Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I think you are determined to not admit you were wrong IN ANY WAY. What you really should do is temper your specific enthusiam to a realistic level. Bernardini is a fine horse, most likely one of the best hundred or so in the time period you mention. But, his performances on the racetrack completely belie your opinion of him. Saying something is so does not make it so. A horse has only his performances to speak for him.

I have always thought Bernardini was a nice horse. I also thought highly of Invasor and was far from surprised at Saturday's result. They were two evenly matched horses who would probably split decisions fairly evenly if they met a number of times. But, make no mistake, neither has done anything on the track to place them in any kind of elite group.

Horses who were absolutely better? Off the top of my head....Ghostzapper, Holy Bull, Skip Away, Formal Gold, Candy Ride, Tiznow, Easy Goer, Sunday Silence, probably Cigar, AP Indy, Dubai Millenium. But the list of comparable horses is endless...Point Given, Medaglia D'Oro, maybe even Saint Liam, Smarty Jones, Silver Charm, Touch Gold, Lido Palace, Street Cry, Left Bank, Congaree, Will's Way...I'm sure you get the drift.

You feel some sort of connection to Bernardini, which is great, but that doesn't alter his resume. What he is/was is another in a long line of nice horses who has a reasonable resume of success.