Worlds Best Horse

[RacingFan1992]

Kind of amazing that 7 of the top 30 horses in Worlds Best Race Horse are dirt.

2) American Pharoah
4) Shared Belief
14) Firing Line
18) California Chrome
22) Prince Bishop (Ire)
24) Dortmund
26) Honor Code

All but one of those is from the U.S. and only two horses in the Grass category were from the U.S.

My prediction is Honor Code wins the Whitney Handicap and goes for the Breeders' Cup where he beats American Pharoah and California Chrome. I think HC will have wings on if he runs a good race at Keeneland. Yes I know this is coming from "the Jackass who said HC was going to win the TC and Travers" Best of Luck to HC.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Honor Code is a great horse, but he has to prove that he can get 10 furlongs against a quality field like what he'll see in the BC Classic.

His Met Mile was amazing, but you still have to have some questions about him...., right?

[Kash$]

Honor Code is a great horse, but he has to prove that he can get 10 furlongs against a quality field like what he'll see in the BC Classic.

His Met Mile was amazing, but you still have to have some questions about him...., right?

IF Honor Code is a great horse then what would you call American Pharoah?Great gets tossed around too much

[RacingFan1992]

IF Honor Code is a great horse then what would you call American Pharoah?Great gets tossed around too much

AP will be yesterdays news when HC gets done with him. lol. Only time will tell.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

IF Honor Code is a great horse then what would you call American Pharoah?Great gets tossed around too much

Well, I guess we need to qualify a great horse.

To me, a great horse is a horse that wins multiple G1 and G2 races. There simply aren't that many that can do that amid thousands and thousands of horses that run every year. They are the 1%. I think if a horse is in the 1% I can consider them great.

I see 2 more levels above "great" however. There is Elite, and then there are the absolutely Best of the Best. Elite horses are such animals as Wise Dan, Curlin, Invasor, Tiznow, etc. And then the Best of the Best you get into Secretariat, Kelso, etc..

I think Honor Code qualifies as a great horse. He may even be able to become elite with some more quality G1 wins, a BC Classic, and likely a bit more.

[Kash$]

Well, I guess we need to qualify a great horse.

To me, a great horse is a horse that wins multiple G1 and G2 races. There simply aren't that many that can do that amid thousands and thousands of horses that run every year. They are the 1%. I think if a horse is in the 1% I can consider them great.

I see 2 more levels above "great" however. There is Elite, and then there are the absolutely Best of the Best. Elite horses are such animals as Wise Dan, Curlin, Invasor, Tiznow, etc. And then the Best of the Best you get into Secretariat, Kelso, etc..

I think Honor Code qualifies as a great horse. He may even be able to become elite with some more quality G1 wins, a BC Classic, and likely a bit more.

HC is a notch below great.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

HC is a notch below great.

He has 5 wins and 2 seconds in 8 career starts.

Among those 5 wins are a G1 and two G2 victories with another Place in a G1 event.

He has defeated Tonalist, Private Zone (twice), Wicked Strong (twice), and BC Classic Champion Bayern.

You really don't consider that a great horse? For most trainers and owners in the business, that is a once in a lifetime thoroughbred.

[Kash$]

He has 5 wins and 2 seconds in 8 career starts.

Among those 5 wins are a G1 and two G2 victories with another Place in a G1 event.

He has defeated Tonalist, Private Zone (twice), Wicked Strong (twice), and BC Classic Champion Bayern.

You really don't consider that a great horse? For most trainers and owners in the business, that is a once in a lifetime thoroughbred.

Bayern,Wicked Strong both winless this year.HC needs one turn mile and a fast pace.Nope dont think hes great.

My question to you..if HC is great then what would AP be considered?

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Bayern,Wicked Strong both winless this year.HC needs one turn mile and a fast pace.Nope dont think hes great.

My question to you..if HC is great then what would AP be considered?

AP is Elite.

He is one of 12 horses in the history of American horse racing to win the Triple Crown and the first in 37 years to complete the feat. That is an Elite horse in my opinion.

Will he be one of the Best of the Best? We shall see as this year rolls on. A couple more G1 victories and a BC Classic win would surely put him in contention for that kind of category I would believe.

Do I think he'll do it? No. But he definitely has a shot if he stays healthy.

