Which horses were truly great?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

That also means he lost 50 out of 100. I have tough time putting a horse in the upper tier that only won half his starts. Grey Lag was really only great for one year which hurts his case.

if he was 5 of 10, i could see your point. just remember that no one holds citations losses against him, not with that win streak, and weight carried.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Danzig

if he was 5 of 10, i could see your point. just remember that no one holds citations losses against him, not with that win streak, and weight carried.

In those 50 wins Exterminator never had a streak longer than 6, and in that streak he only carried more than 126 once.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

In those 50 wins Exterminator never had a streak longer than 6, and in that streak he only carried more than 126 once.

when i said win streak, it was in reference to citation.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Danzig

when i said win streak, it was in reference to citation.

I know, I just think if Exterminator truly belonged in that elite class he would have won more than 6 in a row.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

I know, I just think if Exterminator truly belonged in that elite class he would have won more than 6 in a row.

why? you include nashua, he never won more than 6 in a row.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Danzig

why? you include nashua, he never won more than 6 in a row.

But Nashua won more than 2/3 of his races. Had Exterminator had a nice run in his 50 wins and then racked up a bunch of losses late in his career then he'd have a better excuse for his 50 losses. But he didn't.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

But Nashua won more than 2/3 of his races. Had Exterminator had a nice run in his 50 wins and then racked up a bunch of losses late in his career then he'd have a better excuse for his 50 losses. But he didn't.

but he won 50 races. most horses don't even start in 50 races. most horses today don't have 50 starts between themselves, their sire and their dam.

anyway, i think exterminator was a heck of a horse.

[Pedigree Ann]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

But Nashua won more than 2/3 of his races. Had Exterminator had a nice run in his 50 wins and then racked up a bunch of losses late in his career then he'd have a better excuse for his 50 losses. But he didn't.

Exterminator ran until he was 10, long past his best years. Without modern analgesics, his old joints couldn't move him as fast as they had and his form nosedived. (This is why I still can't put John Henry in the same category as Exterminator, Kelso and Native Diver - he got bute for his elderly aches and pains.)

[westcoastinvader]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

But Nashua won more than 2/3 of his races. Had Exterminator had a nice run in his 50 wins and then racked up a bunch of losses late in his career then he'd have a better excuse for his 50 losses. But he didn't.

And as I recall, Nashua was the all time leading $$ winner for a great number of years.

I think from retirement, until Spectacular Bid passed him.

If my memory is correct, I think that's a metric that should put Nashua in the group, for certain.

And Spectacular Bid is certainly on my list with 26 wins, 2 places and a show in 30 starts.