Spectacular Bid VS Seattle Slew

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

You do realize that Dr. Patches was a VERY talented horse? He had previously won an allowance at Saratoga ( as did Slew ) that got a very similar, if not better, fig. Plus. Patches had something Slew was about to get, Angel Cordero.

Seattle Slew, until the Marlboro Cup, was ridden by Jean Cruget. Now, Ron Franklin did Bid no favors, but Cruget was one of the worst ever. Winning the TC, much less nine or ten straight races, with Cruget is akin to walking across the Grand Canyon on a tightrope with PG1985 on your shoulders.

By the way, using the Swaps as any kind of example of Slew's talents ( and you're right, he was relatively " slow " as a 3YO ) is wildly unfair....and you know that. At least base your argument on relevent races.

I know Dr. Patches was very good. You don't run down a loose on the lead Seattle Slew as a 4-year-old if you're anything short of being very good.

The Swaps was the one and only time in Seattle Slew's career where he was rated off of the lead ... perhaps it doesn't point to him being a one-dimensional speed horse... and maybe he would have put in the same non-effort had he not been rated.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I know Dr. Patches was very good. You don't run down a loose on the lead Seattle Slew as a 4-year-old if you're anything short of being very good.

The Swaps was the one and only time in Seattle Slew's career where he was rated off of the lead ... perhaps it doesn't point to him being a one-dimensional speed horse... and maybe he would have put in the same non-effort had he not been rated.

I get what you're saying about him, theoretically, failing badly the one time he didn't have the early lead, but you have to take a lot of other factors into account, and that race ( the Swaps ) simply can't be used as a fair barometer.

The thing is, he's not your run-of-the-mill speed horse that needs everything his own way. He showed pretty definitively in the Jockey Club Gold Cup that he is fast enough to outrun pretty much anyone while also being able to carry that speed a very long way. You just don't see horses like that. Hell, as great as Dr. Fager was, and there is no doubt he is on the very short list of greatest horses ever, he got trounced at 1 1/4 when severely pressured by a rabbit. Slew dusted off two, at 1 1/2 miles, when one of them was also a Triple Crown winner, and stilled missed by a slim nose to a damn good horse in Exceller. He was not your ordinary need the lead type and shouldn't be suggested as such.

[smartbid09]

Don't know which horse was better but know which horse I would have rather owned....... SEATTLE SLEW!

[blackthroatedwind]

Another poster on my ever growing ignore list. I feel like The Fat Man.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by smartbid09

Don't know which horse was better but know which horse I would have rather owned....... SEATTLE SLEW!

Obviously.

[smartbid09]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Obviously.

lol

Just kidding around

[smartbid09]

Getting back to the point of this post - I would say that spectacular bid was a better horse. Let's face it. He was. Slew was very talented and I love him to death. I probably care for slew more than the bid but at the end of the day The Bid at 4 would not lose to the great Seattle Slew.

JMO

[freddymo]

Nice to read about truly great horses. Much more interesting then reading about horses that have manicured campaigns so they dont chip a nail.

[Linny]

To use what is clearly the worst race (by far) of a great horse's life as representative is pointless. The Swaps was a circus and the trainer knew it. The Taylors wanted to make Slew a petting zoo animal and tour the county with him etc. He was barely trained for the Swaps and was exhausted.
No less than Bill Shoemaker (a man with a clock in his head) was simply mystified by what Slew did in the Gold Cup. Turning for home Shoe knew how fast Slew was going and figured he'd win on Exceller by the largest margin ever in the Gold Cup. That he had to work to get Slew and barely did was testament to an amazing horse.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I get what you're saying about him, theoretically, failing badly the one time he didn't have the early lead, but you have to take a lot of other factors into account, and that race ( the Swaps ) simply can't be used as a fair barometer.

The thing is, he's not your run-of-the-mill speed horse that needs everything his own way. He showed pretty definitively in the Jockey Club Gold Cup that he is fast enough to outrun pretty much anyone while also being able to carry that speed a very long way. You just don't see horses like that. Hell, as great as Dr. Fager was, and there is no doubt he is on the very short list of greatest horses ever, he got trounced at 1 1/4 when severely pressured by a rabbit. Slew dusted off two, at 1 1/2 miles, when one of them was also a Triple Crown winner, and stilled missed by a slim nose to a damn good horse in Exceller. He was not your ordinary need the lead type and shouldn't be suggested as such.

Do you know if the trainer change - Going from Turner to Peterson - was viewed as a big-time positive trainer switch?

I thought Cruget rode miserable races in the Ky Derby and Swaps - however, there's only so much a rider can do to get in the way of a natural speed horse. The Billy Turner I remember was a guy who could be easily moved up on - but that's 20+ years later.