[Kash$]

AP is Elite.

He is one of 12 horses in the history of American horse racing to win the Triple Crown and the first in 37 years to complete the feat. That is an Elite horse in my opinion.

Will he be one of the Best of the Best? We shall see as this year rolls on. A couple more G1 victories and a BC Classic win would surely put him in contention for that kind of category I would believe.

Do I think he'll do it? No. But he definitely has a shot if he stays healthy.

Because you have a great career doesnt make you a great horse

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Because you have a great career doesnt make you a great horse

Obviously your qualifications are a bit higher than mine when you are considering a "great" horse.

As I stated earlier, if we are talking about the top 1% of horses, I consider them great without any other needed qualifier.

You have a different measure than mine.

What is your qualification(s) for a great thoroughbred? I'm thinking your great is my elite.

[Some_One]

AP is Elite.

He is one of 12 horses in the history of American horse racing to win the Triple Crown and the first in 37 years to complete the feat. That is an Elite horse in my opinion.

Will he be one of the Best of the Best? We shall see as this year rolls on. A couple more G1 victories and a BC Classic win would surely put him in contention for that kind of category I would believe.

Do I think he'll do it? No. But he definitely has a shot if he stays healthy.

Well you're going to have a bit of the Zenyatta effect where one race will attempt to validate an entire career as AP will be lucky to face more then 5 horses in his next two races combined. So the BC Classic will be his real only test in his career.

[Kash$]

Extraordinary
examples..
Big Red
Frankel
Spectacular Bid
Affirmed,
just to name a few

Great
Sunday Silence
Easy Goer
Seattle Slew
Ruffian
Cigar
Zenyatta
Rachel Alexandra
Risen Star
Manila
just to name a few..

[Kash$]

Well you're going to have a bit of the Zenyatta effect where one race will attempt to validate an entire career as AP will be lucky to face more then 5 horses in his next two races combined. So the BC Classic will be his real only test in his career.

Wait a second,

His only real test will be the BC?..Before the derby this was strong 3 year old crop,all of a suddden the crop is weak because he wins the triple crown..

Have you seen the older division
Califrnia Chrome..lol
Shared Belief is out for the year.
If he wins the Classic what will be the excuse then?

[Kash$]

Well you're going to have a bit of the Zenyatta effect where one race will attempt to validate an entire career as AP will be lucky to face more then 5 horses in his next two races combined. So the BC Classic will be his real only test in his career.

Zenyatta's BC win over the colts didnt validate her career?

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Well you're going to have a bit of the Zenyatta effect where one race will attempt to validate an entire career as AP will be lucky to face more then 5 horses in his next two races combined. So the BC Classic will be his real only test in his career.

Seriously?

The BC Classic would be his "only" test in his career?

The complete flopping on AP and his accomplishment this year is becoming annoying to be honest. And I'm far from being an AP Homer much less a monster fan. I simply appreciate what he did in an 8 week stretch against quality, YES quality, horses.

He is one of 12. The first in 37 years. And did it against his pedigree and supposed running style to get it done. I'm baffled how some still are not impressed.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Extraordinary
examples..
Big Red
Frankel
Spectacular Bid
Affirmed,
just to name a few

Great
Sunday Silence
Easy Goer
Seattle Slew
Ruffian
Cigar
Zenyatta
Rachel Alexandra
Risen Star
Manila
just to name a few..

OK. As I assumed, we are just off a category so to speak in language.

Your great is my elite, and your extraordinary are my best of the best. I think we are both in line with our thinking, just have different tastes/feelings for the word "great". :D

[Kash$]

OK. As I assumed, we are just off a category so to speak in language.

Your great is my elite, and your extraordinary are my best of the best. I think we are both in line with our thinking, just have different tastes/feelings for the word "great". :D

Whos your favorite..mine

Frankel
Spectacular Bid
Landaluce

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Whos your favorite..mine

Frankel
Spectacular Bid
Landaluce

My favorites are weird. Most based upon big wins and beliefs in horses. Huge underdog fan and digging for prices.

Lemon Drop Kid obviously. Palace Malice. Funny Cide. Charasmatic. Drosselmeyer. Dakota Phone. Blame. Hard Spun. Summer Bird. Tiznow. Giacomo. Ghostzapper.

