rich off of these ponies.

However, the BCC race did happen.

So you are this rare person who compares his previous races to the BCC? Are you kidding me? What do you think everyone else is doing?

So you and your insider friends got together and agreed that he wasn't on his A game? Well I guess that does it then, case closed.

For the last time, it was the pace, the number of horses, and the quality of the horses in the field that took him off his game. If you actually compare his previous races to the BCC you will see that those are facts.

Who cares what would have happened in some ficticious match race? I don't agree that its a foregone conclusion the Bernardini would have won. My guess is that he wouldn't have. The only race we actually know about is the one we saw a few weeks ago where he ran the best he could and got beat by the undefeated horse of the year. No big disgrace in that but, as talented as Seattle Slew? Only in your mind I'm afraid.

I think calling Ghostzapper great in the same breath with calling Slew great is a mindblower. To me they are residents of different planets.:D

Yes, those are facts, and it is also a fact that the horse got sandwiched hard and bumped around in the first turn. It is also a fact that the horse dropped back to fifth place after coming up to fourth place on the backstretch signaling that he wasn't on his A game. It is also a fact that after getting hit like that, that he wasn't pulling at Javier like he did in the rest of his races. It is also a fact that Javier knew that Bernardini was not himself, so he started asking him just after the half mile pole. It is also a fact that Bernardini did not explode with as much force around the final turn as he did in the Preakness.

Invasor was is not the undefeated horse of the year. Discreet Cat beat Invasor in Dubai (Invasor was a distant fourth).

If you're afraid, then quit replying to me.

I'm going to ask a question that everyone usually hates. Why?

This is precisely the kind of criticism I have ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM with.

You're completely right. He never proved on the track that he was great. Those who feel that he was immensely talented and wasn't on his A game in the BCC will continue to think he's great. Those who think that was his best effort will continue to think what they think.

What bothers me is the guys who come on here proclaiming his BCC SECOND-PLACE FINISH (Not up the track like their hero Lava Man) is indisputable evidence that he's a fraud. Listen, none of us KNOW ****.

People like me and KY Roses will continue to think he was one of the best horses we've ever seen. People like Sniper and Windu and ArlJim will continue to think he was an okay 3-year-old. There's no proving either opinion wrong, and they should be stated as that, opinions.

I don't think he's an okay 3yo, I think he's a very good with a possibility of being a great 3yo, unfortunately we'll never know...I always thought he was talented, but I did not think he was a great horse at least not until he would have had a chance to prove it...I thought he was going to win, he didn't, maybe I undervalued Invasior, he gets another prep and he might have won by more...He's going to be 3yo of the year, how many 3yo's race a year, that's pretty good to be the best of your generation...

Ghostzapper will not even make the Hall of Fame. He was too lightly raced.

That I'm fine with. Just sick of hearing that people know he didn't run his race when really it is just their opinion that he was a lot better than he showed in the BC Classic. He's certainly a lot more than an ok 3yo. I think he's a very good horse that could have been a great one if he improved next year. Unfortunately we'll never know, and that pisses me off more than anything.

You're right. He may not, but that horse was brillant. He is one of the fastest horses to have ever lived.

It would be a shame though if a horse like Barbaro made the Hall of Fame and Ghostzapper did not.

yeah, I think that about covers it in a nutshell.

He got passed by a great horse. :D

I can't really argue with that Pillow Pants. We were blessed with some incredible talent this year in Barbaro, Bernardini, and Invasor.

If Ghostzapper had raced more, we would have called him Dr. Fager II. He is one helluva horse. :D

I agree with that too.

It's a shame we didn't get to see these three run against each other next year. It can be a cruel game at times.

Thats what happens when racing in big fields, they bump, thay have to go wide, etc. Before this race you may recall that I said that Bernardini had never been in a battle and that Invasor had many times shown himself to be able to battle and come out on top. Talk to you insider friends about that, maybe it will make some sense.

I thought Bernardini exploded quite well on the turn, to me it was a powerful move. He could never have done that and finished so close to Invasor as he did if he was not himself and not on his A game. The whole thing people like you missed was how good Invasor is. That does not mean you have to bring Bernardini down. If Bernardini compares well talentwise with Seattle Slew, what comparisons should be made with Invasor?

In my mind,:) Invasor is undefeated because I throw out the Dubai race because I think it is suspect from what I can tell. If there was ever a case of a horse not being on his A game that was it. He is undefeated in the Western Hemisphere.:D

i won't rehash slews accomplishments at two, three and four. everyone knows his record.
i don't agree bernardini showed as much talent. he certainly didn't show any precocity as slew did. and of course slew never allowed his peers to catch up with him either.

as for having it all as a stallion...so did plugged nickel. a lot of horses with fantastic pedigrees end up standing in obscure places for less than huge money. bernardini will have a better shot than many at making it, as he'll get the BEST of mares. but he still has a an 80% chance of being a failure.

he ran figures on par with his others this year. he ran his race. he just had better competition this time. and that made all the difference.

Your first paragraph makes perfect sense and I already know all of that kind of stuff;).

However, I also know that horses that get sandwiched as Bernardini did usually can not run their best race after the fact. We saw it with Alex in the Derby too.

See, I think that Bernardini is more talented than Invasor and just didn't fire his best race. Although, Invasor is most certainly a lovely horse.

And if you can throw out Invasor's race in Dubai, then I am going to throw out Bernardini's BCC at Churchill because I think that it was suspect since he didn't run his A game. LOL.:p :D

Let's call this at a draw. I'm happy with the arguments that both of us have presented, and we really can't carry this any further. You like Invasor better, but respect Bernardini, while I like Bernardini better, but respect Invasor. If nothing else, some good information was conveyed, and that is what this board is all about.:)