Bernardini IS

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by pgardn

1.MOver yes. Out of the gate to get position, not even close with Smarty.
2.bigger yes, but what does that have to do with the price of walnuts?
3.faster NOOOOOO. NO flippin way.
4.better built yes, but what does that have to do with the price of walnuts?
5.more talented. No way to tell, he has not been tested like Smarty. Three grueling triple crown races against a much better 3 yo old group. Talent includes heart. Again not Bernardinis fault.

So basically because you like how the horse looks, therefore he is better.

Bonzo post. There have been quite a few horses that looked like crap that were great runners. Too much into the visuals, forget performance.

I'm into the way that both horses moved and how both horses performed on the track. You can tell the quality of the horse by watching them move and run in races. IMO, Bernardini was definitely better. IMO, Smarty Jones doesn't even compare to Bernardini. In fact, I also think that Barbaro, Afleet Alex, and Point Given were better horses than Smarty Jones. And I think that Bernardini could have beaten all of them, although Point Given may could have given him a run for his money. Point Given was also another very talented animal.

This is really pointless.

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

I'm into the way that both horses moved and how both horses performed on the track. You can tell the quality of the horse by watching them move and run in races. IMO, Bernardini was definitely better. IMO, Smarty Jones doesn't even compare to Bernardini. In fact, I also think that Barbaro, Afleet Alex, and Point Given were better horses than Smarty Jones. And I think that Bernardini could have beaten all of them, although Point Given may could have given him a run for his money. Point Given was also another very talented animal.

This is really pointless.

Again into the looks. By your posts only Point Given could possibly be given the title. Point Given was a horribly unattentive horse in his early 3's. His derby was bad, showed his lack a complete lack of why he is on the track. His Preakness was a again sloppy, as he enjoyed looking at the crowd while winning. His Belmont was awesome. They got him to understand what he was supposed to do. And then his races after that were all very professional. So of course because he was big, bred well you think he moved well. Watch the Derby and the Preakness again and you will see how raw PG was at that time.

We are clearly wearing diff lenses and put emphasis on a very different part of the sport. I dont give a flying flip about how pretty a coat, or how well muscled a horse is until he has to show guts. Thats the difference here.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Again into the looks. By your posts only Point Given could possibly be given the title. Point Given was a horribly unattentive horse in his early 3's. His derby was bad, showed his lack a complete lack of why he is on the track. His Preakness was a again sloppy, as he enjoyed looking at the crowd while winning. His Belmont was awesome. They got him to understand what he was supposed to do. And then his races after that were all very professional. So of course because he was big, bred well you think he moved well. Watch the Derby and the Preakness again and you will see how raw PG was at that time.

We are clearly wearing diff lenses and put emphasis on a very different part of the sport. I dont give a flying flip about how pretty a coat, or how well muscled a horse is until he has to show guts. Thats the difference here.

I never said that PG moved well. I said that he was a better horse than Smarty Jones. It is all about how the horses perform on the racetrack. That is why I don't understand how people can't recognize how great of a horse Bernardini is. His performances are flawless.

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

I never said that PG moved well. I said that he was a better horse than Smarty Jones. It is all about how the horses perform on the racetrack. That is why I don't understand how people can't recognize how great of a horse Bernardini is. His performances are flawless.

Yes they are. Flawless. The horse looks like the real deal. But I personally have another criteria for greatness, not just talented. I hope he gets his chance to show it. You say he is Tiger Woods. I say he has not faced enough good competition to be recognized as such.

Run him at 4. Please. Otherwise. Larry Holmes. For those of you that used to be, or are still into boxing. A great boxer. But never put up as the close to the best. Because he boxed at the wrong time. Again not Larry/horses fault. And there is no way I put the horses you mentioned that might be in the BCC at the same talent level as Congaree, Pleasantly Perfect, and Megs. No way. All of these horses were warriors and proved so numerous times.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Yes they are. Flawless. The horse looks like the real deal. But I personally have another criteria for greatness, not just talented. I hope he gets his chance to show it. You say he is Tiger Woods. I say he has not faced enough good competition to be recognized as such.

Run him at 4. Please. Otherwise. Larry Holmes. For those of you that used to be, or are still into boxing. A great boxer. But never put up as the close to the best. Because he boxed at the wrong time. Again not Larry/horses fault. And there is no way I put the horses you mentioned that might be in the BCC at the same talent level as Congaree, Pleasantly Perfect, and Megs. No way. All of these horses were warriors and proved so numerous times.

Pleasantly Perfect made 17 starts over 3 campaigns. Not exactly a warrior schedule.

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Pleasantly Perfect made 17 starts over 3 campaigns. Not exactly a warrior schedule.

And look at the level of those races and the competion. He battled the best, even when he was too old to stay with them. Bernardini wont even run at 4.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

And look at the level of those races and the competion. He battled the best, even when he was too old to stay with them. Bernardini wont even run at 4.

True and true

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

I'm into the way that both horses moved and how both horses performed on the track. You can tell the quality of the horse by watching them move and run in races. IMO, Bernardini was definitely better. IMO, Smarty Jones doesn't even compare to Bernardini. In fact, I also think that Barbaro, Afleet Alex, and Point Given were better horses than Smarty Jones. And I think that Bernardini could have beaten all of them, although Point Given may could have given him a run for his money. Point Given was also another very talented animal.

This is really pointless.

it is pointless, which is why i wonder at the exercise. each horse was/is very good, each had or has his strong points. whether it be running up an unbeaten streak, winning on two surfaces, running in and winning 12f races, or beating older horses....but to say bernardini is 'definitely' better is an exercise in futility, as it can't be proven. altho you might take all those others over smarty, i'm sure many could make an argument that they would take smarty over all the others! or point given...or barbaro for that matter.

Originally Posted by Danzig188

it is pointless, which is why i wonder at the exercise. each horse was/is very good, each had or has his strong points. whether it be running up an unbeaten streak, winning on two surfaces, running in and winning 12f races, or beating older horses....but to say bernardini is 'definitely' better is an exercise in futility, as it can't be proven. altho you might take all those others over smarty, i'm sure many could make an argument that they would take smarty over all the others! or point given...or barbaro for that matter.

Don't forget Dollar Bill.

[Danzig]

poor bill. always a hard luck story....but we won't speak ill of the dead.

funny tho, isn't it. invasor beats sun king (but then, doesn't everyone?) and anyone who praises invasors runs this year gets shot down with the sun king sucks line.
lava man, same thing. you try to talk him up, and get shot down over who he's beaten.

but bernie, to suggest that beating wanderin boy does not a hall of famer make, and it's blasphemy and the search for stones to throw is on.

bern gets a high figure, wonderful. anyone else--ah, beyer tinkering with #'s again. it's hilarious.