As for the Best of the Best? Probably Invasor and Ghostzapper. I think both are seriously underrated and unappreciated. I still can't believe I got 7/1 on Invasor in the BC Classic. Just a massive overlay for a horse I had as the 9/5 chalk.

But if I'm honest, probably Frankel. Just flat out unbelievable horse. People talk about push-button speed, tactical speed, knowing how to win, etc.. He was the complete package. He could encounter any situation and have the ability to adjust, rate, get it done in traffic, and still overcome due to his pure talent, agility, and ability.

[tubesockshakur]

Alysheba 4 year old season was as good as you will get.

[Kash$]

Alysheba 4 year old season was as good as you will get.

Ever look up Bid 4 year old season?

[pandy]

With Firing Line and Shared Belief out, things are looking very good for American Pharoah. I just hope he gets into the Classic so we can see him race against older horses.

[LottaKash]

At 70, I have seen a whole bunch of good ones, live at the races, and/or have read their charts and read the articles of what they had done, for oh some many of these wow-type horses...

Of course some of the fun of racetalk is, and has always been, comparing one horse's record of accomplishments in his or her generation, to another's...While hearing and having some real good dogfights about it too...

Given that tho, I have an extremely hard time trying pigeon hole any one of these fantastic horses into categories such the Greatest, Best, etc...

I just refer to them as, "The Legends", of this great game of ours...They are all such an important part of the most memorable times in the history of horseracing....

I have been so lucky to see, so many, many of those Legends, in my time...

[pandy]

That's a good way to look at it.

[Steve R]

Seriously?

The BC Classic would be his "only" test in his career?

The complete flopping on AP and his accomplishment this year is becoming annoying to be honest. And I'm far from being an AP Homer much less a monster fan. I simply appreciate what he did in an 8 week stretch against quality, YES quality, horses.

He is one of 12. The first in 37 years. And did it against his pedigree and supposed running style to get it done. I'm baffled how some still are not impressed.
So far, just not fast enough to be compared with the all-timers. And where does the pedigree/running style limitation come from? He seems quite typical of contemporary American classic horses to me.

[RacingFan1992]

Well here is an Update for how the dirt horses stand overall among the turf horses in the overall standings.

1.) American Pharoah
4.) Shared Belief
10.) Honor Code
14.) Firing Line
19.) California Chrome
25.) Prince Bishop
27.) Dortmund

Old Standings did some shuffling:
2) American Pharoah
4) Shared Belief
14) Firing Line
18) California Chrome
22) Prince Bishop (Ire)
24) Dortmund
26) Honor Code

[Fager Fan]

Well here is an Update for how the dirt horses stand overall among the turf horses in the overall standings.

1.) American Pharoah
4.) Shared Belief
10.) Honor Code
14.) Firing Line
19.) California Chrome
25.) Prince Bishop
27.) Dortmund

Old Standings did some shuffling:
2) American Pharoah
4) Shared Belief
14) Firing Line
18) California Chrome
22) Prince Bishop (Ire)
24) Dortmund
26) Honor Code

Again, who cares?

Who made them king? Why not take a Pace Advantage poll and use that to declare the rankings? That's just as meaningful.

In addition, it's folly to declare a particular apple as being better than a particular orange. You can't compare a European turf horse to an American dirt horse.

[horses4courses]

You can't compare a European turf horse to an American dirt horse.

I'll second that. :ThmbUp:
Apples to oranges.

[RacingFan1992]

Sorry I posted. Just thought I would share. I'm not the one who did the list so don't kill the messenger.

[Pensacola Pete]

AP is Elite.



In my opinion, American Pharoah is a good horse in a very bad crop of 3 year olds. The horse has to prove himself against 4 year olds before even being hinted at as "Elite."

In fairness, the same could have been said about Seattle Slew in 1977. He didn't have much (at the time) to beat for his Triple Crown wins, either. But he went on to prove himself against older and earn his status among the great.

[pandy]

In my opinion, American Pharoah is a good horse in a very bad crop of 3 year olds. The horse has to prove himself against 4 year olds before even being hinted at as "Elite."

