[miraja2]

People seem to get caught up in arguing about whether all of Lava Man's impressive accomplishments are the result of him being a good horse, or if it is the result of his fairly easy competition.
I believe the answer is.........both.
Lava Man's accomplishments are incredible. Winning the Big Cap and the Gold Cup in the same year is impressive. He has now done that two years in a row.
Last year he won G1s on the turf and dirt. You don't see that very often.
etc. etc.
Based solely on his number of G1 wins, he looks like the horse of the decade. But because of the competition he has faced, and his complete failures when he leaves SoCal, he is certainly not that.
Now, has he faced spectacular competition in those SoCal races? Not at all. But it takes a pretty good horse to show up time after time even to beat the Borregos, Super Frolics, Brother Dereks, and A.P. Xcellents of the sport. Is beating any of those horses very impressive? No. But showing up to beat horses of that caliber consistently over a three-year span IS fairly impressive. In other words, he certainly was handed a great opportunity to rack up some big-time accomplishments, but it takes a pretty good horse to seize that opportunity.
He is not the best horse in the world. He isn't even close. But it hasn't just been Cali with a lack of good horses in the handicap division the last few years. After Lava Man beat Borrego in the 2005 HGC, Borrego went east in the fall and won the JCGC. Look at the last two years. Who did Bernardini beat in the JCGC last year? Who just won the Suburban? etc. etc.