Afleet Alex

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Lots of horses need to have good showings in their final preps to qualify for the Derby. Smarty had a brilliant 3YO career, I don't think that can be argued. Charismatic - as great as he was - was running in claiming races early in 1999. I think there's a pretty clear distinction betwixt the two.

They had not figured Charismatic out yet, he did run in 2 Graded Stakes before the Lexington Stakes. I liked all three, but to declare one had a better season than the others, is revisionist history...

[slotdirt]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

They had not figured Charismatic out yet, he did run in 2 Graded Stakes before the Lexington Stakes. I liked all three, but to declare one had a better season than the others, is revisionist history...

Do you really think it was? I guess we can look at the competition in the various seasons in which they ran. Some of the best horses Charismatic beat in his Derby year were Lemon Drop Kid, Menifee, Cat Thief, Prime Timber, and Stephen Got Even, to name a few. Meanwhile, Smarty beat Castledale, Rock Hard Ten, Lion Heart, Limehouse, Borrego, Eddington, and Pollard's Vision, not to mention Birdstone and others.

Based on that, I'd still go with Smarty - and I'm not sure it's even that close. Charismatic was a wonderful animal and a great story, but certainly not in the same league as Smarty Jones.

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Do you really think it was? I guess we can look at the competition in the various seasons in which they ran. Some of the best horses Charismatic beat in his Derby year were Lemon Drop Kid, Menifee, Cat Thief, Prime Timber, and Stephen Got Even, to name a few. Meanwhile, Smarty beat Castledale, Rock Hard Ten, Lion Heart, Limehouse, Borrego, Eddington, and Pollard's Vision, not to mention Birdstone and others.

Based on that, I'd still go with Smarty - and I'm not sure it's even that close. Charismatic was a wonderful animal and a great story, but certainly not in the same league as Smarty Jones.

Okay, now these statements are in the same league as something Rockhead would say:

Let's see:
LDK-Won the Belmont, Travers, and a bunch of stakes his 4yo year
Menifee-Won the Blue Grass and Haskell, then retired
Cat Thief-Breeders Cup Classic Winner, also won one of the Strub
Prime Timber-I believe was hurt and retired after the Derby
General Challenge-Won the Pacific Classic as a 3yo and the Big Cap

Geez, Slot are you done with me blitzkrieging that theory? Really, this is revisionist history to say that AA and SJ were so much better, just look at the facts.

[slotdirt]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

Okay, now these statements are in the same league as something Rockhead would say:

Let's see:
LDK-Won the Belmont, Travers, and a bunch of stakes his 4yo year
Menifee-Won the Blue Grass and Haskell, then retired
Cat Thief-Breeders Cup Classic Winner, also won one of the Strub
Prime Timber-I believe was hurt and retired after the Derby
General Challenge-Won the Pacific Classic as a 3yo and the Big Cap

Geez, Slot are you done with me blitzkrieging that theory? Really, this is revisionist history to say that AA and SJ were so much better, just look at the facts.

Come on, Mace, I wasn't saying that those guys weren't great horses, but I much prefer the exploits of Rock Hard Ten, Eddington, and Castledale, that's all I'm saying. No need to go the blockheadd route with me.

I think the bottom line for me is that of the two horses I saw with my own two eyes - Smarty was the better racehorse.

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Come on, Mace, I wasn't saying that those guys weren't great horses, but I much prefer the exploits of Rock Hard Ten, Eddington, and Castledale, that's all I'm saying. No need to go the blockheadd route with me.

I think the bottom line for me is that of the two horses I saw with my own two eyes - Smarty was the better racehorse.

Okay, I'll leave the nitwit out of it, I shouldn't have said that...

I would say that Charismatic faced better competition and he would have won the Triple Crown, had he not broken down. SJ ran a monster Belmont, but he still lost racing, Charismatic lost because of injury, don't forget he was up on a hot pace as well.

I did not see Smarty race in person, but I saw Charismatic twice, his Lexington Stakes victory was very impressive....

Originally Posted by Pointg5

Okay, I'll leave the nitwit out of it, I shouldn't have said that...

I would say that Charismatic faced better competition and he would have won the Triple Crown, had he not broken down. SJ ran a monster Belmont, but he still lost racing, Charismatic lost because of injury, don't forget he was up on a hot pace as well.