In fairness, the same could have been said about Seattle Slew in 1977. He didn't have much (at the time) to beat for his Triple Crown wins, either. But he went on to prove himself against older and earn his status among the great.


People sometimes forget how dominant Seattle Slew was. I've read a few posts on paceadvantage about how some thought he was overrated early in his career, I don't recall that at all. When Slew won the Derby he was 1-2 odds in a 15 horse field. Who goes off at 1-2 in the Derby?

After he set a track record, went :44, 1:08, 1:20.3 for 7 furlongs in his 4th lifetime start that opened some eyes. But if you look at his lifetime pps, in his first 9 races including the Belmont, 7 GR1 wins, in the Preakness the short comment in drf was "drew clear." In all of the other races it was Easily, Ridden Out, Easy Score, Handily, Speed In Reserve....he was winning in hand against full fields. Many people, myself included, thought he was a superhorse even before his handy win in the Belmont.

[classhandicapper]

People sometimes forget how dominant Seattle Slew was. I've read a few posts on paceadvantage about how some thought he was overrated early in his career, I don't recall that at all.

I was a maniac Slew fan and remember almost every bias, trip, and comment about him from those days. That originated from two people.

1. Eddie Arcaro was very critical of Seattle Slew's derby win on the live telecast because the final time didn't come up particularly fast and the last quarter was slowish. He called him "the best of an ordinary lot". He recanted the following week after they showed an isolated shot of Seattle Slew's disastrous trip. He changed it to "much the best of an ordinary lot". There was no mention of the pace as part of that trip that I can recall.

2. Andy Beyer wrote critically about Seattle Slew's speed figures relative to Secretariat's. I'm not sure what to say about that, but I think you have to remember that Beyer wasn't particularly sensitive to the impact of pace or trip on figures back in those days. He also did not believe that horses that are winning eased up might have the ability run faster if pressed. IMO, people still misunderstand the difference between winning easily because you had an easy trip (most cases) and winning easily because you have more in reserve. Seattle Slew was the latter (as is American Pharoah).

The bottom line is that the critics were wrong and didn't see what was obvious even before he proved it to everyone at 4. Slew was a fire breathing dragon. I only wish I saw Fager.

[cj]

I was a maniac Slew fan and remember almost every bias, trip, and comment about him from those days. That originated from two people.

1. Eddie Arcaro was very critical of Seattle Slew's derby win on the live telecast because the final time didn't come up particularly fast and the last quarter was slowish. He called him "the best of an ordinary lot". He recanted the following week after they showed an isolated shot of Seattle Slew's disastrous trip. He changed it to "much the best of an ordinary lot". There was no mention of the pace as part of that trip that I can recall.

2. Andy Beyer wrote critically about Seattle Slew's speed figures relative to Secretariat's. I'm not sure what to say about that, but I think you have to remember that Beyer wasn't particularly sensitive to the impact of pace or trip on figures back in those days. He also did not believe that horses that are winning eased up might have the ability run faster if pressed. IMO, people still misunderstand the difference between winning easily because you had an easy trip (most cases) and winning easily because you have more in reserve. Seattle Slew was the latter (as is American Pharoah).

The bottom line is that the critics were wrong and didn't see what was obvious even before he proved it to everyone at 4. Slew was a fire breathing dragon. I only wish I saw Fager.

Not only wasn't he particularly sensitive to pace, he specifically said that pace did not have any effect on a horse's speed figures in his first edition of "Picking Winners." I still have the original.

[thaskalos]

Not only wasn't he particularly sensitive to pace, he specifically said that pace did not have any effect on a horse's speed figures in his first edition of "Picking Winners." I still have the original.
This is true...and it was an ASTOUNDING declaration for an "expert handicapper" to make. That's why I consider "Picking Winners" to be the most potentially dangerous book that a beginning horseplayer could get his hands on.

To Beyer's credit, he has admitted his pace-related mistakes...although, IMO, he still holds an unreasonable bias against "class".

[depalma113]

In my opinion, American Pharoah is a good horse in a very bad crop of 3 year olds. The horse has to prove himself against 4 year olds before even being hinted at as "Elite."

The horse won the Triple Crown. Trying to justify that he is not an elite horse is comical.

[classhandicapper]

although, IMO, he still holds an unreasonable bias against "class".

