How do you.....

High performance and longevity.

[Bigsmc]

Sustained high performance and longevity.

[SentToStud]

Six Grade 1 wins plus two Eclipse Awards.

[Scav]

Me, when i am in a good mood

[blackthroatedwind]

It also helps to overcome adversity at a very high level.....like Seattle Slew in the Jockey Club Gold Cup and Ghostzapper when he was carried out 15 paths by Saint Liam in the Woodward.

The ability to win at a very high level when things don't go your own way.

[TheSpyder]

My sex life when I was about one half of my current age.

[IrishofNDMan]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

It also helps to overcome adversity at a very high level.....like Seattle Slew in the Jockey Club Gold Cup and Ghostzapper when he was carried out 15 paths by Saint Liam in the Woodward.

The ability to win at a very high level when things don't go your own way.

Afleet Alex as well??

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by IrishofNDMan

Afleet Alex as well??

He never ran a fast race.

[Hickory Hill Hoff]

How bout this MMSC???

[robfla]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

It also helps to overcome adversity at a very high level....
The ability to win at a very high level when things don't go your own way.

like Invasor in the Whitney - way too close to a fast pace, crazy middle move and still wins.



edit: lets not forget his Donn race... where is Jara now??

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by robfla

like Invasor in the Whitney - way too close to a fast pace, crazy middle move and still wins.

He was a lot faster than Afleet Alex but not as fast as the real greats of the past. To me he was pretty much as good as Cigar...though Cigar was a little faster on his best days.

Here's the problem as I see it, to many people who haven't followed the game for that long, and don't know the history, these horses are special....because relative to what they've seen they are, in fact, special. Now, in the short term there's nothing specifically wrong with that, but in relation to the true greats these horses are also rans. That doesn't mean they aren't very good horses, but it also doesn't put them in the rarified air of the true greats, and if you are going to attach the word " great " to a horse it is competing with history....and not just the personal history of the judger.

[robfla]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

He was a lot faster than Afleet Alex but not as fast as the real greats of the past. To me he was pretty much as good as Cigar...though Cigar was a little faster on his best days.

Here's the problem as I see it, to many people who haven't followed the game for that long, and don't know the history, these horses are special....because relative to what they've seen they are, in fact, special. Now, in the short term there's nothing specifically wrong with that, but in relation to the true greats these horses are also rans. That doesn't mean they aren't very good horses, but it also doesn't put them in the rarified air of the true greats, and if you are going to attach the word " great " to a horse it is competing with history....and not just the personal history of the judger.

in today's state of racing we will never have another " great " horse.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

He was a lot faster than Afleet Alex but not as fast as the real greats of the past. To me he was pretty much as good as Cigar...though Cigar was a little faster on his best days.

Here's the problem as I see it, to many people who haven't followed the game for that long, and don't know the history, these horses are special....because relative to what they've seen they are, in fact, special. Now, in the short term there's nothing specifically wrong with that, but in relation to the true greats these horses are also rans. That doesn't mean they aren't very good horses, but it also doesn't put them in the rarified air of the true greats, and if you are going to attach the word " great " to a horse it is competing with history....and not just the personal history of the judger.

Sucks that Invasor's legacy will always be lessened because his fastest race was a race in which no Beyer was published and everyone is always going to use the lack of a 120+ Beyer against him. He was a very good horse, too bad we didn't get to see him finish the year and possibly duplicate that World Cup performance.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Here's the problem as I see it, to many people who haven't followed the game for that long, and don't know the history, these horses are special....because relative to what they've seen they are, in fact, special. Now, in the short term there's nothing specifically wrong with that, but in relation to the true greats these horses are also rans. That doesn't mean they aren't very good horses, but it also doesn't put them in the rarified air of the true greats, and if you are going to attach the word " great " to a horse it is competing with history....and not just the personal history of the judger.

"Most people have difficulty in defining what was truly great, and what they simply have heard of." - Memoirs of a Geisha

[my miss storm cat]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Here's the problem as I see it, to many people who haven't followed the game for that long, and don't know the history, these horses are special....because relative to what they've seen they are, in fact, special. Now, in the short term there's nothing specifically wrong with that, but in relation to the true greats these horses are also rans. That doesn't mean they aren't very good horses, but it also doesn't put them in the rarified air of the true greats, and if you are going to attach the word " great " to a horse it is competing with history....and not just the personal history of the judger.

This is a really good point but I want to ask something and I'll use king's Silent Witness thought as an example....

He and I have had that discussion quite a few times... horses like Silent Witness and Makybe Diva and whether or not they were greats.

I realize I'm a newer fan and so my frame of reference is a lot different, but don't the older fans also do this... consider the horses who first excited them as great?

I mean on King's tagline for example.....I'm assuming he's saying King Glorious and Java Gold were great (?). I'm not saying they were or weren't... I have no idea.

Silent Witness won 18 races... 18 - 3 - 2 out of 29. Went to Japan a couple of times, won the Sprinters Stakes over there, in his career repeatedly beat G1 winners.

So for someone who came into the game when he was undefeated and just phenomenal, for someone who didn't know any of the history of the sport, he defined greatness and that's why.

I can understand the other side though, the people who say he beat the same horses over and over.

My problem with that is that not everyone realizes just how good these other horses were. Cape of Good Hope for example.

Do the older fans do this? I'm not trying to be cute, I really want to know.

Does history make a great horse greater?

The great horses of the past..... if one were to look at who they beat, whether or not they remained in one area, etc. would they still measure up in general or have they become part of folklore?

It seems like no present day horse ever measures up to the past and I'm trying to figure out if this is valid or not.

I realize it probably is, but.....

[VOL JACK]

Originally Posted by robfla

like Invasor in the Whitney - way too close to a fast pace, crazy middle move and still wins.



edit: lets not forget his Donn race... where is Jara now??

I really got the feeling that Invasor was just getting real good and could've been great. He was also the type that only ran as fast as necessary to win.
However, we could speculate all night about horses that were injured before thier prime.


As for Jarhead Jara, he is plucking oranges somewhere near Gulfstream.

[smuthg]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

It also helps to overcome adversity at a very high level.....like Seattle Slew in the Jockey Club Gold Cup and Ghostzapper when he was carried out 15 paths by Saint Liam in the Woodward.

The ability to win at a very high level when things don't go your own way.

Was Ouija Board "Great"? What about Makybe Diva?

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by smuthg

Was Ouija Board "Great"? What about Makybe Diva?

Pride was better.

[horseofcourse]

1. Curlin...he simply did more. Ran all 3 TC races and won the Classic. HIs Preakness was great and his last two races were great.

2. Bernardini...skipped the Belmont to focus on the Travers...whereas Curlin was using the Haskell as more a return race/prep for the fall races.

3. Smarty Jones

4. Afleet Alex

5. Barbaro.

The bottom 3 simply stopped running and the top 2 finished out there 3 year old years very strong. I don't know how you rate horses that simply stop running. Speculating whether they win the BC Classic or what not is all that...speculation. If Curlin/Bernardini also stopped running after the TC I would rank them...

1. Smarty Jones
2. Afleet Alex
3. Barbaro
4. Bernardini
5. Curlin.

I dont' know what the question was or if there were stipulations on how to rank them...