The Best Ever ?

[cj's dad]

Compared to most PA members, I am a relative newcomer (15 years) to the sport and as such, I have been researching past racing greats. I came up with these three as the best (IMHO) ever. I would like to read comments on your favorites and the reasoning I am probably off base with these choices and/or their ranking.

#1 - Man O War- 21 starts-20 wins/1 second

#2 - Spectacular Bid - 30 starts- 26/2/1

#3 - Secretariat - 21 starts - 16/3/1

:ThmbUp: :ThmbDown:

[GaryG]

Well, I wouldn't place Bid above Big Red. Here is how I see it:

MAN O'WAR / SECRETARIAT no way to really compare them, but the two best

Then I would take Citation. Total domination as a 3yo. He lost some of his luster when they brought him back at age 6 (I think) in order to become the first millionaire. He held the two turn mile world record for a long time.

[classhandicapper]

It's very difficult to compare horses from different generations because the crops are much larger, the training techniques have probably improved, and for all we know the breed is better. We don't have good figures either.

I started handicapping in the mid 70s. These are the best horses I ever saw. I am rating them off their best form as older horses. (#1 and #2 could easily be reversed but I have a soft spot for speed horses and put SS first)

1. Seattle Slew
2. Spectacular Bid
3. Affirmed
4. Forego
5. Ghostzapper
6. Cigar

Based on PPs alone, I would rate Dr Fager as the best horse in modern times.

I'm not sure where I would put Secretariat. It's practically sacrilege to say he might have been a little overrated, but I've always had a tough time thinking he was as good as everyone says. He was clearly a lot better than Sham, but Sham was not a world beater and finished fairly close to him in the Derby and Preakness (granted Secretariat had the worse trip). So you either have to think that Sham was also great/extremely good, or that Secretariat was a little overrated because he was the first Triple Crown winner in such a long time. He also lost to older horses twice after that. He's high on the list somewhere, but I'm not qualified to say where. However, I do think his Belmont was one of the greatest performances ever (if not the greatest).

Going back further.......

Citation was a monster, but got hurt and did not come back as good.

Count Fleet was a terror.

Man of War was another monster.

This is going to seem like a stretch to some, but I think Smarty Jones is very underrated and probably belongs on a list somewhere even if near the bottom. I thought he was terrific in defeat at Belmont against a group of very good horses (bad ride and they ganged up on him). He was undefeated at that point and was still developing. He "might" have been special, but we'll never know.

Ruffian was the best filly. It's not even close.

[witchdoctor]

Thorooughbred Times last year did a survey of the greatest TB of the past 50 years. The conclusion was Dr Fager was the best. He won on both coast and the midwest. He won sprinting and routing. He won on grass and on the dirt.


Another one who was not mentioned here is Swaps. He set 4 world records during the summer of his 4 year old season. He also set a few track records that were not world records.

[banacek]

Well, I wouldn't place Bid above Big Red. Here is how I see it:

MAN O'WAR / SECRETARIAT no way to really compare them, but the two best



I agree, maybe slight edge to Secretariat, but that's probably because I saw him run.

And for fun, this has the same order:

http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/static.cgi?page=classic

[Red Knave]

#1 - Man O War- 21 starts-20 wins/1 second

#2 - Spectacular Bid - 30 starts- 26/2/1

#3 - Secretariat - 21 starts - 16/3/1

:ThmbUp: :ThmbDown:Have a look at Dr. Fager's record. He'd be at the top of my list.

Other than I would put the Bid after Secretariat, that's a good list.

[GaryG]

One that is often forgotten is Native Dancer. He was a monster and was much the best in the Belmont, his only defeat. He came back at 4 to win all 3 starts including the Met Mile and was HOY.

[gIracing]

I hate when people go for the "shock value" pick.

Man o war is the best horse north america, and quite possibly the world, has ever seen. And it's not even close.


I would have to go with Big red over spectacular bid... but I wouldn't aruge with anyone who went the other way.. it's a toss up.

I would put Dr Fager 4th.. what he did in one year is unheard of. Defianatly the best FL bred to come out the state.

The rest I would have to do a hell of a lot more reserach.. I think Ghostzapper belongs somewhere in the top 7-8. I have never in my life seen a horse that varsitle and that explosive... but I'm just 23. He made grade1's look like allownece none winners other than races.

Also.... if not for the cancer, how good of a sprinter was lost in the fog? we will never no. I think you can throw out everything with the breeders cup sprint...

Invasor is climbing up the ranks... if he can win ANOTHER breeders cup this year.. now could you NOT put him up there? His only lost was in a race to what many, on his best day, people STILL think might be the best horse in the world (i'm not one of them)

[JPinMaryland]

Man o war is the best horse north america, and quite possibly the world, has ever seen. And it's not even close.

It's very close. It's very debatable.

One guy made the excellent pt. that MoW faced very short fields in latter part of his career. I forget the exact stat. but something like the last 10 races he faced a total of 15 horses, so avg. field size of 2.5 or something...

And the foal crop was very small in 1917, e.g. 1800 something, one of the smallest in history. Which says something about competitiveness.

Still there's no reason to think he could not keep up with today's horses at least for 10f. He could run 23 change fractions in steel shoes on cinder tracks so that says something. Dont know how traffic issues and having more challenges to beat off would affect him.

ANother guy (I think on this forum) made excellent pt. about Citation that if he had been pushed to beat his stablemate (Twilight Tear, IIRC) his winning streak would have been 20+. A perhaps insurmountable streak.

To me it seems he would have been the most dominant horse to step on a track in his prime. He ran stride for strike w/ Noor when that one won in record time and being spotted weight. This when Citation was already over the hill.

[Bruddah]

One that is often forgotten is Native Dancer. He was a monster and was much the best in the Belmont, his only defeat. He came back at 4 to win all 3 starts including the Met Mile and was HOY.

The best Horse either racing or in the breeding shed in the last 50+ years is Native Dancer. If a horse today accomplished what this one did, we would be calling him the best of all time. He raced 22 times and won 21, ran second 1. His progeny line consists of more Classic winners than any horse in History. He is the sire of all sires. :)

By the way, his only defeat was the 1953 Ky Derby, by a head.

[gIracing]

are we talking purely racing only?

[Secretariat]

I'm not sure how people are making these kind of blanket statements. It is nothing but opinion.

To me Secretariat's times blow any of Man O'War's out of the water. Of course the loading of the gate and variants and tactics vary, but if one goes on time along, Secretariat's times put him at the top. Some like Citation. Actually Sham's times in the Derby were very impressive, and the Pimlico timer malfunction or Secretariat would have the three fastest Triple Crown races of all time.

[gIracing]

hmmm.....good point.

i was going off of man o war's racing record (and what he accomlished in the breeding shed)... but you make a very good point.

If you look at time's, the big red and Dr. Fager stand heads and sholders above the rest

[classhandicapper]

The best Horse either racing or in the breeding shed in the last 50+ years is Native Dancer. If a horse today accomplished what this one did, we would be calling him the best of all time. He raced 22 times and won 21, ran second 1. His progeny line consists of more Classic winners than any horse in History. He is the sire of all sires. :)

By the way, his only defeat was the 1953 Ky Derby, by a head.

He should certainly be mentioned too. Sorry I overlooked him earlier. He's sort of in the same category with Citation, Count Fleet, Man O War etc... None of us saw them or are very familiar with their competition. We also don't have accurate figures to look it. All we have is their records and no idea if the smaller crops were any good or if the breed has improved a lot over the decades.

[cj]

Native Dancer lost the Derby, not the Belmont. There is a very good book out about him, The Grey Ghost, by John Eisenberg.

[JPinMaryland]

Actually Sham's times in the Derby were very impressive...

Actually every horses time that derby was impressive. Out of 13 horses 12 of them ran sub 25 sec. final quarters. Can you find another derby where that happened? Or any other race in history?

Twice a Prince ran a 23.9 final fraction. I am sure he was a better closer than Afleet Alex.

THere were six sub 24 sec. finals. Has any DECADE produced that many?

Shecky Green, running the slowest of 13 horses at the end, is closing faster than ALydar?

Yup you're right, the times are very impressive.

[gIracing]

Native Dancer might be the best horse ever NOT to win the derby


As far as breeding, he's a sire of sires, one of the top 3-4 in the last century, but not the best. Ribot, Man O War and Phalaris all have to be put in that catogory, with in my mind the edge going to Phalaris... but the downside to that is alot of the unsoundness issues we get today come from (at least in IMHO) phalaris

[JPinMaryland]

One that is often forgotten is Native Dancer. He was a monster and was much the best in the Belmont, his only defeat. He came back at 4 to win all 3 starts including the Met Mile and was HOY.

His only defeat was KY derby and he was not much the best. Take a look at the video, in deep stretch he is not making up any ground on Dark Star.

[JPinMaryland]

The best Horse either racing or in the breeding shed in the last 50+ years is Native Dancer..

I thought Northern Dance was the best sire at least until more recent times.

[cj]

If you want to include the after racing careers, I think Seattle Slew in a runaway when you consider on and off track accomplishments.

[gIracing]

just to put it in perspective, Phalaris is the Great Great Great grandsire of Native Dancer and the Great Great Grandsire of Northern Dancer, the great great damsire of Sham, the great great great great gransire of Secretariat, and the great great great great grandsire of Spectacular Bid.

you have to go back a little bit, but Settatle Slew has Phalaris on both the sire and the dam side of his family


He was northern dancer before there was a northern dancer, and has ties to over half, if not more Grade 1 winners we see today.

[kenwoodallpromos]

I may agree if you are only talking about male TBreds at 3. Otherwise consider:
Black Ruby; Azeri; John Henry; Forego.
As far as I know Seabiscuit and Secretariat have drawn the most people into racing.
An then whoever is considered the best of human or Thoroughbred gets the ECLIPSE award, so deference to the horse Eclipse must be made.

[JPinMaryland]

I think PHalaris is in 65% of them at this pt..

[classhandicapper]

Actually every horses time that derby was impressive. Out of 13 horses 12 of them ran sub 25 sec. final quarters. Can you find another derby where that happened? Or any other race in history?

Twice a Prince ran a 23.9 final fraction. I am sure he was a better closer than Afleet Alex.

THere were six sub 24 sec. finals. Has any DECADE produced that many?

Shecky Green, running the slowest of 13 horses at the end, is closing faster than ALydar?

Yup you're right, the times are very impressive.

IMO that says more about the speed of the track than the quality of the horses. I know Forego was well beaten in Secretariat's Derby, but he wasn't "Forego" yet. I don't think there was all that much quality behind him that day.

[JPinMaryland]

If Forego doesnt hit rail my guess he finishes right up there with Sham. His final quarter fraction is basically the same.

9 horses in this field ran faster final quarters than Street Sense. :lol:

[Kelso]

KELSO!!
(aka King Kelly)


63 races = 39-12-2
24 races @ 130+ pounds = 13-5-1

As 3-year-old ... first Horse of the Year to not win a Triple Crown race (didn't run).

As 4-year-old ... winner NY Handicap Triple Crown.
-Metropolitan (130 pounds)
-Brooklyn (133 pounds)
-Suburban (136 pounds)

As 7-year-old ... set American 12f. turf record.

At 3-7 years old ... won 5 consecutive Jockey Club Gold Cup races - at 2.0 miles ... most consecutive wins of a major stakes race by any horse in history.

Called Man o' War "Grampa"


Oh, and .....
5 times Horse of the Year
(How quickly they forget.)

[Kelso]

Thanks for asking. :jump:

[cj]

If Forego doesnt hit rail my guess he finishes right up there with Sham. His final quarter fraction is basically the same.

9 horses in this field ran faster final quarters than Street Sense. :lol:

Raw times, even for shorter distances, are pretty useless.

[ranchwest]

Everyone has had some good comments, but it seems that everyone is going with the full body of work of the horses mentioned. And, the focus is mostly on dirt horses.