I did not see Smarty race in person, but I saw Charismatic twice, his Lexington Stakes victory was very impressive....

TCharismatic was already a beaten horse before the injury occured.

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by eurobounce

TCharismatic was already a beaten horse before the injury occured.

Really, he lost the race on the turn for home?
That's where I heard the injury happened...

There are so many things to consider here. First off Alex was a very very good horse. But also keep in mind that he was running in the MRLS year. The competition was diluted to say the least. But he still won and he looked good doing it.

In my opinion, The Breeders Cup is bad for racing when you look at older horses. Also too much emphasis is put on a Breeders Cup win for older horses. This is why we only see the best older horses racing 5 times a year. Without the Breeders Cup we would see more and more older horses running earlier in the year.

Horse of the Year is a joke of an award. I have been sour on the award ever since Favorite Trick won the award.

IMO Alex wouldnt have even come close to St Liam in the Classic. In fact, I dont think he would have been Flower Alley. I would even go as far as saying that 3 year olds should not be running against older horses.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by eurobounce

There are so many things to consider here. First off Alex was a very very good horse. But also keep in mind that he was running in the MRLS year. The competition was diluted to say the least. But he still won and he looked good doing it.

In my opinion, The Breeders Cup is bad for racing when you look at older horses. Also too much emphasis is put on a Breeders Cup win for older horses. This is why we only see the best older horses racing 5 times a year. Without the Breeders Cup we would see more and more older horses running earlier in the year.

Horse of the Year is a joke of an award. I have been sour on the award ever since Favorite Trick won the award.

IMO Alex wouldnt have even come close to St Liam in the Classic. In fact, I dont think he would have been Flower Alley. I would even go as far as saying that 3 year olds should not be running against older horses.

Afleet Alex was a much better horse than Flower Alley. They weren't even in the same league. AA was amazing. Did you not see the time of the work off of that huge layoff just before they officially retired him? By God, that horse could run. There is no doubt in my mind that AA would have won the BC Classic had he run. He would have ran right by those two because Ritchey and Jeremy finally figured the horse out. If they would have figured out the horse one race sooner, we would be looking at a TC winner.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

Afleet Alex was a much better horse than Flower Alley. They weren't even in the same league. AA was amazing. Did you not see the time of the work off of that huge layoff just before they officially retired him? By God, that horse could run. There is no doubt in my mind that AA would have won the BC Classic had he run. He would have ran right by those two because Ritchey and Jeremy finally figured the horse out.

I don't agree, Jessica. TIME in a work means little... it's HOW the horse worked. I don't think AA would have come close to St. Liam.

[slotdirt]

St. Liam was so obviously a dog because he managed to only lose to Ghostzapper - another obvious nag - by a neck in the Clark in 2004.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

St. Liam was so obviously a dog because he managed to only lose to Ghostzapper - another obvious nag - by a neck in the Clark in 2004.

St. Liam was by far from being a nag. St. Liam was awesome. This is an invalid arguement because Commentator, as well as others, also beat St. Liam. Also, St. Liam's performance against GZ that day was not as good as it seems. GZ was in the deepest part of the track, and as far as ability goes, St. Liam didn't even come close to GZ. No horse that I have ever seen live had GZ's talent, with maybe the exception of a few who are currently running. We'll find out about them when their careers are over.

Afleet Alex also had a lot more talent than some of you realize. He was a darn good horse that had the best kick I have ever seen. He looked like he had been shot out of a cannon when he turned it on. The horse was really as good as his times showed in the Arkansas Derby and the Mountain Valley Stakes. They were for real, and the horse was fast. He proved it in the last quarter of the Belmont Stakes after a grueling TC campaign, and after almost being knocked off his feet in the Preakness three weeks before. Not many horses could have won the Belmont under those circumstances.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

I don't agree, Jessica. TIME in a work means little... it's HOW the horse worked. I don't think AA would have come close to St. Liam.

Exactly, the horse worked phenomenally off of that layoff. Time does matter coupled with the horse's precociousness, power, and movement. Speed is everything in this game. It was too fast and too good-looking. Something was bound to go wrong, and it did. It was sort of like Bellamy Road's Travers performance. It was too much too soon. AA would have ran by St. Liam. I've said that many times before and that is honestly my opinion.