Greatest Living Racehorse?

[miraja2]

If you include Cigar (in his prime) into the fields of any of Ghostzapper's last six races....how many of them would Cigar would have won?

It is obviously impossible to know, but my guess is zero. Ghostzapper probably still would have won them all.

That's certainly not the only factor one should use in determining "greatness," but I do think its pretty important.

[Princess Doreen]

Originally Posted by miraja2

If you include Cigar (in his prime) into the fields of any of Ghostzapper's last six races....how many of them would Cigar would have won?

It is obviously impossible to know, but my guess is zero. Ghostzapper probably still would have won them all.

That's certainly not the only factor one should use in determining "greatness," but I do think its pretty important.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda. If GZ had the same kind of schedule that CIGAR had, how many races would he have won or would have missed because he couldn't have kept up?!~

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Princess Doreen

Shoulda, coulda, woulda. If GZ had the same kind of schedule that CIGAR had, how many races would he have won or would have missed because he couldn't have kept up?!~

So it's OK for you to speculate, but not others.

[Princess Doreen]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

So it's OK for you to speculate, but not others.

No - just showing there's another side to shoulda would coulda. Gotta go with what's been done - not what anyone thinks MIGHT have been done.

[NTamm1215]

One of the things that's admirable about Cigar is that he held up to the rigors of a strong campaign. Horses like Candy Ride and Ghostzapper, who were brilliant when healthy, have to be judged somewhat differently.

I don't think a then 6YO Cigar losing to Skip Away and losing the BCC while racing against a strong inside bias at Woodbine should tarnish what he accomplished in two years.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Princess Doreen

Shoulda, coulda, woulda. If GZ had the same kind of schedule that CIGAR had, how many races would he have won or would have missed because he couldn't have kept up?!~

Oops, I should have read further. I would have seen that you made the same point 6 hrs ago that I just made.

--Dunbar

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by miraja2

If you include Cigar (in his prime) into the fields of any of Ghostzapper's last six races....how many of them would Cigar would have won?

It is obviously impossible to know, but my guess is zero. Ghostzapper probably still would have won them all.

That's certainly not the only factor one should use in determining "greatness," but I do think its pretty important.

The flip side to that is putting Ghostzapper in Cigar's races.

If he had to contend with horses like Louis Quatorze, Siphon, Urgent Request, Honour and Glory, etc. on the front end, he probably would have been kept sprinting.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

The flip side to that is putting Ghostzapper in Cigar's races.

If he had to contend with horses like Louis Quatorze, Siphon, Urgent Request, Honour and Glory, etc. on the front end, he probably would have been kept sprinting.

Ghostzapper didn't need to be on the front. He was just so much better than his competition, Castellano would often let him roll and he'd still have plenty left in the stretch.

As has been said before, 'greatness' is loosely defined. Some think it's longevity, some think it's brilliance, some think it's a combination of the two. Ghostzapper was as brilliant as any horse in the last 30 years, so I don't think it's unreasonable to consider him the best living racehorse without getting into a dozen pages of hypothetical matchups.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Ghostzapper didn't need to be on the front. He was just so much better than his competition, Castellano would often let him roll and he'd still have plenty left in the stretch.

Didn't Bobby Frankel go to great lengths to convince Ken Ramsey to keep Roses In May from dueling with Ghostzapper in the BC Classic? At least that's what Steve Haskin said. Seems like Frankel was aware that the colt had his limits.

Looking (crudely I'll admit) at Cigar's races, he routinely ran in 9-10f races with :45+ and :46+ half-mile fractions. Ghostzapper, who made all of 2 starts around two turns, barely edged the good, but hardly great, St. Liam when encountering those sorts of fractions.

I would think he'd be vulnerable in at least some of those races Cigar ran in.

As has been said before, 'greatness' is loosely defined. Some think it's longevity, some think it's brilliance, some think it's a combination of the two. Ghostzapper was as brilliant as any horse in the last 30 years, so I don't think it's unreasonable to consider him the best living racehorse without getting into a dozen pages of hypothetical matchups.

Well, isn't that sort of the intent of this thread?

If you're opposed to getting involved in "hypothetical matchup" debates, maybe refrain from piggy-backing off miraja's posts.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Didn't Bobby Frankel go to great lengths to convince Ken Ramsey to keep Roses In May from dueling with Ghostzapper in the BC Classic? At least that's what Steve Haskin said. Seems like Frankel was aware that the colt had his limits.