How about considering things this way? What if you had to pick a horse for one big race? What horses would you pick to run for you? I think you then have to add in horses like John Henry and Theatrical as possibles.

Of course, there's no doubt that Secretariat, Dr. Fager, Man O' War, Native Dancer, Citation, Kelso and others were all great horses.

Not to put him at the very top, but I think my favorite horse was Alysheba. Just something special about that horse.

[Pace Cap'n]

KELSO!!
(aka King Kelly)


63 races = 39-12-2
24 races @ 130+ pounds = 13-5-1

As 3-year-old ... first Horse of the Year to not win a Triple Crown race (didn't run).

As 4-year-old ... winner NY Handicap Triple Crown.
-Metropolitan (130 pounds)
-Brooklyn (133 pounds)
-Suburban (136 pounds)

As 7-year-old ... set American 12f. turf record.

At 3-7 years old ... won 5 consecutive Jockey Club Gold Cup races - at 2.0 miles ... most consecutive wins of a major stakes race by any horse in history.

Called Man o' War "Grampa"


Oh, and .....
5 times Horse of the Year
(How quickly they forget.)


Not a chance--you didn't run in the Belmont...

[gIracing]

wasn't Alysheba a horrible bleeder? I heard that's why he lost the TC.. at the time you couldn't use lassix on the NYRA tracks.. heard he did a good job of passing the trait on in the shed as well.


If i had a 5 million dollar race, and I got to pick any horse tor un for me... Big Red.

Maybe Dr. Fagar in hs prime, maybe.


Better yet how about this.. make a M/L odds list with these hroses

To be ran at Saratoga (Because it's Saratoga) Mile and 1/8th on Dirt

PP HORSE
1 Man O War
2 Secretariat
3 Seattle Slew
4 Seabiscuit
5 Dr. Fagar
6 Ghostzapper
7 Northern Dancer
8 Forego
9 Cigar
10 Sham
11 Tiznow
12 Silky Sullivan
13 Affirmed
14 Alydar



:cool:

[cj]

He lost the Belmont without Lasix, but ran fine without it on a few other later occasions.

[ranchwest]

Jack van Berg always said that Alysheba could run without Lasix, but you are correct that when he went to the Belmont without the aid of Lasix he ran poorly. There could be other explanations. He had a surgical procedure to improve his breathing, so maybe being off his training schedule and then running big left him drained for the Belmont. As CJ said, he did run without it successfully later.

As I said, I'm not trying to put Alysheba in the top tier. Maybe the second tier. I just liked the horse. van Berg is a likeable guy and Alysheba was a likeable horse. Especially when I saw him win the Super Derby (with my money on him).

[gIracing]

he's right there with Ghostzapper, Tiznow, etc... strong stong second tier.. should have won the TC.

however, his lack of success in the shed is one of things I never could really undestand.

[classhandicapper]

The day that Alysheba lost the Belmont without Lasix, it was an extremely hot and humid day (if my memory isn't failing me). I'm not sot sure if that matters, but I've heard that it does.

[GaryG]

wasn't Alysheba a horrible bleeder? I heard that's why he lost the TC.. at the time you couldn't use lassix on the NYRA tracks.. heard he did a good job of passing the trait on in the shed as well.


If i had a 5 million dollar race, and I got to pick any horse tor un for me... Big Red.

Maybe Dr. Fagar in hs prime, maybe.


Better yet how about this.. make a M/L odds list with these hroses

To be ran at Saratoga (Because it's Saratoga) Mile and 1/8th on Dirt

PP HORSE
1 Man O War
2 Secretariat
3 Seattle Slew
4 Seabiscuit
5 Dr. Fagar
6 Ghostzapper
7 Northern Dancer
8 Forego
9 Cigar
10 Sham
11 Tiznow
12 Silky Sullivan
13 Affirmed
14 Alydar



:cool:Silky Sullivan would be about a million to one against that field. He was in no way a top class horse.

[ghostyapper]

I'm not sure how people are making these kind of blanket statements. It is nothing but opinion.

To me Secretariat's times blow any of Man O'War's out of the water. Of course the loading of the gate and variants and tactics vary, but if one goes on time along, Secretariat's times put him at the top. Some like Citation. Actually Sham's times in the Derby were very impressive, and the Pimlico timer malfunction or Secretariat would have the three fastest Triple Crown races of all time.

Which is all the more reason why you can't go on time alone. How could anyone rank ahead of a horse whose only loss came when he was facing the wrong way when the race started and it was a sprint!!

[ghostyapper]

He was odds-on in all 21 of his races -- three times being quoted by bookmakers at 1-100. He won the Belmont Stakes by 20 lengths and the Lawrence Realization by 100 lengths. He beat the best horses of his time, including John P. Grier and Triple Crown winner Sir Barton.

Man o' War's time records included:

New World Record, Dwyer Stakes, 1 1/8 miles
New World Record, Belmont Stakes, 1 3/8 miles
New World Record, Lawrence Realization, 1 5/8 miles
New American Record, Jockey Club Stakes, 1 1/2 miles
New American Record, Withers Stakes, 1 mile
New Track Record, Kenilworth Park Gold Cup, 1 1/4 miles
New Track Record, Potomac Handicap, 1 1/16 miles
Equaled Track Record, Travers Stakes, 1 1/4 miles

On nearly a dozen occasions, the interior fractions of his races were completed in times that would have broken American and/or world records.

His records stood the test of time. His 1-1/2 mile American record stood for 17 years.

He didn't just take a tick off time records, he obliterated them. Up against Triple Crown winner Sir Barton, Man o' War took more than SIX full seconds off the track record for 1 1/4 miles at Kenilworth Park.

He won easily over tracks labeled fast, good and sloppy.

He won at distances from five furlongs to 1-5/8 miles.

He won on straight courses and on both clockwise and counter-clockwise courses.

He carried and won with 130 pounds five times as a TWO-year old.

At three, he won with 131 pounds in the Miller Stakes, 135 pounds in the Stuyvesant and 138 pounds in the Potomac.

He gave extreme weight concessions to the competition. In one race, the second high weight carried 32 pounds less.

At three, he consistently gave major weight concessions to, and beat, older horses.

He retired as the greatest money-winning Thoroughbred ever.

Writing in the 1947 volume of "American Race Horses," another legendary racing writer and historian, Joe Palmer, said of Big Red:

"He did not beat, he merely annihilated. He did not run to world records, he galloped to them. He was so far superior to his contemporaries that, except for one race against John P. Grier, they could not extend him. In 1920 he dominated racing as perhaps no athlete -- not Tilden or Jones or Dempsey or Louis or Nurmi or Thorpe or any human athlete -- had dominated his sport."

[GaryG]

Regarding final time (Sham etc) note that Decidedly's 1962 derby was the fastest ever until Red. Later races have almost all been faster on the hopped up track.

[JPinMaryland]

Regarding final time (Sham etc) note that Decidedly's 1962 derby was the fastest ever until Red. Later races have almost all been faster on the hopped up track.

Gary what are you saying? "Later races..." Later than what? Secretariat? Races after secretariat have almost all been SLOWER, not faster. Hell not almost all, all of them....

ALso Decidely record was broken by Northen Dancer so the first sentence is wrong..

[Gibbon]

The best in the past 27 years:

Dubai Millennium
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubai_Millennium


Unfortunately, he died before stud duty.







_______________________________________
Barry Meadow ~
The Internet has vastly expanded the number of players who claim to be winners....On the typical handicapping message board, almost nobody admits they're consistent losers.

[Gibbon]

Did someone say Cigar? Give me a break. Who did he beat? A Broken down Holy Bull.

At the very least Skippy {Skip Away} beat Formal Gold and Wills Way. Horses who routinely broke 125 Beyers, 0 on rags, -4 thorograph. And 130 to 140 on old DRF + Variant.







_______________________________________
Swimming is not a sport. Swimming is a way to keep from drowning.

[classhandicapper]

The best in the past 27 years:

Dubai Millennium
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubai_Millennium


Unfortunately, he died before stud duty.



I was actually thinking about him yesterday, but didn't bring him up because his career was brief and I wasn't familiar with most of his races.

[classhandicapper]

Did someone say Cigar? Give me a break. Who did he beat? A Broken down Holy Bull.

At the very least Skippy {Skip Away} beat Formal Gold and Wills Way. Horses who routinely broke 125 Beyers, 0 on rags, -4 thorograph. And 130 to 140 on old DRF + Variant.

Horses like Formal Gold and Wills Way are more or less one hit wonders. There have been plenty of horses that have put up 1 or 2 very fast performances, others that have put up big figures when the conditions were perfect, and others where the speed figure was just wrong.

Skip Away was good for awhile and would be in my second tier in the last 30 years.

Cigar didn't have the greatest competition, but he fired a big race every time he ran on dirt (until the end when he had some physical issues). He wasn't in the same class as the true super greats, but you don't win that many in a row shipping around against the best available opposition unless you are very very good. It means you are overcoming a variety of trips, paces, etc... and probably have a little more in the tank than just your Beyer figure.

Speaking of second tier, Mineshaft had a pretty good run also.

[classhandicapper]

This was Steve Davidowit'z list from his new book.

1. Secretariat
2. Man O War
3. Count Fleet
4. Kelso
5. Citation
6. Spectacular Bid
7. Dr Fager
8. Buckpasser
9. Damascus
10. Seattle Slew
11. Affirmed
12. Swaps
13. Ruffian
14. Forego
15. Seabiscuit
16. Ta We
17. John Henry
18. Personal Ensign
19. Manila
20. Miesque

[GaryG]

Gary what are you saying? "Later races..." Later than what? Secretariat? Races after secretariat have almost all been SLOWER, not faster. Hell not almost all, all of them....

ALso Decidely record was broken by Northen Dancer so the first sentence is wrong..The point is: Decidedly had one one of the fastest times and has never been comsidered top class. Since 2000 the only ones slower than 2:02 were Giacomo and Smarty on a sloppy track. RAW TIME IS NOT A RELEVANT MEASURE OF QUALITY.

[banacek]

Here's a graph of speeds since the beginning.

[JPinMaryland]

Southernspeak translator:

"Regarding final time (Sham etc) note that Decidedly's 1962 derby was the fastest ever until Red. Later races have almost all been faster on the hopped up track...."

Means:

"Decidedly had one one of the fastest times and has never been comsidered top class. Since 2000 the only ones slower than 2:02 were Giacomo and Smarty on a sloppy track. RAW TIME IS NOT A RELEVANT MEASURE OF QUALITY..."

[Figman]

Man O War 3-1
Secretariat 7-2
Seattle Slew 8-1
Seabiscuit 20-1
Dr.Fager 5-2
Ghostzapper 30-1
Northern Dancer 20-1
Forego 50-1
Cigar 30-1
Sham 50-1
Tiznow 50-1
Silky Sullivan 100-1
Affirmed 10-1
Alydar 10-1

[Pace Cap'n]

Silky Sullivan--might not belong, but from what I've read it would be great fun to watch him try.

[gIracing]

Man O War 3-1
Secretariat 7-2
Seattle Slew 8-1
Seabiscuit 20-1
Dr.Fager 5-2
Ghostzapper 30-1
Northern Dancer 20-1
Forego 50-1
Cigar 30-1
Sham 50-1
Tiznow 50-1
Silky Sullivan 100-1
Affirmed 10-1
Alydar 10-1

Dr. Fager as the M/F fav?

Man O War- 7/2
Secretariat 5/2
Seattle Slew 8-1
Seabiscuit 15-1
Dr.Fager 5-1
Ghostzapper 15-1
Northern Dancer 12-1
Forego 50-1
Cigar 8-1
Sham 50-1
Tiznow 20-1
Silky Sullivan 100-1
Affirmed 12-1
Alydar 20-1


The ML is how you percieve the public will bet. First of all... there isn't a way on god's green earth the big red goes off at anything over 5/2 if the general betting public has anything to do with it. You'd probably be lucky to get that

Tiznow won 2 BC Classics.. that accounts for something.

