Well ... at least you're making some distinctions ... instead of trying to evaluate every single thoroughbred who has ever been registered ... and even some who raced before there was a registry.

But you still haven't told us your evaluation method. For instance ... why is Hyperion on the list ... while Bahram isn't ... when every knowledgable British authority of the 1930's rated Bahram as being much better?

And ... how did you compare Flying Childers ... a British foal of 1715 who competed in only three competitive races at ages 6 and 7 ... facing a total of four opponents ... with, say, Forego ... an American foal of 1970 ... who competed 57 times from 3 to 8 ... and faced hundreds of opponents ... and conclude that Flying Childers was the better race horse?

And how did you compare Henry Of Navarre with Lammtarra ... and which did you conclude was better?