[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Housebuster was injured in the BC and Groovy didn't " flop " in the manner that Lost in the Fog did. Also, in a mild defense of Groovy, he had the unfortunate " luck " of having the BC run in California in successive years.

How familiar are you with Groovy's entire resume? How about Housebuster's before it was laid out in this thread?

Groovy absolutely did flop bigger IMO. The first year, he failed to hit the board at odds-on in a nine-horse field. The second year, he got outrun to the front again and again, lost at odds-on. That was the deal with him. No lead, no win. I don't get why it's unfortunate luck for Groovy having had to come to CA in successive years but it's not for Fog having to go to NY after flying back and forth across the country 13 times in one year. Groovy, like Fog, was a fringe contender for HOY in 1987 and he lost. I understand that Groovy ran some outstanding races outside of the BC. So did Fog. In fact, because of Groovy going 130+ in back to back races, that makes his flops even bigger.

Housebuster was good. I'm not saying he wasn't. Personally, I thought of him more as a brilliant miler than a brilliant sprinter. I know he lost to Unbridled in Florida in a sprint. He beat Black Tie Affair in the Carter and lost to him in the Commonwealth. What do BTA and Unbridled have in common? They were BC Classic winners and neither would be confused with the top sprinters over the years. He beat Clevor Trevor a couple of times, in the DeFrancis and the Forego. Clevor Trevor was another more known for his exploits at distances beyond 8f. The DeFrancis was a great race for him and showed he was a top class sprinter without a doubt. He beat Safely Kept in that race. I always felt though that the 1990 Met Mile was his best race.