Man O War is an overlay at 7/2 if you ask me, but he was almost 90 years ago... people don't want to think back that far

I don't like Cigar... but again, general betting pubic+win streak=underlay

If that is how it played out, I would box Dr. Fager and Secretariat, and probably have Dr. Fager to win

[gIracing]

Silky Sullivan--might not belong, but from what I've read it would be great fun to watch him try.

if he had a pace to run at it he could be dangerous. However, you throw him in there and people wll bet him because of who he is... guaranteeing you will get a decent price on who you like.. I call it the Lava man factor (dubai)

[Kelso]

you didn't run in the Belmont...


True .... no balls. :lol:

[RXB]

Cigar didn't have the greatest competition, but he fired a big race every time he ran on dirt (until the end when he had some physical issues). He wasn't in the same class as the true super greats, but you don't win that many in a row shipping around against the best available opposition unless you are very very good. It means you are overcoming a variety of trips, paces, etc... and probably have a little more in the tank than just your Beyer figure.


Amen.

[RXB]

Man O War 3-1
Secretariat 7-2
Seattle Slew 8-1
Seabiscuit 20-1
Dr.Fager 5-2
Ghostzapper 30-1
Northern Dancer 20-1
Forego 50-1
Cigar 30-1
Sham 50-1
Tiznow 50-1
Silky Sullivan 100-1
Affirmed 10-1
Alydar 10-1

How can Citation not be in this field? The greatest 3YO ever. And where's Spectacular Bid?

Silky Sullivan was nothing.

Alydar was merely a foil for Affirmed as a 3YO, and he followed that up with an utterly mediocre 4YO campaign-- couldn't win a Grade 1 stakes against older competition.

Sham didn't do anything nearly enough to be in the greatest ever field.

OUT: Silky, Alydar, Sham, Ghostzapper, Northern Dancer (the greatest sire of the 20th century, but didn't prove quite enough on the racetrack to be in this field)

IN: Citation, Spectacular Bid, Damascus, Buckpasser, Native Dancer

P.S. Fager's not going to win any race against top-class competition if Seattle Slew is in the field. No 5/2 morning line for him.

[Hank]

A strong case can be made for Dr. Fager the only three horses to finnish in front of him were champions Damascus, Buckpasser and Successor.He set world and track records a distances from 7 to 10 furlongs all under heavy weight impost.He faced hall of fame caliber compition,and the only way they could beat him was a tag team effort using a sprint champion rabbit to soften him up first.He was as FAST and as GAME as they come.His victory over Damascus in the Suburan,his win in the UN on turf when he was headed 3 times and battled back 3 times to win,and his gritty loss to Damascus in the Brooklyn after he battled Hedevar though insane fractions of like 45n change and 109 n change going a mile and quarter CONFIRM a class level that is other worldly.

[RXB]

Fager was a great, great horse but he was a speed maniac, and if he couldn't win a race when Hedevar was entered he damn sure wouldn't win one that included Seattle Slew.

[Hank]

No not when one of the most powerful horses in history is the closer. He was not passed by just any old horse, come now.But your point is well taken, the pressence of a quality speed like Slew would make it tough on the Doc and render him beatable late.So lets just say head to head in a match race The Doc would likely prove unbeatable.

[RXB]

Fager and Slew would go 1:09 for 6f, 1:33 to the mile and be swept away in the stretch by the closers.

My God, I just looked again at that list and realized-- where's KELSO? Five times Horse of the Year, the most amazing accomplishment in the history of the sport. Tiznow just got the boot. And what about the mighty Tom Fool? I've constructed a special 15-horse starting gate to get him into the field.

[gIracing]

How can Citation not be in this field? The greatest 3YO ever. And where's Spectacular Bid?

Silky Sullivan was nothing.

Alydar was merely a foil for Affirmed as a 3YO, and he followed that up with an utterly mediocre 4YO campaign-- couldn't win a Grade 1 stakes against older competition.

Sham didn't do anything nearly enough to be in the greatest ever field.

OUT: Silky, Alydar, Sham, Ghostzapper, Northern Dancer (the greatest sire of the 20th century, but didn't prove quite enough on the racetrack to be in this field)

IN: Citation, Spectacular Bid, Damascus, Buckpasser, Native Dancer

P.S. Fager's not going to win any race against top-class competition if Seattle Slew is in the field. No 5/2 morning line for him.

someone had to get left out. but you are right for the most part. I figured yo ucouldn't put affirmed in without putting alydar. Buckpasser definatly belongs as well as Damascus


redo

Man O War- 7/2
Secretariat 5/2
Seattle Slew 8-1
Seabiscuit 15-1
Dr.Fager 5-1
Ghostzapper 15-1
Citation 9/2
Kelso 5-1
Forego 50-1
Cigar 8-1
Spectacular Bid 6-1
Tiznow 20-1
Damascus 8-1
Affirmed 12-1
Buckpasser 6-1
Native Dancer 10-1

[gIracing]

Fager and Slew would go 1:09 for 6f, 1:33 to the mile and be swept away in the stretch by the closers.

My God, I just looked again at that list and realized-- where's KELSO? Five times Horse of the Year, the most amazing accomplishment in the history of the sport. Tiznow just got the boot. And what about the mighty Tom Fool? I've constructed a special 15-horse starting gate to get him into the field.


Tiznow won the BC Classic twice... that gets him automatically in in my book... but as soon as I thoubht about that, i had to put kelso in, you are right.

[classhandicapper]

No not when one of the most powerful horses in history is the closer. He was not passed by just any old horse, come now.But your point is well taken, the pressence of a quality speed like Slew would make it tough on the Doc and render him beatable late.So lets just say head to head in a match race The Doc would likely prove unbeatable.

I would pay large sums of money to see a match race between Slew and Fager.

In fact, when I die, if there is a heaven and I get in, the first thing I'm going to ask God is when is post time and where are the windows. It can't be heaven if I don't get to see that race. ;)

[RXB]

someone had to get left out. but you are right for the most part. I figured yo ucouldn't put affirmed in without putting alydar. Buckpasser definatly belongs as well as Damascus


redo

Man O War- 7/2
Secretariat 5/2
Seattle Slew 8-1
Seabiscuit 15-1
Dr.Fager 5-1
Ghostzapper 15-1
Citation 9/2
Kelso 5-1
Forego 50-1
Cigar 8-1
Spectacular Bid 6-1
Tiznow 20-1
Damascus 8-1
Affirmed 12-1
Buckpasser 6-1
Native Dancer 10-1

Almost there now. Interchange your ML odds on Ghostzapper (50/1), Forego (8/1) and Cigar (15/1) and you're just about on the money.

[cj]

Cigar at 8-1? He wouldn't make my race if the top 50 of all time were included.

[GaryG]

No mention of Round Table. He was considered a grass horse but won plenty of big races on dirt. I'd make him 2-5 in a 3 horse race against Tiznow and Cigar.

[46zilzal]

match races are not as telling as a race amongst a pace and a field.

The few I've witnessed were more like Olympic cylcing contests with the one out front going slow and playing cat and mouse with the one behind.

That isn't racing, that's pure tactics with the advantage to the one in front. Look how the trainers worked on their mounts to quicken from the gate in Seabiscuit/War Admiral. Nashua/Swaps, Foolish Pleasure/Ruffian, Typecast/Convenience, or even in the "bomb" of Miss Musket/Chris Everett.

50/1 on Forego? as gritty as he was? I'd take a piece fo that one.

[gIracing]

you'd have to make a different one for grass.

I think ghostzapper doesn't get any love because he was "recent" but was the most dominat horse of my generation. If he would have raced the entire 2005 year, he would have won another BC. he could win long, short, rate, take the lead, didnt' matter. if he was healthy you might as well scratch your horse.

I'm with you on Cigar... I'll met you half way at 30-1.

Forego was a typo.. was supposed to be 10 to 1.. I can live with 8 to 1.

[46zilzal]

You simply cannot compare generationally different or different era horses. Their nutrition, steel shoes, training methods - all different.

May as well throw in Eclipse and/or Ribot in the mix

[ghostyapper]

Alydar was merely a foil for Affirmed as a 3YO, and he followed that up with an utterly mediocre 4YO campaign-- couldn't win a Grade 1 stakes against older competition.



So you consider a horse that goes 10-7-3 his 3yo season a foil?

Alydar trounced older horses in the whitney as a 3yo. He won by like 10 galloping. He was never the same after the injury he suffered in the travers so his 4yo campaign should not be used against him.

The funny thing is you want to keep alydar from the list cause he couldn't beat affirmed. You want to add spectacular bid who guess what?? COULDN'T BEAT AFFIRMED!!!

[ghostyapper]

Fager and Slew would go 1:09 for 6f, 1:33 to the mile and be swept away in the stretch by the closers.

I doubt slew would fold even dueling with fager. The fractions he ran in the 12 furlong jcgc were sick and he still lost by only a head to a very talented champion.

[46zilzal]

I doubt slew would fold even dueling with fager. The fractions he ran in the 12 furlong jcgc were sick and he still lost by only a head to a very talented champion.



none of those listed could stay with Fager unless the went out in 44 and 107 and change. Seem to recall that is what it took to make the doctor meltdown...

[classhandicapper]

I'm with you on Alydar. I didn't put him on my original list (which just included horses I've personally seen and can evaluate reasonably well because I'm familiar with the competition etc...) but he belongs on any list regardless. In fact, it's in looking at how dominant and brilliant Alydar was when Affirmed wasn't in the race that you get a better picture of just how good they both were as 3YOs. He was not the same horse after his injuries.

Sticking with the last 30 or so years, I would add Sunday Silence and Easy Goer among the best I've seen. Slew of Gold was no slouch either when he was at his best.

Going back further, Damascus, Buckpasser, Swaps, Nashua, Tom Fool, Native Dancer and some others were also obviously great horses.

I think you can't really appreciate Fager without realizing how great Damascus was before his best form started to deteriorate. He was a monster. Had it not been for having a tough time pre race in the Derby, his reputation would be twice what it is today because he probably would have won the Triple Crown.

There were also some horses I've seen that deserve honorable mentions because they retired prematurely while they were still developing and might have been great had they continued running. Horses like Smarty Jones, Point Given, and Risen Star quickly come to mind.

[cj's dad]

He was odds-on in all 21 of his races -- three times being quoted by bookmakers at 1-100. He won the Belmont Stakes by 20 lengths and the Lawrence Realization by 100 lengths. He beat the best horses of his time, including John P. Grier and Triple Crown winner Sir Barton.

Man o' War's time records included:

New World Record, Dwyer Stakes, 1 1/8 miles
New World Record, Belmont Stakes, 1 3/8 miles
New World Record, Lawrence Realization, 1 5/8 miles
New American Record, Jockey Club Stakes, 1 1/2 miles
New American Record, Withers Stakes, 1 mile
New Track Record, Kenilworth Park Gold Cup, 1 1/4 miles
New Track Record, Potomac Handicap, 1 1/16 miles
Equaled Track Record, Travers Stakes, 1 1/4 miles

On nearly a dozen occasions, the interior fractions of his races were completed in times that would have broken American and/or world records.

His records stood the test of time. His 1-1/2 mile American record stood for 17 years.

He didn't just take a tick off time records, he obliterated them. Up against Triple Crown winner Sir Barton, Man o' War took more than SIX full seconds off the track record for 1 1/4 miles at Kenilworth Park.

He won easily over tracks labeled fast, good and sloppy.

He won at distances from five furlongs to 1-5/8 miles.

He won on straight courses and on both clockwise and counter-clockwise courses.

He carried and won with 130 pounds five times as a TWO-year old.

At three, he won with 131 pounds in the Miller Stakes, 135 pounds in the Stuyvesant and 138 pounds in the Potomac.

He gave extreme weight concessions to the competition. In one race, the second high weight carried 32 pounds less.

At three, he consistently gave major weight concessions to, and beat, older horses.

