Defining a "GREAT" horse

[Scurlogue Champ]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

When the subject is American racing ... yes ... it's quite evident that the most talented horses are trained for the dirt ... and ...

... and only when they disappoint there ... are they tried on the lawn.

As far as "turf is where most all champions run" ... that's patent nonsense ... since 7 of the 10 Eclipse Awards are given to horses which race on dirt ... and I'm being generous by considering jumpers to be turf horses.

You're not one of those Euroweenies .. are you?

I tell you what, if you consider the Eclipse awards the only type of organization that names "champions," then you can kiss my ass.

Let's round up all the awards from every country that has racing, and then see how many "champions" run exclusively on the turf versus our 7 Eclipse awards.

When I said "turf is where most all champions run," I was right.

It is probably 100+ to 7.

Originally Posted by moodwalker

I tell you what, if you consider the Eclipse awards the only type of organization that names "champions," then you can kiss my ass.

Let's round up all the awards from every country that has racing, and then see how many "champions" run exclusively on the turf versus our 7 Eclipse awards.

When I said "turf is where most all champions run," I was right.

It is probably 100+ to 7.

Not if you include NASCAR and greyhound racing ... where does that leave your precious turf horses?

I think turf horses should be held is higher regard that dirt horses. Dirt horses have many more options in the US than do grass horses. Grass horses usually face larger fields and they always have a blanket finish. In addition, US turfers get bombarded with Europeans. US Dirt horses dont have to worry about that. I think a turf horse who consistently performs at the top is more of a great horse than a horse that raced on selective tracks with selective races.