So does almost everyone else. I suppose that's a good thing for me. ;)

Early books defined class as some vague intangible quality within horses that determined the outcome of races. Then they came up with some very unimpressive ways to measure it. It all sounded like voodoo and it didn't work very well. That's why it became so discredited.

Class handicapping is really just measuring horses performances in terms of who beats who and how instead of looking at the clock.

We see endless threads about the complications of run ups, rail settings, wind, track speed change, the impact of pace on time, etc... But a lot of that stuff goes away when you know the class pecking order at your track and simply compare the performances of horses relative to each other given their trips. Of course, there are other issues with classifying, but that's another story.

Speed handicappers will argue that it's tough to compare shippers to local horses, statebreds to open, younger horses to older etc...using class. That's all true. But if someone is willing to work hard enough to pour through 10s of thousands of races trying to create speed figures that equalize horses across distances and tracks, they can also monitor how horses do when they make class moves until they understand the class structure and performances.

[Steve R]

The horse won the Triple Crown. Trying to justify that he is not an elite horse is comical.
I disagree. Races have names but the names alone don't necessarily characterize the quality of each edition. I doubt anyone would confuse Secretariat's Kentucky Derby with Giacomo's or Ghostzapper's BC Classic with Drosselmeyer's. Every race has to be evaluated on its own merits and not because it has a label attached to it.

That isn't to say that winning the TC is not a significant achievement considering how rarely it has been done, although is has been accomplished 12 times in 96 years. Meanwhile, the English Triple Crown has been won only twice in the same timeframe. But in the end each of the races should be measured against historical standards in order to put it in the proper perspective. To many the simple act of capturing all three races qualifies the winner as "elite", but only because relatively few have done it. If 20 sprinters started in the Derby a sprinter would be the winner and, most likely, in a slow time. Just calling such a slowly-run race the Kentucky Derby does nothing to elevate the actual performance.

In the case of American Pharoah there is virtually unanimous agreement among those who make figures based on speed that the three TC races this year were substandard, and that includes Beyer, BRIS, Equibase, Ragozin and others. Unless one assumes there is a conspiracy against American Pharoah involving all of these organizations and unless one can demonstrate that their figures were generated by a different methodology than used previously it is fair to say that his performances were historically "ordinary" at best. So from a physiological perspective they were hardly "elite".

I suppose what it gets down to is whether one believe it's simply the winning that is important or whether the winning represents the full expression of centuries of Thoroughbred breeding which has always been toward greater speed. As with most things in Thoroughbred racing, much of it is personal preference and, in this case, how one chooses to define the word "elite". Personally, I reserve that term for very few horses, among which would include (of those I have seen personally) Secretariat, Dr. Fager, Spectacular Bid and a handful of others. "Elite" loses it's meaning when the term is applied too loosely. Then again, maybe you believe American Pharoah belongs in that group.

[ILovetheInner]

People sometimes forget how dominant Seattle Slew was. I've read a few posts on paceadvantage about how some thought he was overrated early in his career, I don't recall that at all. When Slew won the Derby he was 1-2 odds in a 15 horse field. Who goes off at 1-2 in the Derby?


A really good horse in a really bad year, basically. Hindsight is great, but I was certainly amongst those who had issues for a time. The TC being such a rare accomplishment, a fear for some is a horse ends up in a crappy year and waltzes. We have seen too many deserving horses get foiled for that to be an attractive scenario. I was getting an ulcer last year with CC because a few really promising horses fell off the trail and then more preps than not went to long prices. Those were all ripe for the picking.

Slew's crop WAS ordinary. He was one heck of a "good thing" juvenile....major buzz before he even started. Did nothing wrong. But the TC was easy. It was the most consistent series I can remember....Run Dusty Run placed in all three, Sanhedrin the two he ran in (and couldn't get a graded win on his own), Iron Constitution got slapped plenty before running 2nd in the Preakness and could win nothing thereafter.

Run Dusty Run would have won two Classics and been the dq'd winner of the Travers. Pretty elite on paper (Jatski never won after being moved up in the Travers, to add to this record). He was a very earnest racehorse, but certainly has no relationship to an Alydar or a Sham. Sham beat both Linda's Chief and Ancient Title in fast time prior to the TC. The former won many in a row that season in the aftermath, and the latter a year later a G1 winner of significance. You can look back and have the horses look fine. You cannot do that with Slew's TC.