He retired as the greatest money-winning Thoroughbred ever.

Writing in the 1947 volume of "American Race Horses," another legendary racing writer and historian, Joe Palmer, said of Big Red:

"He did not beat, he merely annihilated. He did not run to world records, he galloped to them. He was so far superior to his contemporaries that, except for one race against John P. Grier, they could not extend him. In 1920 he dominated racing as perhaps no athlete -- not Tilden or Jones or Dempsey or Louis or Nurmi or Thorpe or any human athlete -- had dominated his sport."

Geez, it looks I got my top choice right !!:lol:

[gIracing]

how many records does man o war still hold?



I don't think there is a horse in the last 20 years that can touch dr fager with a 10 foot pole

[46zilzal]

how many records does man o war still hold?




For many years Belmont did not card races at 1 3/8ths so as to keep the track record of June 12th, 1920 intact for Man O' War at 2:14 1/5

[gIracing]

2:14 1/5 for a mile and a half or a mile and a quarter? It better be a mile and a half

[46zilzal]

2:14 1/5 for a mile and a half or a mile and a quarter? It better be a mile and a half

ONE mile and 3/8ths

also tied with Kelso (in this old edition of the American Racing Manual) at 1 5/8ths in 2:40 4/5 September 4, 1920.

[classhandicapper]

Here are Cigar's PPs for anyone that wants to review them.

http://www.drf.com/hcponline/samples/269.pdf

[Secretariat]

For many years Belmont did not card races at 1 3/8ths so as to keep the track record of June 12th, 1920 intact for Man O' War at 2:14 1/5

It wasn't many years, but I could be wrong. About 1926 or so I beleive.

Man O'War ran the Belmont in 214 and 2/5ths seconds at 1 mile and 3/8ths or 11 furlongs.

Secretariat ran the Belmont in 225 at a mile and a half or 12 furlongs.

Generally, horses who run shorter distances have a faster rate of time per fulrong.

Man O'War's Belmont at the shorter distance comes out to 12.218 per furlong of his Belmont. Secretariat's was 12.083 per furlong. Add to this that Secretariat ran against the following early fractions before Sham cracked.
23.3 - 46.1 - 109.4.

Those are scorching early fractions and should have cooked both horses. It didn't for Big Red. It did for Sham.

Another interesting comparision is the next race after the Belmont for Man O'War was the mile and a half Jockey Club Stakes. He ran it in 228 and 4/5ths. Using the 1/5th for length for each point of variant that comes out to 19 lengths behind Secretariat at a mile and a half when compared to his Belmont.

One could argue that the starts in Man O'Wars day were from a tape barrier rather than a starting gate, but over a long race that I doubt that amounts to a 19 length differnetial. I don't have the middle fractions of those races but they'd offer a good comparision when excluding the start times.

Did Man O'War race on the turf? Just wondered. Secretariat ran quite well on it.

btw.. Iam surprised no foreign horses made it to Davidowitz's list. Maybe I missed some. Should a horse like Phar Lap have been included?

[RXB]

You're actually shortchanging your hero by a full second. He ran the 12f in 2:24, not 2:25.

But raw time comparisons are futile. God only knows how fast or slow the track might have been when Man O' War ran over it. When Seattle Slew won the Belmont the track was muddy and slow and it was reflected in his time. Not a true measure of his quality.

[RXB]

I doubt slew would fold even dueling with fager. The fractions he ran in the 12 furlong jcgc were sick and he still lost by only a head to a very talented champion.

He dispatched Life's Magic shortly after the 6f mark. If he were somehow to dispatch Dr. Fager in a duel-- no horse ever did-- it would've taken much longer than 6f to do so. Also, horses better than Exceller are entered in our little dream race. So yes, Slew would've been run over in the stretch by several entrants. Same with Fager.

[DrugS]

Spectacular Bid would get my vote.

Man O' War was from the 2nd smallest foal crop of the entire 1900's, never faced a serious horse in his entire career---and his track record clockings came against fields with one or two other challengers...where he was able to use his superior early speed to his advantage.

[Secretariat]

You're actually shortchanging your hero by a full second. He ran the 12f in 2:24, not 2:25.

But raw time comparisons are futile. God only knows how fast or slow the track might have been when Man O' War ran over it. When Seattle Slew won the Belmont the track was muddy and slow and it was reflected in his time. Not a true measure of his quality.

You're right. Make that a 24 length advantage over Man o'War's mile and a half Jockey Club Stakes races which was over a fast track. Now yes, variants do affect races. But a 24 length advantage over both fast tracks is signficant. Especially in lieu of the pace Secretariat ran those Belmont fractions in. And the time per furlong in the Belmont for Sec was even faster than I posted. I think Man O'War was a great horse, I just belevie Secretariat was a better one - on or off the turf.

[GaryG]

Spectacular Bid would get my vote.

Man O' War was from the 2nd smallest foal crop of the entire 1900's, never faced a serious horse in his entire career---and his track record clockings came against fields with one or two other challengers...where he was able to use his superior early speed to his advantage.Ever hear of Sir Barton?

[46zilzal]

QUOTE: "Did Man O'War race on the turf? Just wondered. Secretariat ran quite well on it."

No, very few N.A. race courses had turf back then.

Carried 138 near the end of his three year old season at 8.5 furlongs.

[ghostyapper]

You're right. Make that a 24 length advantage over Man o'War's mile and a half Jockey Club Stakes races which was over a fast track. Now yes, variants do affect races. But a 24 length advantage over both fast tracks is signficant. Especially in lieu of the pace Secretariat ran those Belmont fractions in. And the time per furlong in the Belmont for Sec was even faster than I posted. I think Man O'War was a great horse, I just belevie Secretariat was a better one - on or off the turf.

You can't compare times on the same track from day to day and you are trying to compare them 50 years apart?

[cj]

Ever hear of Sir Barton?

The horse did very little before and after his Triple Crown. It wasn't even considered such until much later on.

Sir Barton was actually the only horse not foaled in 1917 that he even faced on the track.

[saevena]

I agree with Zilzal that it is impossible to compare horses of different generations. Over the years I've read the views of different horse people about the great horses. Eddie Arcaro said that Kelso was the greatest horse he ever rode; Shoemaker said Spectacular Bid was the best he rode. John Nerud said that no horse could have beaten Dr. Fager up to a flat mile (I think he was right). Interestingly enough, both Matt Winn ( a track official who created the Triple Crown and saw Man 'O War race) and Bob Moore (who worked on the back side for many years, later was a journalist, and saw Man 'O War, Secretariat, and all of the great horses until 1975) said that Exterminator was the greatest horse they ever saw. He ran until age 9 and won 50 of his 100 starts, finishing in the money 84 times (as I recall, Man 'O War ducked him once or twice when they were scheduled to run against each other; of his 21 starts, in only 8 races did Man 'O War face more than 4 other horses). Exterminator won races from 5 and one-half furlongs to 2 and one-quarter miles over deep mud and fast tracks. He carried as much as 140 lbs. and 35 times he carried 130 lbs. or more, winning 20 of these races. Anybody could train him, anybody could ride him. In 1943 he was vanned to Belmont Park to make his final appearance at a race track (he and his pony companion "Peanuts" came down the stretch) and sell war bonds. The 31,300 fans in attendance that day purchased $25 million in war bonds. A great racing book is Bob Moore's Those Wonderful Days, from which much of this information was obtained.

[Hank]

But the Doc's combination of Crazy freakish speed and fierce pitbull like gameness earns him a special place in my hall of champions.I even admire him for his intractable personality unwilling to yield to man or beast,sure as a racehorse it created a chink in his armour, but he did not want any sob in front of him at any time, cause he KNEW he was the BOSS and his rightful place was at the LEAD of his herd.:ThmbUp:

[Bruddah]

However,what I think all of us fail to understand is, each of our favorites was only the THE BEST OF THEIR GENERATION That's all any of them ever ran against. It's certainly impossible to say, which was the best of all time. The journalistic hacks, of this sport, can only give you their opinions. None better than yours or mine.

Each of you put forth good arguments for those you endorsed. However, I am still convinced Native Dancer would fill the best of all time. Especially, if his progeny and their records are taken into account. (JMHHO) :)

[46zilzal]

even the best can be had: When Cigar shipped West, it was Siphon's presence in that race that spelled his doom. Couldn't go with him, couldn't let him go out by himself.

Rabbtis caused the great Fager to soften up.

There is a way to beat most of these great ones on any given day. I recall Quiet Little Table getting Forego....It happens when the pace distributions overwhelming tax the style of the logical choice.

[DrugS]

Ever hear of Sir Barton?

Yes...he entered the Kentucky Derby as a maiden...only running in it to ensure a fast pace for his stablemate Billy Kelly and play the role of rabbit....

He left the Belmont Stakes as the first horse to sweep what is now called the Triple Crown.

I think Billy Kelly beat him about nine or ten times in his career....I'd have liked to have seen what would have happened if Man O' War met Exterminator, while facing a full field of horses, some with some early speed...which would negate the massive tactical edge he held in all those match races.

It was obviously never going to happen though. Man O' War's connections choose to duck Exterminator, even in a race under much more favorable circumstances than the hypothetical race I described between the two.

[classhandicapper]

My feeling is that horses with greater early speed are often superior to the opponents that can beat them in full fields where there is typically an average or faster than average pace.

People tend to think that speed horses have a tactical and strategic advantage by being on the lead and saving ground (which is true), but all my research on pace suggests that even in a "honest paced" race, the front runners tend to expend their energy in an inefficient way. Even an average pace for the class is a little too fast.

That superiority is often demonstrated match races. It's not a tactical advantage that tends to give speed horses the upper hand in match races. It's the fact that both horses are either forced to expend their energy equally (proving that the speed horse has more of it) or that the front runner is allowed to expend his more efficiently than under typical race conditions.

(I am not referring to very slow paces here. That is a tactical advantage.)

IMHO, horses like Fager and Seattle Slew are much better than people give them credit for relative to some of the horses that might beat them under tough race conditions.

I'm the very rare bird that thinks that match races actually do a better job of proving who the better horse is.

[classhandicapper]

By the way, Ruffian's breakdown was one of the biggest tragedies in racing history. I shed my first tear for a horse that day. However, I don't see how match races increase the probability of a breakdown over the dozens of races held each day where horses duel on the lead. I don't even think that a match race automatically translates into a severe speed duel. It just happened that day because Jolley felt that he needed to test the filly to win.

I wish they would bring match races back. I think if two great horses were matched heads up it would create an exceptionally exciting racing event and might even attract new fans to racing because of all the guaranteed national and even international hype.

[DrugS]

That superiority is often demonstrated match races. It's not a tactical advantage that tends to give speed horses the upper hand in match races. It's the fact that both horses are either forced to expend their energy equally (proving that the speed horse has more of it) or that the front runner is allowed to expend his more efficiently than under typical race conditions.

Compared to typical races with full sized fields---of course having superior early speed is a bigger tactical advantage in match races. That's common sense.


Man O' War's connections didn't duck Exterminator out of the kind of race where he would have been kept honest by other speed types though.

Saying that a horse proves he's the greatest to ever live by winning match races, or beating two other horses, and refusing to take on the top older horse--and just beating up on the 2nd smallest foal crop of the century (more than 33 times a smaller crop than the Easy Goer/Sunday Silence crop) that is a pretty perverted way of judging an all-time greatest horse.

I'd rather see a horse take on the best---instead of ducking them---and I'd want to see him handle full fields and difficult racing situations that can come with them. I realize it's not Man O' War's fault that he was born into a microscopic foal crop....but, it doesn't mean that he that he had to race exclusively against them. There were something like just 800 males foaled his year, and you wonder how many didn't even make it to the track. This was also before a lot of that quality Europen blood came over and really helped our breeding industry out.

[classhandicapper]

Compared to typical races with full sized fields---of course having superior early speed is a bigger tactical advantage in match races. That's common sense.


