Spanish Chestnut....

King Glorious · #1 09-19-2006, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slotdirt

How can you say he was overrated? Nobody ever thought he was anything more than a lower level, GIII type horse. Is that overrated? I don't think so; he's shown he can compete on that level.

A horse that was used as a f-ing rabbit in the biggest race on the planet just can't, by nature, be overrated.

I knew of people that were saying he was a legit Derby contender after he won that race at Santa Anita. I knew of many people that thought after the Derby that if he were dropped back down to sprints or miles, that he would be a grade one type. For those people, I say he was overrated. For those of us that thought he wouldn't amount to much more than a competitive (but non-winning) grade three type, I guess u could say we didn't overrate him.

Just because he ran in the Derby doesn't mean that he can't be called overrated. Many times u see trainers enter horses that have no shot in a race to be a rabbit for their main horse. Does that make all of those rabbits legit horses? No. So just because Spanish Chestnut was used as a rabbit in the Derby doesn't make him exempt from being able to be put in the overrated category for those that thought he'd be much.

slotdirt · #2 09-19-2006, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I knew of people that were saying he was a legit Derby contender after he won that race at Santa Anita. I knew of many people that thought after the Derby that if he were dropped back down to sprints or miles, that he would be a grade one type. For those people, I say he was overrated. For those of us that thought he wouldn't amount to much more than a competitive (but non-winning) grade three type, I guess u could say we didn't overrate him.

Just because he ran in the Derby doesn't mean that he can't be called overrated. Many times u see trainers enter horses that have no shot in a race to be a rabbit for their main horse. Does that make all of those rabbits legit horses? No. So just because Spanish Chestnut was used as a rabbit in the Derby doesn't make him exempt from being able to be put in the overrated category for those that thought he'd be much.

My point in saying he was a rabbit is that obviously nobody at that time thought he was a competitive horse at that level. I never thought he was more than what he is now, and thought it was sad that they'd put him through the Derby given his chances.

JJP · #3 09-19-2006, 12:09 PM

Whether or not Spanish Chestnut is/was overrated isn't relevant. Not when you see the claim that King Glorious was the best horse in the past 20 years. And Java Gold second. Did King Glorious ever win past a mile and a sixteenth? Did he even win going THAT far? He never beat high quality horses. Yeah Java Gold beat a good field in the 87 Travers but that was in the slop. What was his biggest win on a dry track? Go For Wand was never as good as Personal Ensign, Bayakoa or the other great mares in the late 80s/early 90s. I guess since she died on the track we have to elevate our opinion of her?

King Glorious · #4 09-19-2006, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJP

Whether or not Spanish Chestnut is/was overrated isn't relevant. Not when you see the claim that King Glorious was the best horse in the past 20 years. And Java Gold second. Did King Glorious ever win past a mile and a sixteenth? Did he even win going THAT far? He never beat high quality horses. Yeah Java Gold beat a good field in the 87 Travers but that was in the slop. What was his biggest win on a dry track? Go For Wand was never as good as Personal Ensign, Bayakoa or the other great mares in the late 80s/early 90s. I guess since she died on the track we have to elevate our opinion of her?

Let's answer a couple of your questions.

YES, King Glorious DID win going beyond a 8.5f. Couple of little races called the Ohio Derby and the HASKELL. Perhaps u've never heard of the Haskell so I'll forgive u here. Both of those races were at 9f. I once asked Chris McCarron what he thought of KG's chances against the likes of Easy Goer and Sunday Silence since they were all in the same year. He said that up to a mile, those others would have no shot to catch KG but that he thought they would beat him if it was 9-10f. No disgrace there. Who says that a horse HAS to race at 9-10 to be considered a top horse?

Yes, Java Gold's win in the Travers was in the slop. But when he beat 4yo Broad Brush and Gulch in the Whitney, and when he beat Polish Navy and 4yo Nostalgia's Star in the Marlboro Cup, the track was dry. I'm sure that u remember that the Whitney was (still is) one of the top races of the year for older horses as was the Marlboro Cup. If u remember the situation that year, Java Gold was probably the 1-9 favorite to be named HOY that year. That was his price in the JCGC, where a win would have virtually clinched the title. Unfortunately, he suffered a bruised foot during the running of the race and finished second to Creme Fraiche, a course and distance specialist (Belmont Stakes, back to back JCGC wins all at 12f).