So for me, even in hindsight, I have no issues with having needed Slew to prove something in the aftermath of his TC. He was not beating much. Then or now, very hard to make the case that his TC was not a cakewalk. Fortunately he was a monster, making his TC look more deserving. Had he perished after he got sick, he'd be a lot more controversial.

[classhandicapper]

In the case of American Pharoah there is virtually unanimous agreement among those who make figures based on speed that the three TC races this year were substandard, and that includes Beyer, BRIS, Equibase, Ragozin and others. Unless one assumes there is a conspiracy against American Pharoah involving all of these organizations and unless one can demonstrate that their figures were generated by a different methodology than used previously it is fair to say that his performances were historically "ordinary" at best. So from a physiological perspective they were hardly "elite".



Thorograph had his Derby as a -3 (which is very fast for a 3yo).

Timeform has his Belmont much faster than other people.

The Preakness was run in absolute sudden bog. The horse set a very fast pace that took out the rest of the chasers (which made any kind figure projection based off the losers virtually impossible), and he won with plenty in reserve. That figure was pure guesswork even if a reasonable case could be made that it tied well with the next race. Plus, even if the final time figure was correct, you still have to consider the pace and the fact he won with plenty left.

He raced well within himself in the Belmont. I argued right after the race that a good case could be made that both 1 1/2 mile races that day were probably faster than being given credit for. Given the subsequent performances of AP and Coach Inge I think I was probably right.

That is the problem with being too literal about figures. There might be a consensus that his Triple Crown races were not fast, but there are exceptions among some very sharp people. And even then, the figures don't incorporate the trips, tell you how he won, or evaluate the crop in a less time oriented way etc...

I still think this was a great crop. It's a shame Firing Line is out, Dortmund is having issues, Materiality and Carpe Deim are retired, but Texas Red, Frosted, and Upstart can run.

[classhandicapper]

So for me, even in hindsight, I have no issues with having needed Slew to prove something in the aftermath of his TC. He was not beating much. Then or now, very hard to make the case that his TC was not a cakewalk. Fortunately he was a monster, making his TC look more deserving. Had he perished after he got sick, he'd be a lot more controversial.

I don't disagree much about his crop and I strongly agree that it's a good thing he eventually proved his quality. Otherwise I would have had to argue his totally obvious quality on forums for the last 4 decades.

I'd be hard pressed to name more than a couple of 3yos I've ever seen that would have won his Derby with that break and that pace.

I'd be hard pressed to name more than few that showed the kind of pure speed and brilliance he showed in Florida in the lead up to the Triple Crown.

That was after 3 races as a 2yo that included getting out of the gate badly and racing against strong bias where he dominated.

To me, it was obvious he was a freak from very early on. He was doing things horses are not supposed to be able to do, let alone toy with the opposition after doing it.

[castaway01]

I disagree. Races have names but the names alone don't necessarily characterize the quality of each edition. I doubt anyone would confuse Secretariat's Kentucky Derby with Giacomo's or Ghostzapper's BC Classic with Drosselmeyer's. Every race has to be evaluated on its own merits and not because it has a label attached to it.

That isn't to say that winning the TC is not a significant achievement considering how rarely it has been done, although is has been accomplished 12 times in 96 years. Meanwhile, the English Triple Crown has been won only twice in the same timeframe. But in the end each of the races should be measured against historical standards in order to put it in the proper perspective. To many the simple act of capturing all three races qualifies the winner as "elite", but only because relatively few have done it. If 20 sprinters started in the Derby a sprinter would be the winner and, most likely, in a slow time. Just calling such a slowly-run race the Kentucky Derby does nothing to elevate the actual performance.

In the case of American Pharoah there is virtually unanimous agreement among those who make figures based on speed that the three TC races this year were substandard, and that includes Beyer, BRIS, Equibase, Ragozin and others. Unless one assumes there is a conspiracy against American Pharoah involving all of these organizations and unless one can demonstrate that their figures were generated by a different methodology than used previously it is fair to say that his performances were historically "ordinary" at best. So from a physiological perspective they were hardly "elite".