We are defining things differently.

You are calling speed a tactical advantage in a match race.

I am saying is an advantage "relative" to the typical race. But I am also saying that in a full field, speed horses are usually at a tactical pace DISADVANTAGE because even an average pace is too fast.

A match race, it is closer to "neutral" because the other horse is forced to push the speed horse to an average pace instead of having the advantage of having other horses doing his dirty work. If he doesn't, the speed horse can relax into an efficient pace (NOT SLOW, JUST EFFICIENT) and prove his SUPERIORITY.

People are used to thinking of "average" (as in the typical full field) as automatically equal to "fair". My research suggests that average is too fast when it comes to pace. Of course ground loss is another issue, but it is understood better than pace.

I agree with most of your comments regarding Man O War.

[DrugS]

We are defining things differently.

You are calling speed a tactical advantage in a match race.

I am saying is an advantage "relative" to the typical race. But I am also saying that in a full field, speed horses are usually at a tactical pace DISADVANTAGE because even an average pace is too fast.

I hear ya....and see what you're saying now.

I agree to a large extent...but...

The opposite of saying that a horse with superior speed has a tacitcal advantage in a match race---would be that a horse with inferior early speed has a tactical disadvantage in a match race...because he must be taken out of his game and used early to keep the naturally faster horse honest.

As opposed to races with a bigger field size--where he can get help from other horses to do so.

That's all I'm saying.

[Hank]

I agree with Class capper,which is why champions like Doc and Slew earn a speical wing in my hall of champs,Slews gritty loss in the gold cup after battling Affirmed through hellish fractions is one one the great performances and displays of class of all time, same with the Doc in the brooklyn.This got me thinking Slew and Doc both being in our mythical race of all time,makes a win by either unlikely,BUT Wait ,theres a late stratch of slew or doc is the other now a solid pick?I say yes

[ghostyapper]

Compared to typical races with full sized fields---of course having superior early speed is a bigger tactical advantage in match races. That's common sense.


Man O' War's connections didn't duck Exterminator out of the kind of race where he would have been kept honest by other speed types though.

Saying that a horse proves he's the greatest to ever live by winning match races, or beating two other horses, and refusing to take on the top older horse--and just beating up on the 2nd smallest foal crop of the century (more than 33 times a smaller crop than the Easy Goer/Sunday Silence crop) that is a pretty perverted way of judging an all-time greatest horse.

I'd rather see a horse take on the best---instead of ducking them---and I'd want to see him handle full fields and difficult racing situations that can come with them. I realize it's not Man O' War's fault that he was born into a microscopic foal crop....but, it doesn't mean that he that he had to race exclusively against them. There were something like just 800 males foaled his year, and you wonder how many didn't even make it to the track. This was also before a lot of that quality Europen blood came over and really helped our breeding industry out.

Man O war faced older horses several times as a 3yo and gave weight to them. Its not like he just faced colts from his crop. Also although Exterminator was a great horse, he did lose half the races he ran in. Lets not make him out to be more than he is. Man o war won 20 out of 21 and his only loss came when he was facing the wrong way at the start.

[DrugS]

Man O war faced older horses several times as a 3yo and gave weight to them. Its not like he just faced colts from his crop.

By several---I think you actually must mean just one. Sir Barton.

And as far as him "giving weight" --- that's not true either-- Sir Barton had to give Man O' War 6 pounds in the match race.


Also although Exterminator was a great horse, he did lose half the races he ran in.

He was 50-for-100, with 84 ITM finishes....and he was a hard hitting horse who took on all comers.

[JPinMaryland]

Man o War did not dodge Exterminator. Originally it was just Sir Barton and MoW at 10f. Then Exterminator's connections wanted to get in. But the connections of SB and Ex could not agree on a distance with Exterminator's preferring 12f and Sir Barton's preferring shorter distance. So it was left to the original entrants.

[DrugS]

Man o War did not dodge Exterminator.

This was prior to the match race with Sir Barton.

"Kilmer was anxious to take on the super horse; it was Sam Riddle, Man o' War's owner, who appeared to duck the issue. Exterminator shipped from Saratoga to Canada where he won a stakes on August 28. Riddle immediately announced that Man o' war would contest the Saratoga Cup three days later figuring the coast was clear. When Kilmer got wind of this Exterminator was quickly brought back.

Racing writer David Alexander put it this way: "Exterminator came back to win the Saratoga Cup, despite the fact he had had a hard race three days before. When the frightening news of Exterminator's return reached Riddle, however, he withdrew Man o' War from the weight-for-age event."

[bigmack]

Is you a shorter monikered version of a Drug that pranced through these parts that previously penned with a Salvastore?

[46zilzal]

Many experienced horseman rank Phar Lap as potentially the greatest to have run in North America based upon his history and his single, track record breaking run on a quarter crack at Agua Caliente.

[DrugS]

Is you a shorter monikered version of a Drug that pranced through these parts that previously penned with a Salvastore?

Kind of.

DrugSalvastore was arguably the greatest mind in the history of the interwebs---however, he got bored with it all....so he decided to go out and pay an illegal immigrant $3 an hour to post for him...


Of course it's me my friend......

[bigmack]

he decided to go out and pay an illegal immigrant $3 an hour to post for him...
Of course it's me my friend......
Take it from someone who outsources tasks. You ain't never gonna find anyone to do nuttin' for $3/hr who parks their can in this country. The Phillipines or India more likely.

Vid of Man O' War:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3Xkunfywo4

[46zilzal]

People tend to think that speed horses have a tactical and strategic advantage by being on the lead and saving ground (which is true), but all my research on pace suggests that even in a "honest paced" race, the front runners tend to expend their energy in an inefficient way. Even an average pace for the class is a little too fast.


I used to believe that too, no longer. the front end is where it's at.

[classhandicapper]

I used to believe that too, no longer. the front end is where it's at.

IMO, you have the right answer for the wrong reason. ;)

The front end is PARTLY where it's at because closers have to cope with ground loss, trouble, and other race development issues that put them at a disadvantage "on average". However, the front runners ARE using themselves early even when the pace is just average and are also winning because they are actually superior horses in most cases.

[46zilzal]

You have to realize you are PROJECTING: the lines used were against a different field than the one they are running against today......Quirin found the same thing. Up close you do much better at all distances on dirt.

[Cratos]

Compared to most PA members, I am a relative newcomer (15 years) to the sport and as such, I have been researching past racing greats. I came up with these three as the best (IMHO) ever. I would like to read comments on your favorites and the reasoning I am probably off base with these choices and/or their ranking.

#1 - Man O War- 21 starts-20 wins/1 second

#2 - Spectacular Bid - 30 starts- 26/2/1

#3 - Secretariat - 21 starts - 16/3/1

:ThmbUp: :ThmbDown:

This is an interesting question and I fully realize that there isn’t any way to absolutely say which horse is the best of all time for a variety of reasons (e.g. different eras of racing, improved veterinary technology, and track surface modernization, etc.) Also most of us will be giving our opinions sprinkled with our emotions. However based on the horses that I have seen and read about, my top three would be as follows:

Secretariat – I believe if this horse had been trained by either John Nerud or Frank Whiteley he would have retired undefeated. Big Red lived beyond his hype and the best two comments about him that I have read come from Hatton Rose who said that “Secretariat could only be compared to himself” and Eddie Sweat said in speaking of Secretariat that he was the “mostest of the most,” two very lofty comments.

Man O’War – I give him a slight edge over my 3rd choice Dr. Fager because of stamina. This horse probably was the best long distance horse to ever run in North America. Also I have him behind Big Red because I don’t think any horse ever had Big Red’s speed and stamina combination.

Dr. Fager – This is the first big time stakes horse that I saw run in person and that was 40 years ago at Aqueduct in the Woodward when Frank Whiteley entered the rabbit, Hevedar to "cook" the good Doctor and help the great Damascus win. Dr Fager is my all-time favorite because I just enjoyed his competitiveness and I saw every one his races that was run in New York until he was retired in November 1968. Only two horses ever finished in front of him and at distances of 7f and below there just wasn’t any competition for him.

[46zilzal]

There are many in the first half of the century that are overlooked Citation, Phar Lap, Native Dancer, Exterminator. N.D. only lost ONE race, the Kentucky Derby and that was due to a bad ride. Still it is very hard to compare generationally

[MrSuave1]

Forget Man o War and Secretariat. Big Cy was the all time greatest IMOP.
For his first two years he was 27 for 29, with two excusable seconds. No other horse even comes close. Against the best horses of his time, against older horses (Belmont and Preakness winners) 5+ times (his first two races as a 3 year old were against older horses, including Armed, 1947 Horse of the Year). He ran the Sysonby Mile, and whipped the fastest horses in the country, then THREE DAYS LATER, won the Jockey Club Gold Cup by 7 lengths (and back then it was a 2 mile race), then 2 weeks later won the Empire Stakes Gold Cup at 1-5/8 miles with ease. No other horse dared to face him in the Pimlico Special. Total domination.

Man o' War also was totally dominant, but the nature of his opposition is not clear. Many horses were scared to face him, and those that did were of dubious merit. Remember him winning by 100 lengths? The only other horse in the race had never won a race and hurt himself early on. This is not to demean Man o War, but simply to state the obvious. The competition he faced was not of the same caliber as Big Cy faced.

Secretariat. Yes, his Belmont was fabulous, and his record may never be broken on dirt (although I hear the track was abnormally fast that day; in fact, a track record had been set in the previous race, and several records were broken in the surrounding months). But his Preakness has been tied, and his Derby, though not tied or broken, has been closely approached, by Sham on the same day, and Monarchos, an average horse, who ran it in under 2 minutes.

So to those who go ga-ga over times, I guess Secretariat will always be their god. But he lost 3 races out of 12 starts as a 3 year old, a not very distinguished record compared to other equine greats. Man o War had one lifetime loss (disputable) and Big Cy, well he shouldn't have lost any as a two or three year old. See my website at BigCy1948.tripod.com and see if I can't make a convert out of you!

[MrSuave1]

Sec IS very overrated, and if saying that is a sacrilege, so be it. Actually, Sham was very injured in the Derby, getting his mouth smashed by another horse in the gate. He was bleeding with teeth hanging out, but managed to run the second fastest Derby, just two lengths behind Big Red. Imagine if he was in tip top shape! Sham was an ordinary horse, but somehow, racing against Sec brought out the best in him!

I am a Citation booster, and I think he is the most underrated horse (although Bloodhorse named him #3.) Many in his day called him Man o' War's equal, and equally as many said he was better. The fact that he is underappreciated is a result, I am sure, of people's ignorance of what he did as a three year old, feats which have never been equalled. Go to my website at BigCy1948.tripod.com and see what I mean.

You seem to hold the fact that he was injured and was unable to race as a four year old against him. Those injuries were the direct result of the stupidity and greed of his owner, Warren Wright, and his trainer, Jimmy Jones. He came back at 5 and 6 and raced on the West Coast. At five, he actually ran quite well, breaking the world record for the mile, and racing five times against the powerful Noor, coming in second in all of them, but giving him quite a bit of weight in three races.

Citation continued to race at 6 until he won a million dollars, his owner's dying wish. A braver, more determined horse you will never find. Don't compare him to Secretariat.

[MrSuave1]

I quite agree. For all those who are infatuated with time and records, Swaps set many more than Secretariat, and with bad legs on top of it!

[MrSuave1]

Nobody here seems to have heard of Citation's record. At the end of his third year, 1948, he was 29-27-2, with those two losses not his fault. Beating the toughest horses his own age, he took on older horses and whipped them, too. He was unstoppable, totally dominant. But go on--keep on thinking MOW and Secretariat were the best like everybody else. Someday the truth will come out. (I agree with you, though, on The Bid. He was mind-boggling!).