If that's true, and I'd hardly take what Haskin says as gospel these days, it likely had less to do with tactical limitations and more with the fact that Castellano's hand was forced when he drew the rail. Ghostzapper still had to set pretty quick fractions and was never challenged. If I remember the quote, it was more along the lines of 'a speed duel isn't good for either horse', but really, it would've been a lot worse for Roses in May. Assuming that Haskin's story is accurate and that Ramsey heeded Frankel's advice, it was the right move. Roses in May never could have run the race that Ghostzapper did.

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Well, isn't that sort of the intent of this thread?

If you're opposed to getting involved in "hypothetical matchup" debates, maybe refrain from piggy-backing off miraja's posts.

Got it, so I can't defend an opinion about a horse's ability without an accompanying desire to get into hours of debate over pretend races.

[Antitrust32]

is Formal Gold still alive?

I'd say Skip Away, but since he's dead... what about Gold?

Cigar is the horse with the best career that is still alive.

Horse with the most talent that is still alive... I'll get crucified for saying this.. Unbridled's Song

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

is Formal Gold still alive?

I'd say Skip Away, but since he's dead... what about Gold?

Cigar is the horse with the best career that is still alive.

Horse with the most talent that is still alive... I'll get crucified for saying this.. Unbridled's Song

Are you kidding? UBS was freakin amazing.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

...it would've been a lot worse for Roses in May. Assuming that Haskin's story is accurate and that Ramsey heeded Frankel's advice, it was the right move. Roses in May never could have run the race that Ghostzapper did.

That's not the point. Point is that Roses in May and horses of his ilk would always be a thorn in Ghostzapper's side, at least when it came to classic distances.

Fortunately, Frankel avoided running him in such races but twice in top company.

Got it, so I can't defend an opinion about a horse's ability without an accompanying desire to get into hours of debate over pretend races.

Didn't say that at all. Miraja brought up the hypothetical Cigar-Ghostzapper matchup that you are so loathe to bother yourself with. I, on the other hand, don't mind wasting "hours" and "pages" on such a debate, so I responded.

I'm still not sure why you involved yourself with it if your not interested in that sort of discussion.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

That's not the point. Point is that Roses in May and horses of his ilk would always be a thorn in Ghostzapper's side, at least when it came to classic distances.

Fortunately, Frankel avoided running him in such races but twice in top company.

Nice job cherry-picking that part of my post. It was an add-on to my original point about Ghostzapper's brilliance. The main point is that had Ghostzapper not drawn the rail, I'm almost positive the Frankel/Ramsey exchange never would've happened (if it happened at all).

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Didn't say that at all. Miraja brought up the hypothetical Cigar-Ghostzapper matchup that you are so loathe to bother yourself with. I, on the other hand, don't mind wasting "hours" and "pages" on such a debate, so I responded.

I'm still not sure why you involved yourself with it if your not interested in that sort of discussion.

Because I thought it was pretty funny that Princess Doreen trashed miraja for using 'hypotheticals', then used one of her own in the very next sentence doubting whether Ghostzapper could've run Cigar's schedule. Hope that satisfies you.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

That's not the point. Point is that Roses in May and horses of his ilk would always be a thorn in Ghostzapper's side, at least when it came to classic distances.

Fortunately, Frankel avoided running him in such races but twice in top company.

But why? What I appreciated about Ghostzapper more than anything else besides his utter brilliance was his versatility. He could literally run at any pace from any part of the track. What evidence is there that he was vulnerable to pace at ANY distance?

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Point is that Roses in May and horses of his ilk would always be a thorn in Ghostzapper's side, at least when it came to classic distances.

Doesn't their one matchup against each other refute that argument a bit?

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by miraja2

If you include Cigar (in his prime) into the fields of any of Ghostzapper's last six races....how many of them would Cigar would have won?

It is obviously impossible to know, but my guess is zero. Ghostzapper probably still would have won them all.

That's certainly not the only factor one should use in determining "greatness," but I do think its pretty important.

I agree with you. But how about if they ran a race every month for a year? How many would Cigar have won? At least 6, IMO. GZ would have crashed after 4-5.

Durability and consistency are also elements of greatness.

--Dunbar

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

I agree with you. But how about if they ran a race every month for a year? How many would Cigar have won? At least 6, IMO. GZ would have crashed after 4-5.

Durability and consistency are also elements of greatness.

Like all hypotheticals - including the one I brought up - there's no way to know for sure. Obviously Cigar deserves a lot of credit for the sheer number of big races he won....something Ghostzapper didn't come close to equalling.

While you are correct in saying that those factors are also "elements of greatness," I think versatility matters some too. There just aren't a lot of horses that I can think of in recent memory (including Cigar) who had the ability to run absolutely brilliant sprints like GZ did in the Vosburgh and the Tom Fool and then come back and easily defeat really good route horses like Roses in May and Pleasantly Perfect going 10f.