Was Go for Wand as good as Personal Ensign or Bayakoa? Who's to say. Could any of those horses u think were better have done what Go for Wand did in the summer of her 3yo season? GfW won the 7f Test in 1:21 flat then came back NINE DAYS LATER and won the 10f Alabama in 2:00 4/5 under a hand ride. I don't care what track, what the conditions......u don't find 3yo fillies running 2:00 4/5 and especially ones that are that versatile to have run 1:21 flat barely a week earlier. Then to top it off, she comes back a couple of months later and runs 9f in 1:45 4/5, just missing Secretariat's track record at Belmont. Those three things are extraordinary feats for any horse, even moreso when it's a 3yo filly. U are comparing the 3yo GfW with the 4yo Personal Ensign and the even more mature Bayakoa. And before GfW broke down, she was running step for step with Bayakoa. U don't have to agree that she's better. But she's definitely right there in the conversation. Her death has no bearing on what she did on the track.

In any case, this was NOT a claim that these ARE the best horses of the past 20 years. Just the best ones in MY opinion. U are more than welcome to have a contrary opinion.

JJP · #5 09-19-2006, 01:03 PM

Its not that they weren't good. Its just when you claim those were three of the top 5 in the past 20 years, you're gonna hear about it. Of those three, I'd say Java Gold was the most deserving. Beating Broad Brush and Gulch was solid in the Whitney although IMO Nostalgia's Star and Polish Navy were no world beaters by any stretch for the JCGC. The Travers was a strong field too. Brilliant but brief career.

As for KG, I'd take what any jockey says with a grain of salt. And after Sunday Silence and Easy Goer, there wasn't much to beat in the Haskell (or Ohio Derby for that matter). Sunday Silence had a pretty good turn of foot; I really doubt KG would've beaten Sunday Silence at a mile.

Go for Wand was very solid too although I'm not big on throwing around unadjusted times. Just IMO, she didn't distinguish herself as being better than the true superstar mares. Maybe as good, or close to, but not better.

Cajungator26 · #6 09-19-2006, 01:05 PM

Opinions are like a ssholes... everyone has got one.

IMO, the best horse of the last 20 years was Easy Goer. God, I loved that horse.

blackthroatedwind · #7 09-19-2006, 01:12 PM

Java Gold ( who I believe was 3-10 that day ) lost the JCGC due to Pat Day's incompetence not an injury. In fact, Mack Miller was actually considering running him in the BC, which he was against, to try and recoup HOY but he then discovered an injury. But, the injury did not cost him the Jockey Club, Day's horrendous and inexcusable ride did.

Go for Wand was a VERY good horse. Please...I don't know how anyone could suggest otherwise. Compared to the random horses people call great these days she was the greatest horse of all time.

As for King Glorious...I was at that Haskell and remembering him beating a very bad field. I can't believe anybody would base an opinion of a horse on what a jockey says. Gary Stevens, for instance, has ridden 896 horses that are the best he has ever ridden.

Cajungator26 · #8 09-19-2006, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Java Gold ( who I believe was 3-10 that day ) lost the JCGC due to Pat Day's incompetence not an injury. In fact, Mack Miller was actually considering running him in the BC, which he was against, to try and recoup HOY but he then discovered an injury. But, the injury did not cost him the Jockey Club, Day's horrendous and inexcusable ride did.

Go for Wand was a VERY good horse. Please...I don't know how anyone could suggest otherwise. Compared to the random horses people call great these days she was the greatest horse of all time.

As for King Glorious...I was at that Haskell and remembering him beating a very bad field. I can't believe anybody would base an opinion of a horse on what a jockey says. Gary Stevens, for instance, has ridden 896 horses that are the best he has ever ridden.

Yep... my favorite "favorite" of his was Eddington. Talk about a talented but immature colt... he would have won a lot more if he had been mature. LOL

Sightseek · #9 09-19-2006, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Java Gold ( who I believe was 3-10 that day ) lost the JCGC due to Pat Day's incompetence not an injury. In fact, Mack Miller was actually considering running him in the BC, which he was against, to try and recoup HOY but he then discovered an injury. But, the injury did not cost him the Jockey Club, Day's horrendous and inexcusable ride did.

Go for Wand was a VERY good horse. Please...I don't know how anyone could suggest otherwise. Compared to the random horses people call great these days she was the greatest horse of all time.

As for King Glorious...I was at that Haskell and remembering him beating a very bad field. I can't believe anybody would base an opinion of a horse on what a jockey says. Gary Stevens, for instance, has ridden 896 horses that are the best he has ever ridden.