[MrSuave1]

You are right about one thing. You need to do quite a bit of research. Your picks are ridiculous if you don't even mention a horse named Citation. But you aren't the only one. This magnificent colt seems to be destined to be ignored by people like you, who adore Man o' War (who never faced any real competition), and Secretariat, who lost three major stakes races when he was three. When you make a choice, make it an informed choice.

[MrSuave1]

Times are so conditional; they are the poorest indication of a horse's true ability. Sham ran injured in the Derby, but finished second only two lengths behind, running the second fastest derby. Monarchos, a mediocre horse, has run it in under two minutes. His Preakness times have been tied twice this year. His Belmont will probably prove to be untouchable, but this may be because few races are 1-1/2 miles anymore, and horses are bred for speed, not endurance nowadays.

Comparing Sec's times to MOW's is a ridiculous exercise in futility.

[MrSuave1]

Many good horses don't win in the Derby. Perhaps it is the ridiculously large fields. In 1974, Little Current ran in a crowd of 23 horses (the next year a rule was instituted making 20 the limit). A stretch runner, he was blocked from coming to the front from last, and finished 5th. He won the Preakness and Belmont, but his loss at Louisville prevented him from winning the Triple Crown.

[PaceAdvantage]

Wow, 7 replies in a row. I think that's a record.

[MrSuave1]

I agree completely. Alone, he was the best. My only bone of contention is about the quality of his competition. I'm not sure he was ever really challenged. But no horse every dominated like he did.

Until Citation. MOW died in 1947, the year Citation started racing. Many feel that was no coincidence, and later felt that Citation was the next bearer of MOW's totally dominance of the field.

[bigmack]

Wow, 7 replies in a row. I think that's a record.
You busted up 8. Now THAT could have been the record.

[MrSuave1]

I totally agree. All Sec's fans talk about are his times, not realizing how conditional time is. Suppose he had run on sloppy or gloppy tracks? He may have won, but he wouldn't have set any track records. As Ben Jones said, "Time only counts when you are in jail."

[MrSuave1]

I agree. Omitting Citation makes the list a joke. He could pull a cart and beat any horse on the list.

[BillW]

Wow, 7 replies in a row. I think that's a record.
... ignoring OT :lol:

[MrSuave1]

How many records does MOW still hold? None. But that's an unfair question that underscores your basic lack of knowledge. It also underscores the ludicrousness of basing quality on times only. It is as ridiculous as basing it on amount of money won. Records are made to be broken. By man and by horses.

[MrSuave1]

Comparisons between the two horses are futile and inane. Who was greater, Jack Johnson or Mohammed Ali? Who was funnier, Charlie Chaplin or Jack Benny? Who was the better golfer, Bobby Jones or Jack Nicklaus? Again, it looks like you are relying on speed/records to make your point, which is the weakest of evidence.

[MrSuave1]

RXB you may the the most intelligent one on the thread. Watching stop watches is a fool's game. Suppose Sec had run on slop. I hear that after Slew won, his time was made fun of by a Sec fan. They replied, "But the Slew won the Triple Crown undefeated, unlike Secretariat." Touche.

[Edward DeVere]

Records are made to be broken.

Give me a holler the next time the Belmont goes in 223.4.

[statik27]

Mr Suave1?

Are you answering your own questions?

[The Judge]

Is how Fast can a horse run. Thats time and thats records; anything else is a cop-out. Secretariat worked out faster then Man of War could run.

As an aside I read that Man Of War didn't run in the Kentucky Derby because he ran in the Preakness which was held on the "same day." I heard that there was a bitter fight between the folks at Pimilco and Churchill Downs so Pimilco got Man of War to run there and not in the Derby. Sam Riddle later came up with he thought 3 years old was too young for a horse to run 1 1/4 carring so much weight. Anyone know for sure? I'll look for the article

[Pace Cap'n]

Perhaps Mr. Suave has overlooked the "quote" button.

[MrSuave1]

I assume the Judge has seen Man o' War race, otherwise how can he compare him to Secretariat? Does he mean Sec would wipe the floor with him on a 1920 track or a 1973 track? Using the same horseshoes? On fast, sloppy, gloppy, and turf tracks? Carrying the same amount of weight? Sprints, one mile, mile and a half, two miles? How many turns? How hot or cold a day? Some horses can't run well on humid days.

Sorry, time is NOT the crucial factor because it has so many conditions. Whose nose crosses the finish line first is most important. Whether a record was set or not is totally inconsequential. Many horses have exceptional days, even unexceptional horses, and set records. Even Sec's record is conditional: it is the fastest time on DIRT; Hawkster bettered it on turf. Will it ever be broken? Well, I never say "never", but it will take an exceptionally fast horse, who can run 1-1/2 miles on a really fast Belmont track, who is really feeling great that day. He may break it by only 1/100 of a second, but that's the nature of records, isn't it?

I have nothing against Sec. He was a beautiful, great colt. I don't like his fans who deify him. Sorry, he wasn't numero uno.

[Humph]

The best in the past 27 years:

Dubai Millennium
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubai_Millennium


Unfortunately, he died before stud duty.



Timeform's lofty opinion of DM has always been a contentious issue , mainly because the horse didn't race against strong opposition, and many have questioned the substance of his victories ; his 6 length destruction of Sumitas, who wasn't the greatest horse to have contested a turf Gr1, at Royal Ascot is a typical example of his form.

[MrSuave1]

Perhaps Mr. Suave has overlooked the "quote" button.

Did I do it right this time? Sorry!!!!

[MrSuave1]

Mr Suave1?

Are you answering your own questions?

Whaddya mean??

[46zilzal]

All these "best ever" lists never have any historical perspective, even the ones European based forget about Ribot, Brigader Gerrard, Nashwan and many others and then never consider greats like Exterminator or Phar Lap. Forego and Dr. Fager have to be considered with many others. There is no best only the best of a decade perhaps.

You cannot compare generationally different animals as there is no uniform yardstick.

Then there is the sex bias as Miesque and Ta Wee were two of the best, (not to mention the undefeated Personal Ensign), I ever saw race.

[MrSuave1]

Give me a holler the next time the Belmont goes in 223.4.

The 1973 Belmont is Secretariat's sole claim to fame. You can't judge a horse's lifetime on one race. Glad you didn't mention the 31 lengths. That is totally ridiculous (the next horse would have come in at 2:30 on a super fast track).

[46zilzal]

The 1973 Belmont is Secretariat's sole claim to fame. You can't judge a horse's lifetime on one race. Glad you didn't mention the 31 lengths. That is totally ridiculous (the next horse would have come in at 2:30 on a super fast track).
SOLE?

Broke the world's record for 1 5/8ths EASED UP in the Belmont race.

Runs the Derby in track record time with each fraction faster that the previous one.

Wins the Preakness in track record time with a move on the CLUBHOUSE turn the likes of which I have never seen before or since.

Best know what you are talking about when you start this nonsense.

Don't you find it a bit strange that EVERYONE in racing from the top down agrees that this one was one of the best ever? Hatton remarked he had never seen anything like it. People who had seen Man O' War and Citation run claimed he was as good or better. This is not an isolated opinion here.

Breaks the track record on the Belmont grass the first time he sets foot on it.

Breaks the world's record for 9.0 furlongs.

Superlatives abound in many of his races....

Everyone from racing secretaries to grooms to owners to breeders, around the world agree that this one was in a class by himself.

[MrSuave1]

You busted up 8. Now THAT could have been the record.

Sorry. I am brand new here and have a lot to say. But now I know how to use the "Quote" button. To use the "Reply" button to actually reply to a quotation really threw me off! Think my record will last long?

[46zilzal]

Sorry. I am brand new here and have a lot to say.
Then it might help to back up what you say with facts not supposition.

[toetoe]

Has anyone mentioned Grade I winner Stuka ? :lol: :lol:

[MrSuave1]

Then it might help to back up what you say with facts not supposition.

Tell me where my facts are wrong. I'd really like to know.

[Tom]

Don't mind him, MrSuave, he never offers anything but his own opinons and pawns them off as facts. Or he gets facts not releated to the topic. :lol:

Welcome to the board. You certainly seem passionate about racing. This is a good thing.

[MrSuave1]

SOLE?

Broke the world's record for 1 5/8ths EASED UP in the Belmont race.

Runs the Derby in track record time with each fraction faster that the previous one.

Wins the Preakness in track record time with a move on the CLUBHOUSE turn the likes of which I have never seen before or since.

Best know what you are talking about when you start this nonsense.

Don't you find it a bit strange that EVERYONE in racing from the top down agrees that this one was one of the best ever? Hatton remarked he had never seen anything like it. People who had seen Man O' War and Citation run claimed he was as good or better. This is not an isolated opinion here.

Breaks the track record on the Belmont grass the first time he sets foot on it.

Breaks the world's record for 9.0 furlongs.

Superlatives abound in many of his races....

Everyone from racing secretaries to grooms to owners to breeders, around the world agree that this one was in a class by himself.

Track records don't impress me. There are lots of tracks and lots of records. Swaps has many more than Secretariat. His Preakness was tied twice this year, and his Derby closely approached (unless you give tremendous importance to hundredths of a second). Again, all you talk about is TIME. I find the fact that he lost three major stakes races to mediocre horses when he was three more telling. Don't start with the excuses. Many horses have raced when hurt somewhat and won.

You are obviously one of those who go ga-ga over times. But I stand by my statement that the Belmont is Secretariat's major claim to fame.

[MrSuave1]

Don't mind him, MrSuave, he never offers anything but his own opinons and pawns them off as facts. Or he gets facts not releated to the topic. :lol:

Welcome to the board. You certainly seem passionate about racing. This is a good thing.

Thanks much for the kind words. I am a newbie to horseracing (about a year), but I've read a lot and learned a lot. I used to be a Secretariat worshipper, until I learned about Citation. Now, I am a Citation worshipper! I think it is sad that he does not get the appreciation due him by many horse-racing fans. I can only assume that this is because they are unaware of his incredible achievements as a three-year-old. I hope, in my small way, to remedy that!

[46zilzal]

Tell me where my facts are wrong. I'd really like to know.
That one race makes a horse. NOT this one

He not only won races, he destroyed the best of his time on both surfaces. His moves are incredible race to race.

Your NEWBIE-NESS shows big time.

[46zilzal]

Track records don't impress me. There are lots of tracks and lots of records. Swaps has many more than Secretariat. His Preakness was tied twice this year, and his Derby closely approached (unless you give tremendous importance to hundredths of a second). Again, all you talk about is TIME. I find the fact that he lost three major stakes races to mediocre horses when he was three more telling. Don't start with the excuses. Many horses have raced when hurt somewhat and won.

You are obviously one of those who go ga-ga over times. But I stand by my statement that the Belmont is Secretariat's major claim to fame.
Well be alone in your claims while the vast majority of horsemen throughout the world say differently. Charles Hatton (DRF) admitted that superlatives related to him never came out of his mouth before.

when can you recall that last SPRINTER than came home in under 24? He did that as a three year old under 126 after going 9 furlongs in the Derby. That is the kind of greatest I am talking about.

and Tom (S.F.B.) would argue with a tin can.

[46zilzal]

Dr. George Pratt (MIT engineer) from the documentary "A Magical Way of Going" (who studied the biomechanical elements of horse locomotion) "You put Secretariat in a biomechanical model in a computer and smoke comes out the back. He should NOT be." He goes on to explain (in a comparison of the very good Riva Ridge running side by side) that equine locomotion is dependent upon how much forward motion (he says like spokes of a wheel) is lost to having more than one foot on the ground and quotes the numbers gleaned from Red and all other horses studied. They are not even close.

Decade of Champions, by Patrick Robinson, p. 35. " and one name will always stand shining above the rest...at the end of 1973, by which time he had convinced most experts that he was very possibly the finest thoroughbred ever to live."