It's funny---in the spring all the figure makers said this was a very fast crop. I could link you the posts on other message boards but I don't think that would be right to do here, but do a Google search. Then after Pharoah dusted them three times, suddenly it was an ordinary or poor crop. How does that work, exactly?

If you do something that hardly anyone else has been able to accomplish, that makes you great. Period. Whether you're not allowed to use "elite" instead of "great" or whatever semantics you want to use, then fine, but it's silly to deny the horse his accomplishment just because in your mind he's not Secretariat or Seattle Slew.

[thaskalos]

It's funny---in the spring all the figure makers said this was a very fast crop. I could link you the posts on other message boards but I don't think that would be right to do here, but do a Google search. Then after Pharoah dusted them three times, suddenly it was an ordinary or poor crop. How does that work, exactly?

If you do something that hardly anyone else has been able to accomplish, that makes you great. Period. Whether you're not allowed to use "elite" instead of "great" or whatever semantics you want to use, then fine, but it's silly to deny the horse his accomplishment just because in your mind he's not Secretariat or Seattle Slew.

Is he Secretariat or Seattle Slew in YOUR mind?

IMO...there is no problem in calling American Pharoah "great". The problem lies in the insistence of some of the more renowned posters here to declare that American Pharoah is the second-coming of Secretariat. Have you noticed how many posters here have suddenly started calling Secretariat "overrated"? Had you ever seen this curious phenomenon before? It took the great American Pharoah to finally show us how "overrated" Secretariat really was?

[RacingFan1992]

Is he Secretariat or Seattle Slew in YOUR mind?

IMO...there is no problem in calling American Pharoah "great". The problem lies in the insistence of some of the more renowned posters here to declare that American Pharoah is the second-coming of Secretariat. Have you noticed how many posters here have suddenly started calling Secretariat "overrated"? Had you ever seen this curious phenomenon before? It took the great American Pharoah to finally show us how "overrated" Secretariat really was?


Yup, three stakes records in all of the Triple Crown races, a world record that is yet to be beaten, and a 31 length victory sure does make him overrated. :rolleyes:

[Fager Fan]

It's funny---in the spring all the figure makers said this was a very fast crop. I could link you the posts on other message boards but I don't think that would be right to do here, but do a Google search. Then after Pharoah dusted them three times, suddenly it was an ordinary or poor crop. How does that work, exactly?

If you do something that hardly anyone else has been able to accomplish, that makes you great. Period. Whether you're not allowed to use "elite" instead of "great" or whatever semantics you want to use, then fine, but it's silly to deny the horse his accomplishment just because in your mind he's not Secretariat or Seattle Slew.

But those horses ran poorly in the Derby and after. Other than Texas Red those sort of fell apart.

AP is a top colt and will take his place in history but I was thinking about the TC and its difficulty and wondered how it compared to choosing other three top races run in a row. How many horses have won the Woodward, JCGC and Classic? Or to go back further in history, how about the Whitney, Woodward and JCGC? Maybe winning either of those three is harder to accomplish than winning the TC.

[RacingFan1992]

But those horses ran poorly in the Derby and after. Other than Texas Red those sort of fell apart.

AP is a top colt and will take his place in history but I was thinking about the TC and its difficulty and wondered how it compared to choosing other three top races run in a row. How many horses have won the Woodward, JCGC and Classic? Or to go back further in history, how about the Whitney, Woodward and JCGC? Maybe winning either of those three is harder to accomplish than winning the TC.

Only Easy Goer and he came in 2nd behind Sunday Silence in the Classic.

[maclr11]

Horses to win the Whitney, Woodward and JCGC in same year
Kelso (1961 and 1963)
Slew O'Gold (1984)
Easy Goer (1989)


Horses to win the Woodward, JCGC and BC Classic in same year
Cigar (1995)



A couple of horses have won the Woodward and JCGC and got beat in the Classic at a very short price

Slew O'Gold in 1984 and Curlin in 2008

[RacingFan1992]

Horses to win the Whitney, Woodward and JCGC in same year
Kelso (1961 and 1963)
Slew O'Gold (1984)
Easy Goer (1989)


Horses to win the Woodward, JCGC and BC Classic in same year
Cigar (1995)



A couple of horses have won the Woodward and JCGC and got beat in the Classic at a very short price

Slew O'Gold in 1984 and Curlin in 2008

Ah I gotta do better at fact finding. lol

[tucker6]

The problem lies in the insistence of some of the more renowned posters here to declare that American Pharoah is the second-coming of Secretariat.
Who are these renowned posters you speak of?