Actually it was 897

King Glorious · #10 09-19-2006, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Java Gold ( who I believe was 3-10 that day ) lost the JCGC due to Pat Day's incompetence not an injury. In fact, Mack Miller was actually considering running him in the BC, which he was against, to try and recoup HOY but he then discovered an injury. But, the injury did not cost him the Jockey Club, Day's horrendous and inexcusable ride did.

Go for Wand was a VERY good horse. Please...I don't know how anyone could suggest otherwise. Compared to the random horses people call great these days she was the greatest horse of all time.

As for King Glorious...I was at that Haskell and remembering him beating a very bad field. I can't believe anybody would base an opinion of a horse on what a jockey says. Gary Stevens, for instance, has ridden 896 horses that are the best he has ever ridden.

I'm not so sure about that situation with JG. I do remember that the injury thing supposedly came up after the race and they did publicly say that they were reconsidering him for the BC but I never believed a word of it. For months, they had made it clear that the JCGC was the end of his season. Remember, this was only the fourth year of the BC and a lot of the Eastern folks weren't interested in shipping all the way to California that late in the year (the BC that year was 11/21). They still considered the fall races at Belmont as the true championships. Remember that the winners of the Beldame (Personal Ensign), Champagne (Forty Niner), JCGC (Creme Fraiche) were also held out that year too. Pat Day's ride didn't help either. He was too overconfident and let that other horse go and should have respected Creme Fraiche more than he did. Any horse that has a Belmont win, a Super Derby win, a Donn win, a JCGC win, and the Meadowlands Cup has to be respected.

I don't base my opinion of KG on what McCarron or Stevens said. I based it on what I saw. I saw him live run a 1:08 4/5 at Hollywood. I saw him live run a 1:21 1/5 (which at the time, the DRF said equalled the second fastest time ever for a 2yo). I just think he was the fastest horse I've ever seen in terms of natural cruising speed.

King Glorious · #11 09-19-2006, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJP

Its not that they weren't good. Its just when you claim those were three of the top 5 in the past 20 years, you're gonna hear about it. Of those three, I'd say Java Gold was the most deserving. Beating Broad Brush and Gulch was solid in the Whitney although IMO Nostalgia's Star and Polish Navy were no world beaters by any stretch for the JCGC. The Travers was a strong field too. Brilliant but brief career.

As for KG, I'd take what any jockey says with a grain of salt. And after Sunday Silence and Easy Goer, there wasn't much to beat in the Haskell (or Ohio Derby for that matter). Sunday Silence had a pretty good turn of foot; I really doubt KG would've beaten Sunday Silence at a mile.

Go for Wand was very solid too although I'm not big on throwing around unadjusted times. Just IMO, she didn't distinguish herself as being better than the true superstar mares. Maybe as good, or close to, but not better.

I know I'll hear about it but it doesn't bother me. As I said, it's just opinions. I thought that him beating Nostalgia's Star and Polish Navy in the Marlboro were more impressive than the Whitney. Polish Navy had just come off of a win against older in the Woodward, where he had beaten Gulch (and I believe Bet Twice also) to confirm even more that the 3yo's were a better and deeper group than the older horses that year. Nostalgia's Star, while not a great horse, was a solid older horse (Strub, Hawthorne Gold Cup plus numerous other placings in good races).

As for McCarron's comments, take them as u will. Because he had ridden KG and Sunday Silence, I thought he was in a good position to make a call there. I also had asked Gary Stevens for his opinion before the Santa Anita Derby. He said that he thought that if KG was there, he'd have been favored over Sunday Silence too. Of course, this was before everyone found out just how good SS really was. There was absolutely nothing that KG beat in either the Ohio Derby or the Haskell except for maybe Music Merci. I wasn't touting the quality of those fields though, only answering your question.

With GfW, I would agree with u that a single race time is no way to judge a horse. But when u are able to string together three races like that, that's more than just fast tracks or favorable circumstances. And just the fact that she was able to run step for step with Bayakoa told me that everything she had done was legit. Bayakoa was truly one of the most outstanding mares to come along in the past 20 years. I think easily top five (very underrated in my opinion) and she was a more mature 6yo horse at the time they faced each other. Of course it's all speculation on how much, if any, GfW could have improved in the next year or two had she continued on but even the slightest improvement and I think the question of who was the greatest female runner of all-time would have one universal answer.