"Mr. Calvin Rainey, the immensely experienced executive director of the American Jockey Club..is one of a comparatively small group of racing men who are see all the leading horses in this volume in action on at least one occasion. When you discuss Secretariat," he says, "it is more realistic to compare him at three with other horses four years and upward....In my opinion, to beat Secretariat you'd have to run with him, and in my experience on any known form, none of these horses could possible have done so (in reference to Bid, Affirmed, Exceller, Forego, Slew, or Mill Reef).

p. 37...." I still occasionally hear people say he was not the horse many people think. There are still a few 'experts' who doubt him, who say he never really did enough to justify all that praise he has received. Well, they can all have their opinions. Personally, I never join in such discussion. I KNOW he was the best. Since the day he retired, you can take any horse race you like, and Secretariat would have won it easily. And I will say one more thing. Of those critics who doubt Secretariat, not one of them ever rode him. They sure as hell never rode him." Eddie Maple.

[46zilzal]

FROM Wikipedia: Secretariat stopped the clock in 1:45 2/5 for 1 1/8 miles, at the time, a world record on any surface (according to "railbirds" who claimed to have timed Secretariat galloping past the wire at the track, Secretariat galloped out an extra furlong in 1:57 4/5, which would have broken the world record at that time).

He also won his first start on grass in the Man o' War Stakes in a still standing track record time of 2:24 4/5, without being touched by the whip. Secretariat is claimed to have galloped out an extra furlong in 2:37 4/5, which would have equalled the world record at that distance on any surface (Source: Secretariat, Raymond G. Woolfe Jr.).

Track record are broken all the time, but very few with this kind of dominant performances over good competition.

A class by himself.

[MrSuave1]

FROM Wikipedia: Secretariat stopped the clock in 1:45 2/5 for 1 1/8 miles, at the time, a world record on any surface (according to "railbirds" who claimed to have timed Secretariat galloping past the wire at the track, Secretariat galloped out an extra furlong in 1:57 4/5, which would have broken the world record at that time).

He also won his first start on grass in the Man o' War Stakes in a still standing track record time of 2:24 4/5, without being touched by the whip. Secretariat is claimed to have galloped out an extra furlong in 2:37 4/5, which would have equalled the world record at that distance on any surface (Source: Secretariat, Raymond G. Woolfe Jr.).

Track record are broken all the time, but very few with this kind of dominant performances over good competition.

A class by himself.

You are making my point for me. His Belmont clocking has stood the test of time (excuse the pun). Great run. No one can take that away from him. Same goes for the Man o' War Stakes. Very impressive, especially as he beat a quality older horse, Tentam. But record times don't make you a great horse. Otherwise, Demi's Bret, Najran, Farma Way, Hoedown's Day, Mr. Light, Toonerville, Double Discount, and Paper Junction would have to be on everyone's Greatest List. Now, I'm not saying they are in Secretariat's league, only that average horses can have a great day and make their way into the Hall of Speed. Ah ... but the Hall of Fame. How many horses in it own race records? Very few, even they might once have held them. Should we kick them out if their records are broken? Should we demote them somehow? According to the Speed Mentality, we should. Fortunately, more farseeing persons see it differently.

You are obviously one who goes ga-ga over times. Well, you found the right horse. But time is only one of many factors. Think about it.

[falconridge]

Not sure how I landed in this forum, as "best" lists, halls of fame, awards shows, and the like have always left me cold. Does any poll--of "experts," association members, selection committees, academies, or John Q. Publicans--certify merit? My choice of what book I'll read, what string quartet I'll listen to, what ballot measure I'll vote for, or what horse I'll bet on next is driven by my own tastes, experiences, moods, studies, and inklings--and mine alone. Dante Alighieri never won a Pulitzer, F. J. Haydn never received a Grammy, John Sayles's Matewan garnered no Oscars, and John Updike isn't a Nobel Laureate. Does that mean that Pearl Buck is a better writer than the Florentine poet or the Shillington novelist, or that Elton John is a better pianist than Alexis Weissenberg, or that Forrest Gump is a better picture than The Long Good Friday? They are what they are, and no better for having been "recognized" as such, nor worse for having escaped the notice of any arbiters of taste or "supremacy."

One of the most endearing things I know about Charles Ives, IMHO America's greatest composer, is that, when he was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for his Third Symphony, he didn't attend the ceremony. "Prizes are for boys," he told the committee. "I'm all grown up."

I hereby call for a four-year--at least!--moratorium on the hoary old practice of citing surveys or polling the "experts" to bolster one's argument or to "justify" personal opinion. Cervantes, Flaubert, Shakespeare, Yeats; Bach, Mendelssohn, Schubert, Strauss; Heifetz, Menuhin, Perlman, Stern; Dean, Grove, Koufax, Matthewson; Citation, Colin, Kincsem, Judge Smells (undefeated!--ergo, even better than Dr. Fager, Native Dancer, or Secretariat?)--they're all there for us to enjoy and appreciate, so what's the hang-up on delimiting ourselves to a "best" or "top ten"?

To paraphrase our estimable colleague, toetoe: I want to hear your take on things, not just some survey results that flatter your predilections or prejudices. The coprophage is not a gourmet just because he craves the same fare as the largest terrestrial biomass (the "ten trillion flies can't be wrong" argument).

[MrSuave1]

Dr. George Pratt (MIT engineer) from the documentary "A Magical Way of Going" (who studied the biomechanical elements of horse locomotion) "You put Secretariat in a biomechanical model in a computer and smoke comes out the back. He should NOT be." He goes on to explain (in a comparison of the very good Riva Ridge running side by side) that equine locomotion is dependent upon how much forward motion (he says like spokes of a wheel) is lost to having more than one foot on the ground and quotes the numbers gleaned from Red and all other horses studied. They are not even close.

Decade of Champions, by Patrick Robinson, p. 35. " and one name will always stand shining above the rest...at the end of 1973, by which time he had convinced most experts that he was very possibly the finest thoroughbred ever to live."

"Mr. Calvin Rainey, the immensely experienced executive director of the American Jockey Club..is one of a comparatively small group of racing men who are see all the leading horses in this volume in action on at least one occasion. When you discuss Secretariat," he says, "it is more realistic to compare him at three with other horses four years and upward....In my opinion, to beat Secretariat you'd have to run with him, and in my experience on any known form, none of these horses could possible have done so (in reference to Bid, Affirmed, Exceller, Forego, Slew, or Mill Reef).

p. 37...." I still occasionally hear people say he was not the horse many people think. There are still a few 'experts' who doubt him, who say he never really did enough to justify all that praise he has received. Well, they can all have their opinions. Personally, I never join in such discussion. I KNOW he was the best. Since the day he retired, you can take any horse race you like, and Secretariat would have won it easily. And I will say one more thing. Of those critics who doubt Secretariat, not one of them ever rode him. They sure as hell never rode him." Eddie Maple.

Dr. Pratt is certainly entitled to his opinion, and that is all it is, his opinion. Of course, Secretariat had an unfair advantage: his heart was twice the size of a normal one. How many times did Eddie Maple ride him? Only a few. Funny. He doesn't mention Sec's three stakes losses as a three year old. Uberhorses just don't do that! His reference to Sec's retirement is unclear. Does he mean Secretariat could lick any horse who ran after 1973? Probably true. Any horse who ever lived? Probably false, but unprovable anyway.

[MrSuave1]

Not sure how I landed in this forum, as "best" lists, halls of fame, awards shows, and the like have always left me cold. Does any poll--of "experts," association members, selection committees, academies, or John Q. Publicans--certify merit? My choice of what book I'll read, what string quartet I'll listen to, what ballot measure I'll vote for, or what horse I'll bet on next is driven by my own tastes, experiences, moods, studies, and inklings--and mine alone. Dante Alighieri never won a Pulitzer, F. J. Haydn never received a Grammy, John Sayles's Matewan garnered no Oscars, and John Updike isn't a Nobel Laureate. Does that mean that Pearl Buck is a better writer than the Florentine poet or the Shillington novelist, or that Elton John is a better pianist than Alexis Weissenberg, or that Forrest Gump is a better picture than The Long Good Friday? They are what they are, and no better for having been "recognized" as such, nor worse for having escaped the notice of any arbiters of taste or "supremacy."

One of the most endearing things I know about Charles Ives, IMHO America's greatest composer, is that, when he was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for his Third Symphony, he didn't attend the ceremony. "Prizes are for boys," he told the committee. "I'm all grown up."

I hereby call for a four-year--at least!--moratorium on the hoary old practice of citing surveys or polling the "experts" to bolster one's argument or to "justify" personal opinion. Cervantes, Flaubert, Shakespeare, Yeats; Bach, Mendelssohn, Schubert, Strauss; Heifetz, Menuhin, Perlman, Stern; Dean, Grove, Koufax, Matthewson; Citation, Colin, Kincsem, Judge Smells (undefeated!--ergo, even better than Dr. Fager, Native Dancer, or Secretariat?)--they're all there for us to enjoy and appreciate, so what's the hang-up on delimiting ourselves to a "best" or "top ten"?

To paraphrase our estimable colleague, toetoe: I want to hear your take on things, not just some survey results that flatter your predilections or prejudices. The coprophage is not a gourmet just because he craves the same fare as the largest terrestrial biomass (the "ten trillion flies can't be wrong" argument).

I get your drift that we put too much emphasis on awards, and in general I agree with you, although no one will ever convince me that Shakespeare and Mozart were not the best in their respective arts. But of course, that is my opinion (although in the arts, the test of time is usually the best determinant of intrinsic quality. Who remembers what Mozart's father wrote?)

Valid opinions, however, are informed by solid fact, otherwise they are merely prejudice. Surely, the masses can be, and are often, wrong ("ten trillion flies can't be wrong".) It seems to be a curiously American penchant for "The Best", "Most Popular", etc.

[46zilzal]

You are obviously one who goes ga-ga over times. Well, you found the right horse. But time is only one of many factors.
You have no idea what you are talking about at all. Greatness in the thoroughbred goes far beyond the clock. As I said earlier, generational comparisons do not work, but once in a lifetime animals are in another league.

When enough water goes under your bridge to the point you can construct a genuine sense of historical perspective you might learn where this citizen from Doswell, Virginia ranks in the scheme of things. Until then you need to read a lot more before you enter the conversation. To list such a temporally limited group of equines shows inadequate historical depth in the understanding this game.

I hear this baloney all the time from a good friend, but you and he are in the gross minority in the rational evaluation of this one.

[46zilzal]

Dr. Pratt is certainly entitled to his opinion, and that is all it is, his opinion.

It isn't opinion bub. It is his lifelong work based upon data from hundreds of horses. Two of his many works are:
"Analyzing Track Characteristics”, “Racing Surfaces – A Survey of Mechanical Behavior”

[46zilzal]

Bill Nack knows a few things about the animal he wrote for the Blood Horse top 100 thoroughbreds of the century.

"He also had the heart and the will to win. But he had one advantage that nobody knew of at the time. When Secretariat was put down the autopsy showed that is heart weighed close to 22 pounds,the average Thoroughbred heart weighs 9 lbs. Secretariat's heart was all in proportion, not a mutation. The mutation large heart was found in the horse Eclipse at autopsy in 1789. Eclipse's heart weighed 14 lbs. We now know by research and the hard work of scientists and geneticist like Marianna Haun, that horses carry a gene for a large heart. It is passed through the X chromosome in the mare. Measurements of more than 400 horses with a ECG has found that the X-Factor is 100% consistent.

Australian researcher named Dr. James Steel. In his research Dr.Steel ranks heart scores according to size. A score of 103 is considered small. A medium size heart is scored from 104-116. 117-120 and above is considered large. The Largest heart in his study was from the Thoroughbred Champion Key to the Mint. He carried the Princequello heart, and rated a heart score of 157-160. Most of Princequello's hearts were between 147 and 160. The three other "super hearts" were from War Admiral, Blue Larkspur, and Mahmoud. They had a heart score of 140-150. A heart score of 140 and above is considered very large and generally found in very successful racehorses.

