Easy Goer Was Better than Sunday Silence

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by smartbid09

Hmm... I get what your saying. And this makes sense to me. I agree that three losses is not as excusable as 2 but still as I say in what I wrote, Easy Goer seems to have lost two thirds of the triple crown with legit reasons. If SS was that much better than Easy Goer explain to me the huge margin of victory by Easy Goer in the Belmont stakes?

If Sunday Silence was so superior how could Easy Goer lick him in the Belmont? And if the answer is "well every horse has an off day" than Easy Goer has a legit excuse to have had an Off day in the bcc.

I just feel, and I'm no expert, like those two triple crown races are 100% excusable... could be wrong. And If you look at the BCC it's not like SS dominated Easy Goer. Easy Goer caught him after the wire... I just don't see how their track record is the basis for rating their greatness'. It seems like we never really got a good chance to see which horse was better based on the conditions of their races when they met.

did you miss where i said many thought easy goer was a new yorker thru and thru? he loved belmont, and relished the surface. he lost to sunday silence everywhere but there.

as for catching a horse after the wire, they don't give awards for that. it means nothing. and if we don't rate a horse based on his track record, what's left??