2/16-18: Carlos (SA); Bertie (GP); Gen George (LRL)

[GPK]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Right, I know. What I was referring to was the mystifying statement, albeit an opinion that he was the best horse in the country in 2006 and a shortened season kept him from accomplishing something great.

I was endeavoring to also point out that there were some pretty talented horses that ran in 2006.

NT

Ok, I see now where K.G. stated he was the best horse in 2006. I thought you where referring to his 3yo year....sorry 'bout that.


MMSC....just my personal opinion is all. Not quite sure he was ready to take on the likes of those in that race. Berrego turned out to have a very solid 2 half of the year in 2005. Just think he needed a touch more experience than he had going into that race. But what the hell do I know...im just a golf pro

[my miss storm cat]

Originally Posted by GPK

Ok, I see now where K.G. stated he was the best horse in 2006. I thought you where referring to his 3yo year....sorry 'bout that.


MMSC....just my personal opinion is all. Not quite sure he was ready to take on the likes of those in that race. Berrego turned out to have a very solid 2 half of the year in 2005. Just think he needed a touch more experience than he had going into that race. But what the hell do I know...im just a golf pro

Yeah well I'm just a pretty-horsie-girl-wanna-be-capper so what do I know.

I just tend to think if you've got a really good 3YO (which he was) you should go for it.

Girls against the boys, younger against older, etc.

[King Glorious]

Bernardini blossomed in the second half of the 2006 season. Invasor did the same thing. Barbaro was overrated from the start. Surf Cat, in the first half of 2006, ran as well as any horse in the country. There weren't that many that were able to combine the ability to excel in sprints and routes. I'm sorry that I didn't include the statement "in the first half". Maybe that would have cleared up some of the confusion. At the same time, I do not believe that Bernardini, Invasor or Barbaro could have beaten him under a mile. It's my belief that he'd have a better chance of beating them at 10f than they would have of beating him at 6.5-7f. For some people, the best horses aren't necessarily the best at 9-10f. For some people, they would rather have a horse that has more versatility.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

You're going to have to explain this one. I'm not getting all sentimental here, but how could he have been overrated?

Barbaro was a good horse but I think he was far from proving himself as the superstar that his fans made him out to be. Granted, his Derby was an awesome, overpowering performance. But I think that if people judged Barbaro without all of the sentiment that comes with his story, they will find quite a few horses that were as good as or better at their best than Barbaro was. That begs the question of whether or not we saw Barbaro at his best? There's every chance that he could have shown even more. But strictly based on fact and not speculation, I think he was overrated.

[Mortimer]

Look out.

Secreteriet bashing is next.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Meridian_Artisan

Look out.

Secreteriet bashing is next.

Still missing it DaHoss? Comparing Barbaro to Secretariat.

First of all Meridian, nobody is bashing Barbaro. Saying that I don't think he was as great as the media and his fans made him out to be is not bashing. Bashing would be saying that he wasn't any good. I clearly said that he was a really good horse and that there was a chance the had he continued on, we could have seen him be even better.

I don't think that Barbaro's Derby was as good as Smarty's Rebel, Preakness or Belmont. So I don't agree that he was at least as impressive on the track as Smarty was. And even if I were to go along with you on that, it was still one great performance compared to three for Smarty. Outside of the Derby, Barbaro had a string of rather ordinary performances, IMO. I'm sure part of that was by design. No need to empty the chamber during the prelims. But part of what separates the stars from the superstars is even when they aren't emptying the chamber, they still put in superstar efforts. Smarty's Rebel, Secretariat's Gotham, Sunday Silence's SA Derby, for example.

[Mortimer]

I was only kidding.


About Secreteriet.








Tardy Jones is another matter.

He was good...but people crank him up above his accomplishments.

He was no Bernardini.

[tiggerv]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't think that Barbaro's Derby was as good as Smarty's Rebel, Preakness or Belmont. So I don't agree that he was at least as impressive on the track as Smarty was. And even if I were to go along with you on that, it was still one great performance compared to three for Smarty. Outside of the Derby, Barbaro had a string of rather ordinary performances, IMO. I'm sure part of that was by design. No need to empty the chamber during the prelims. But part of what separates the stars from the superstars is even when they aren't emptying the chamber, they still put in superstar efforts. Smarty's Rebel, Secretariat's Gotham, Sunday Silence's SA Derby, for example.

Wow. While I can appreciate the view that Barbaro is thought of too highly by some because of his story and the fact that we didn't get to see his flaws the rest of that is nonsense. If you think that Barbaro's Laurel Futurity was ordinary you are absolutely nuts.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Obviously Meridian's post was in jest. It's pointless to argue this because we just have differing opinions. But Barbaro was arguably a better turf horse than dirt. His Laurel Futurity was a huge performance. For a horse who is possibly better on another surface to win the Holy Bull, Florida Derby and run the moster race he did in the Kentucky Derby says something about his quality.

This is sort of off topic but I have been meaning to ask you this. Where would you rate Holy Bull on your list? I mean he put on numerous superstar efforts.

Holy Bull was a great horse. On accomplishments + ability, I would have to rate him top five. Understand something. I KNOW that my list is more subjective than objective. I base it more on the talent that I think that I saw than on what they actually accomplished. For that fact, I have absolutely no problem with anyone that ranks Barbaro that high. But I think when we get to being more objective than subjective, we'd realize that my list would have to change....and so would a lot of other people's.