Trying To Make Money On Big Brown Today...

[Gander]

You also have to take a look at just how much Big Brown is beating his competition by, which I agree 100% is very weak.
He was pulled up in the Belmont and he barely got up to win the Haskell against a bunch of goats. But before that he won the KY Derby and the Florida Derby by the easiest of margins from terrible posts which put him at a disadvantage right from the get go. He won the Preakness by a ton. He won his maiden debut on the grass by a mile. Thats got to count for something and you have to also consider his most impressive races, which I just mentioned were all won under close to hand rides with very little urging. His margins of victory could have been even more.

The horses he beat were pretty awful, but realistically not that much worse than the 3 year olds that were running the year Giacomo and Afleet Alex won.

And I'd take a few of the 3 year olds Big Brown crushed over Barcola.

[RollerDoc]

I was thinking that when this thread dies down, I should start a new one titled:

WHO WAS BETTER.....SECRETARIAT or BIG BROWN?

But based on this crowd, I probably shouldn't.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by RollerDoc

I was thinking that when this thread dies down, I should start a new one titled:

WHO WAS BETTER.....SECRETARIAT or BIG BROWN?

But based on this crowd, I probably shouldn't.

You have heard of Secretariat??? Thats a good start!

[RollerDoc]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

You have heard of Secretariat??? Thats a good start!

I think he won the Preakness back in the 70s right?

[Dunbar]

I like Zito's summary.

From today's DRF:

Originally Posted by DRF

Zito also said he was surprised to read some of the comments made by trainer Rick Dutrow regarding Curlin following Big Brown's hard-fought victory over Coal Play in the Haskell.

"Curlin is the Horse of the Year, so when Rick makes those statements, I'm thinking maybe he should get the phone number of Tony Soprano's psychologist," Zito said with a smile. "Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Big Brown. But Rick still needs to get that phone number."

--Dunbar

[Danzig]

there's a reason i said he's ordinary. every year we have a three year old champ, every year said champ does a couple of things that are noteworthy. once in a while you have a horse that does so many things so extraordinarily, that years later he's still spoken of with awe and reverence.
big brown isn't extraordinary. he's going to be the top 3 yo, for good reason. but he's not extraordinary.

look at it this way-you have above average, average, and below average horses. three categories, so conceivably a third of all horses are above average, a third below, and a third in the middle. i'd put him in the middle. maybe the upper middle, but the middle all the same. in other words, average. ordinary. not ordinary as in a claimer, ordinary when you stack him up to others who have raced at this level in years past.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Danzig

there's a reason i said he's ordinary. every year we have a three year old champ, every year said champ does a couple of things that are noteworthy. once in a while you have a horse that does so many things so extraordinarily, that years later he's still spoken of with awe and reverence.
big brown isn't extraordinary. he's going to be the top 3 yo, for good reason. but he's not extraordinary.

look at it this way-you have above average, average, and below average horses. three categories, so conceivably a third of all horses are above average, a third below, and a third in the middle. i'd put him in the middle. maybe the upper middle, but the middle all the same. in other words, average. ordinary. not ordinary as in a claimer, ordinary when you stack him up to others who have raced at this level in years past.

In other words, Big Brown is an ordinary very good horse? I guess I'd agree with that. Affirmed was an ordinary horse, too. He was an ordinary great horse. If we look at Sniper's 'elite of elite' list, we could probably say that Affirmed is a below average horse. Use of "ordinary" can be okay, depending on who we are comparing to.

Who are we stacking Big Brown up against? All of the 400+ horses nominated to the Triple Crown in recent years? I'm sure you'd agree he is in the top third of those horses. Are you comparing Big Brown to the actual triple crown runners of the past 10 years? I'd still put him well into the top third. I find it hard to believe that you wouldn't, too. Now if we are comparing Big Brown to other recent horses who were in the top 2 or 3 of their respective generations, I can at least see how you might use the words "ordinary" or "average".

I took issue with your original post, "big brown wouldn't be any faster if mother theresa owned him and the pope rode him. he's an ordinary horse, but he's better than his peers. that doesn't make him great.", because it wasn't clear to me that you were comparing him to anything but all other horses. If you meant he's an ordinary top 3-yr-old, I'd agree at this point. Your point that most top 3-yr-olds have done something that's considered noteworthy is right on.

--Dunbar