Had Seattle Slew been born a year earlier into the Bold Forbes-Honest Pleasure crop instead of the dog biscuit parade - I think he would have found two other 3yo's who would have made things miserable for him. Bold Forbes appears to be clear-cut faster than Seattle Slew at age 3 all the way around - both on pace and final time .. and he had to deal with good speed horses like Honest Pleasure.



I think if you put Seattle Slew in '76 and Bold Forbes in '77 ... obviously Bold Forbes win the triple crown almost effortlessly ... and good luck to a lightly raced Seattle Slew/Jean Cruget/Billy Turner in dealing with Honest Pleasure.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Do you know if the trainer change - Going from Turner to Peterson - was viewed as a big-time positive trainer switch?

I thought Cruget rode miserable races in the Ky Derby and Swaps - however, there's only so much a rider can do to get in the way of a natural speed horse. The Billy Turner I remember was a guy who could be easily moved up on - but that's 20+ years later.

Had Seattle Slew been born a year earlier into the Bold Forbes-Honest Pleasure crop instead of the dog biscuit parade - I think he would have found two other 3yo's who would have made things miserable for him. Bold Forbes appears to be clear-cut faster than Seattle Slew at age 3 all the way around - both on pace and final time .. and he had to deal with good speed horses like Honest Pleasure.



I think if you put Seattle Slew in '76 and Bold Forbes in '77 ... obviously Bold Forbes win the triple crown almost effortlessly ... and good luck to a lightly raced Seattle Slew/Jean Cruget/Billy Turner in dealing with Honest Pleasure.

I don't have an opinion on Peterson, but have a very high one ( still ) about Billy Turner. He did a pretty good job with Czaravich and Big John Taylor around the time Slew was running.

Slew's crop was woeful ( though Silver Series, who Slew didn't face, was a solid second to Forego in the Woodward ), no doubt, and Honest Pleasure was a monster, but his TC races were major disappointments, especially as they relate to his Florida races, which were dazzling. Obviously he ran pretty well in the Travers ( though he was lone speed on a gold rail day ) and the Marlboro ( but, don't forget, Father Hogan was only about a length behind him that day ).

Bold Forbes is probably a bigger discussion, and I'm not having it here, but I will say that I was at Aqueduct when he won the Wood Memorial.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

I was kind of bummed that I've never seen the video of the '76 Preakness.

From what I've read - some felt Bold Forbes stole the Derby (by running the first quarter of 10f race in 22.40?) and they critisized Baeza for letting him go.

So, in the Preakness, Baeza supposedly guns Honest Pleasure from the gate and they duel head-to-head for a quarter or more - before Bold Forbes gets a little seperation. The first 6f of the Preakness went in 1:09 flat - which was faster than the 6f track record at the time - and both horses get fried. Honest Pleasure more-so.

I believe Ragozin called Bold Forbes the fastest 2yo sprinter ever in his book - pretty amazing that such a precocious speed ball could come from Purto Rico and have enough stamina to win the Derby and Belmont. It would have been fun to see him and Slew hook up in a duel. The numbers (3yo VS 3yo) give Slew virtually no chance of winning that.

[blackthroatedwind]

Bold Forbes ran an amazing race that day to finish third, I think it's safe to say the second finisher, Johnny Campo's Play the Red, was inferior as a racehorse ( by a quarter mile or so ). Elocutionist got an amazing trip but he was pretty good.

And Bold Forbes won the Belmont three weeks later. Absolutely amazing.

[alysheba4]

looking at the swaps race......1:33 and change, 1:58 and 3. that is HUGE.

[Revidere]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Bold Forbes ran an amazing race that day to finish third, I think it's safe to say the second finisher, Johnny Campo's Play the Red, was inferior as a racehorse ( by a quarter mile or so ). Elocutionist got an amazing trip but he was pretty good.

And Bold Forbes won the Belmont three weeks later. Absolutely amazing.

Bold Forbes was truly an underrated colt. His Bay Shore in 1:20 3/5 and Wood Memorial in which he won eased up (A stakes record for 12 years and 2/5 off Riva Ridge's track record) were spectacular. His Kentucky Derby at the time was the fastest wire to wire until Spend A Buck won it on a highway and fifth fastest of all time. His Preakness may have been even better in defeat. He tore off 3/4 of his foot leaving the gate and still pan fried Honest Pleasure in 1:09 and was only beaten 4 lengths. To come back and win the Belmont after all the work they did on him was, as Andy said, amazing.

He was a nervous little horse who could really run. While Cordero thought Seattle Slew was the better horse, he said there were none braver than Bold Forbes. To me he was the forgotten horse of the 70's.