American Pharoah points to Breeders' Cup Classic

[richard burch]

Originally Posted by FATPIANO

LOL................yes he won The TC, a very good horse, but NOT great, how many track records has he matched or broken???? NONE, like I said a very good but NOT great horse

i don't think any horse other than secretariat owns all 3 triple crown records. so are all the other horses "not great" too?

[FATPIANO]

Originally Posted by richard burch

i don't think any horse other than secretariat owns all 3 triple crown records. so are all the other horses "not great" too?

That is NOT what I said, AP has NOT proven to be a great horse yet, he has NOT beaten his elders, and has NOT broken any track records, those are things that GREAT one's do, He is a very good horse, but not a great one(YET) and might not have the time to do so, he got very lucky this spring, that's all.

[knickslions2]

Originally Posted by FATPIANO

That is NOT what I said, AP has NOT proven to be a great horse yet, he has NOT beaten his elders, and has NOT broken any track records, those are things that GREAT one's do, He is a very good horse, but not a great one(YET) and might not have the time to do so, he got very lucky this spring, that's all.

Lucky? You're reaching now.

[FATPIANO]

Originally Posted by knickslions2

Lucky? You're reaching now.

sorry it is just my opinion, we all have opinions, I did say he is very good, The first time he got hooked up with another good horse, he lost, thats all

[casp0555]

Originally Posted by FATPIANO

sorry it is just my opinion, we all have opinions, I did say he is very good, The first time he got hooked up with another good horse, he lost, thats all

So Firing Line and Dortmund were not good horses...just asking

[knickslions2]

Originally Posted by casp0555

So Firing Line and Dortmund were not good horses...just asking

Winning 5 races in 12 weeks including the triple crown against a pretty good crop of horses was terrible too. I'm not here saying he is the greatest horse of all time but people saying he was lucky is beyond ludacris. Lost one race against a horse who is improving every start.

[Arletta]

Originally Posted by knickslions2

Winning 5 races in 12 weeks including the triple crown against a pretty good crop of horses was terrible too. I'm not here saying he is the greatest horse of all time but people saying he was lucky is beyond ludacris. Lost one race against a horse who is improving every start.

I believe it's 2 races he's lost and I can see where some would feel he did get lucky when there was that torrential downpour before the Preakness because it totally changed the dynamics of the race when that happened. Firing Line and Dortmund had no shot when that happened.

[tanner12oz]

Originally Posted by FATPIANO

That is NOT what I said, AP has NOT proven to be a great horse yet, he has NOT beaten his elders, and has NOT broken any track records, those are things that GREAT one's do, He is a very good horse, but not a great one(YET) and might not have the time to do so, he got very lucky this spring, that's all.

I'm the eternal pessimist and I disagree completely. The horse did something that hasn't been done in almost 40 years. Pretty sure that separates you from the field

[senator L]

Yes, Sir Barton was a great horse - he won the triple crown
He beat Exterminator, also set a world record in 1920 for 1 3/16
and he was also thought highly enough to get a match race
against Man o War who many think was America's best horse ever.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by senator L

Yes, Sir Barton was a great horse - he won the triple crown
He beat Exterminator, also set a world record in 1920 for 1 3/16
and he was also thought highly enough to get a match race
against Man o War who many think was America's best horse ever.

If he's on your list of greats, it must be a looooooong list.

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by Danzig

If he's on your list of greats, it must be a looooooong list.

Now now. Firstly, he ranked #49 on the Bloodhorse's top 100 of the 20th century list (between Personal Ensign and Dahlia) so I'd say he certainly qualifies for that term. Secondly, Sir Barton had bad feet to deal with, and it's thought that they were probably affecting him during the MOW match race. As difficult as it would've been to beat MOW he probably would've been closer at the finish. When Sir Barton was at his best, he was pretty talented and he'd be given more credit were it not for those blasted feet.

[Danzig]

I have that book...it's great to look over.
But if we did a book of truly great horses...how long a list? Because if its too long, (and I think sir barton would be even further down with us being 15 years into a new century) you would water down the meaning of greatness.

The bid should be on a list with sir barton? Or secretariat?
That's why I said it would be a long list. And I don't think a list of greats should be long.