[Fager Fan]

Horses to win the Whitney, Woodward and JCGC in same year
Kelso (1961 and 1963)
Slew O'Gold (1984)
Easy Goer (1989)


Horses to win the Woodward, JCGC and BC Classic in same year
Cigar (1995)



A couple of horses have won the Woodward and JCGC and got beat in the Classic at a very short price

Slew O'Gold in 1984 and Curlin in 2008

Thanks. Makes me wonder if I as well as most everyone under appreciates slew o'gold.

[Steve R]

Thorograph had his Derby as a -3 (which is very fast for a 3yo).

Timeform has his Belmont much faster than other people.

The Preakness was run in absolute sudden bog. The horse set a very fast pace that took out the rest of the chasers (which made any kind figure projection based off the losers virtually impossible), and he won with plenty in reserve. That figure was pure guesswork even if a reasonable case could be made that it tied well with the next race. Plus, even if the final time figure was correct, you still have to consider the pace and the fact he won with plenty left.

He raced well within himself in the Belmont. I argued right after the race that a good case could be made that both 1 1/2 mile races that day were probably faster than being given credit for. Given the subsequent performances of AP and Coach Inge I think I was probably right.

That is the problem with being too literal about figures. There might be a consensus that his Triple Crown races were not fast, but there are exceptions among some very sharp people. And even then, the figures don't incorporate the trips, tell you how he won, or evaluate the crop in a less time oriented way etc...

I still think this was a great crop. It's a shame Firing Line is out, Dortmund is having issues, Materiality and Carpe Deim are retired, but Texas Red, Frosted, and Upstart can run.
How does a Thorograph -3 compare with a Ragozin 4-? And I believe time is a minor component in Timeform ratings.

As for the 3yo crop I also believe they were outstanding, but so far apparently only up to 9f. There has always been a world of difference between classic distances and shorter distances. You can find plenty of horses that "belong" at 9f and a diminishing few that "belong" at 10. Tom Ainslie was a firm believer in the backstretch maxim: "Every horse's best distance can be measured with a yardstick."

[Fager Fan]

Time form is a class rating. He won the TC so they automatically gave him a top number.

[cj]

Time form is a class rating. He won the TC so they automatically gave him a top number.

That is far from how it works.

[cj]

How does a Thorograph -3 compare with a Ragozin 4-? And I believe time is a minor component in Timeform ratings.

As for the 3yo crop I also believe they were outstanding, but so far apparently only up to 9f. There has always been a world of difference between classic distances and shorter distances. You can find plenty of horses that "belong" at 9f and a diminishing few that "belong" at 10. Tom Ainslie was a firm believer in the backstretch maxim: "Every horse's best distance can be measured with a yardstick."

Pretty sure Classhandicapper was talking about TimeformUS of which final time is the main part of the rating, fractions a smaller part.

[Fager Fan]

That is far from how it works.

In Europe? You'd have a hard time convincing me of that.

[cj]

In Europe? You'd have a hard time convincing me of that.

I was 11 the last time we had a Triple Crown winner, so I can't say much about that one or use it for comparison. But I know that Timeform doesn't just assign high ratings because a horse wins certain races. American Pharoah was rated very highly (129) as early as the Del Mar Futurity.

[classhandicapper]

How does a Thorograph -3 compare with a Ragozin 4-? "

I'd have to say the relationship between Thorograph and Ragozin is a moving target due to figure drift.

[Steve R]

I was 11 the last time we had a Triple Crown winner, so I can't say much about that one or use it for comparison. But I know that Timeform doesn't just assign high ratings because a horse wins certain races. American Pharoah was rated very highly (129) as early as the Del Mar Futurity.
That's interesting because the Racing Post rated him only the co-4th best two-year-old in the U.S. last year at 116 behind Daredevil, Texas Red and Competitive Edge. And as of now he is still rated one pound below Golden Horn.