Marianna Haun says in her book "The X Factor" that even though there is no heart score on Secretariat, based on the weight of his heart at autopsy his estimated heart score would have been 180. There has not been any heart score even near that size. She also states that if Secretariat's heart hadn't been so far out of the norm, they might not have ever discovered what they have about the genetic mutation that produces a high performance heart."

Her first story, "Great Heart," which appeared in the Thoroughbred Times in April, 1993, led to the quest to understand the meaning of Secretariat's enormous heat. Nearly a year later, after months of intense pedigree research, she discovered a genetic link from Secretariat's mighty heart to Eclipse's great heart through the mare Pocahontas on the X chromosome trail. This link was called the X Factor.

[bigmack]

The coprophage is not a gourmet just because he craves the same fare as the largest terrestrial biomass (the "ten trillion flies can't be wrong" argument).
It doesn’t appear that you’ll be making much of a dent with this pervicacious duo falc, though within your aphoristic harangue you had a couple of “chewy nugget centers” that caught my eye.

Dante never won a Pulitzer was rich.

The coprophage is not a gourmet, while not readily identified if it’s attributable to 2toes or self generated, threw me for a loop. The aforementioned harangue was going so well until I came face to face with the dreaded coprophage. I question that it helped bolster your stance, but for the record it struck me as a raging fillip.

While fully convinced “who’s the best” lists often are futile & knowing my appreciation of Charles Ives is monumental, in most pieces I found his use of thematic material over stated and his instrumental orchestration ill-chosen. And so it goes.

As the average Joe gathers momentum in their opinions, they can’t help but take them and drill ‘em into the ground. :rolleyes:

[MrSuave1]

OThat one race makes a horse. NOT this one

He not only won races, he destroyed the best of his time on both surfaces. His moves are incredible race to race.

Your NEWBIE-NESS shows big time.

Hey, I used to be a Secretariat fanatic just like you! I read Bill Nack's book cover to cover! Went ga-ga over his times, thought he was the best ever! Then, I started reading about other horses and what they did. Suddenly, Secretariat didn't seem so great anymore. Secretariat did not dominate like Man o War, Count Fleet, Citation and other greats. I don't think any horse will dominate again like they did, for a variety of reasons. Secretariat only ran against older horses a few times, and lost once, didn't carry much weight, and his race record at three leaves much to be desired. I think YOU are the one who needs to do some reading, not me.

I am in the decided minority--I know that. Secretariat was a fine horse, beautiful, custom-made for the TV generation who hungered for a Triple Crown winner after 25 years. He had an agent--the William Morris Agency. Nothing but the best! Seems kind of silly now, doesn't it?

[MrSuave1]

It isn't opinion bub. It is his lifelong work based upon data from hundreds of horses. Two of his many works are:
"Analyzing Track Characteristics”, “Racing Surfaces – A Survey of Mechanical Behavior”

His "Lifelong Work"? Too bad. Then he's been wasting his time. Time is ephemeral, tangential, quixotic, not conducive to scientific analysis. But believe it if you want ...

[MrSuave1]

You have no idea what you are talking about at all. Greatness in the thoroughbred goes far beyond the clock. As I said earlier, generational comparisons do not work, but once in a lifetime animals are in another league.

When enough water goes under your bridge to the point you can construct a genuine sense of historical perspective you might learn where this citizen from Doswell, Virginia ranks in the scheme of things. Until then you need to read a lot more before you enter the conversation. To list such a temporally limited group of equines shows inadequate historical depth in the understanding this game.

I hear this baloney all the time from a good friend, but you and he are in the gross minority in the rational evaluation of this one.

Once again, you have made my point. I have consistely said thata Greatness consists of much more than time/records. And comparisons between Man o' Wars' times and Secretariat's are futile for many reasons.

For your information, I know a lot about horses, at least the ones I talk about. Of course, I'm in the minority, but minorities can be right and majorities wrong ... it HAS happened (consult your historical perspective). Mine is an informed opinion, and I am entitled to it. I think Secretariat is overrated in the grand scheme of things, and nothing you have said has made me think differently

[statik27]

Thanks much for the kind words. I am a newbie to horseracing (about a year), but I've read a lot and learned a lot. I used to be a Secretariat worshipper, until I learned about Citation. Now, I am a Citation worshipper! I think it is sad that he does not get the appreciation due him by many horse-racing fans. I can only assume that this is because they are unaware of his incredible achievements as a three-year-old. I hope, in my small way, to remedy that!

Hmmm...I thought I'd throw a monkeywrench into this thread. I personally believe that the greatest thoroughbred that ever lived was born in the Blood-horse's infancy. His name was Flying Childers.

For years people believed that the first carrier of the X-factor gene (enlarged heart) was the great horse Eclipse, but in recent years many have started to speculate that the very first horse to carry the mysterious trait was a horse that shared both the male and female line with Eclipse, Flying Childers. He was by the Darley Arabian out of Betty Leedes, meaning that suspected x-factor carrier Cream Cheeks was his second dam.

Whether he was a genetic freak or not, Flying Childer was a horse of Legendary status. He garnered the nickname " Mile a minute childer's" by doing just that, running the interior fraction of a heat in what the spectator's swore was a minute. He didn't just beat fields, he leveled them with extreme speed and stamina. He won a race by a quarter of a mile.

For years after his death in 1741 the royal navy carried on the tradition of naming their fastest ship the "Flying Childers"

The tales of this horse's speed intrigued me enough to do my own study. Its hard to make sense of and seperating fact from fiction over 300 years of history, but I came up with this.

Secretariat ran the Belmont at a rate of 41 ft per second, an astonishing rate of speed.

Flying Childers ran a heat at Newmarket at the distance of 3 and 3/4 miles plus some odd yards, at a rate of 39 ft per second. He covered over 2 and one half times the distance of the belmont and had only a 16% reduction in velocity. That is amazing.

Who knows if the times I've used to do the calculation are accurate or not, but it is food for thought. And I have no doubt in my mind that the impression this horse left on the people that saw him was very real.

statik

[GaryG]

Statik....thanks for a very fine post. I had heard about him all my life but never knew the particulars. Eclipse was a descendant of his younger brother Bartlett's Childers. This is from bloodlines.net:

His name was Childers, although he was later called both Devonshire and Flying Childers, the latter not until at least five years after his death. Bred by Leonard Childers of Carr House, near Doncaster, he was purchased as a youngster by William Cavendish, the 2nd Duke of Devonshire. A bay with a blaze and four socks, he was thought to be the fastest horse ever trained until that time. He ran in private trials and at Newmarket against the best class of horses, defeating all he met.
That Childers gave his spectators an impression of speed is beyond doubt. He is said to have covered nearly a mile in a minute during his match with Almanzor and Brown Betty, and to have covered the Beacon Course, then measured at 4 miles 1 furlong 128 yards, in 7 minutes and 30 seconds, with each stride covering 25 feet.

[ghostyapper]

Secretariat galloped out an extra furlong in 1:57 4/5, which would have broken the world record at that time).

He also won his first start on grass in the Man o' War Stakes in a still standing track record time of 2:24 4/5, without being touched by the whip. Secretariat is claimed to have galloped out an extra furlong in 2:37 4/5, which would have equalled the world record at that distance on any surface (Source: Secretariat, Raymond G. Woolfe Jr.).

Track record are broken all the time, but very few with this kind of dominant performances over good competition.

A class by himself.

I always get annoyed when people point to secretariats gallop out times as "would have beens". If you want to go that route then spectacular bid galloped out 12 furlongs in 2.23 and change in the strub thus besting secretariats 12 furlong record.

Don't get be wrong, secretariat was a great horse, possibly the best ever but I do not think he was in a "class by himself." I think the likes of slew, dr fager, affirmed, alydar, spectacular bid, forego all would have beaten secretariat a few times if they raced him for a season. He was great but he was not unbeatable.

[Greyfox]

Statik....
That Childers gave his spectators an impression of speed is beyond doubt. He is said to have covered nearly a mile in a minute during his match with Almanzor and Brown Betty,

Sure he wasn't a cheetah?:lol:

[DanG]

Secretariat ran the Belmont at a rate of 41 ft per second, an astonishing rate of speed.

Can you please explain the formula you used for this static? :confused:

Thanks.

[46zilzal]

For your information, I know a lot about horses, at least the ones I talk about. Of course, I'm in the minority, but minorities can be right and majorities wrong ... it HAS happened (consult your historical perspective). Mine is an informed opinion, and I am entitled to it. I think Secretariat is overrated in the grand scheme of things, and nothing you have said has made me think differently

It is always relatively easy to debate an ignorant (not stupid mind you, as the two are different. Donald Rumsfeld is stupid) "johnny come lately" because there is so much data to use against them. Old Goethe was fond of saying; "There is nothing more dangerous than ignorance in action." The well known phrase also fits that "a little bit of knowledge is dangerous." Both phrases fit the bill to a "T" here.

Chris Lincoln on the old Thoroughbred Sport Digest presented a special and stated, quite logically, that if you were a Hollywood writer and did a screenplay using the FACTS behind Secretariat, not fiction, your peers would reject it on the basis of it being too corny, too illogical. They would accept a "Salty O'Rourke", or "Boots Malone" before believing the real story behind this one.

It is the 1970's and Meadow Stud is in financial trouble. The patriarch (Harvard Emeritus economics professor and brother to Collier's magazine editor, Christopher Chenery) is ill and he gives the reins to his trusted daughter Penny. The family is pushing for the sale of the operation, but on his deathbed, Professor Chenery is informed that one of their charges has won the Kentucky Derby. It is as if that were the punctuation on his life's work, and he dies in January 1973 knowing that he has won the big one at last and a younger monster is in the barn. THIS after the losing coin flip many years previous with the Phipps at Saratoga when the family had to get the 2nd choice of the Bold Ruler-Somethingroyal breeding while the Phipps got a plug who went four starts without a win.

On July 4th a RED horse in WHITE and BLUE silks makes his first start and gets clobbered but comes back with a late move to be out of the money the only time in his career. Penny Chenery's instincts are correct and she "kills two birds with one stone" getting together with Seth Hancock and some of the most knowledgeable equine breeder's in the world (the Phipps and Paul Mellon amongst them - guess they didn't know what they were investing in either huh?) line up to syndicate this one for a world's record price. The farm is saved, and she gets control until the Fall of the next year when he goes to Paris, Kentucky.

AGAIN one cannot compare trans-generationally, but to deny this one a UNIQUE place in the hallowed ground arena exposes an inability to comprehend perspective, and overt denial of established norms of thoroughbred understanding.

[GaryG]

46: I have to hand it to you....this is you in all of your pompous glory, nose sniffing the ozone because it is so high in the air (as PA once put it). Rock on...

[46zilzal]

Visit here sometime and people whisper. When I last contacted friends at Claiborne the number of people coming just to see this was still in the thousands. Guess we must be ALL WRONG.

[46zilzal]

46: I have to hand it to you....this is you in all of your pompous glory, nose sniffing the ozone because it is so high in the air (as PA once put it). Rock on...
Facts don't lie. Having good ammunition in a debate always helps. Come to a debate prepared, if you don't prepare then you will be buried.

[ArlJim78]

Not sure how I landed in this forum, as "best" lists, halls of fame, awards shows, and the like have always left me cold. Does any poll--of "experts," association members, selection committees, academies, or John Q. Publicans--certify merit? My choice of what book I'll read, what string quartet I'll listen to, what ballot measure I'll vote for, or what horse I'll bet on next is driven by my own tastes, experiences, moods, studies, and inklings--and mine alone. Dante Alighieri never won a Pulitzer, F. J. Haydn never received a Grammy, John Sayles's Matewan garnered no Oscars, and John Updike isn't a Nobel Laureate. Does that mean that Pearl Buck is a better writer than the Florentine poet or the Shillington novelist, or that Elton John is a better pianist than Alexis Weissenberg, or that Forrest Gump is a better picture than The Long Good Friday? They are what they are, and no better for having been "recognized" as such, nor worse for having escaped the notice of any arbiters of taste or "supremacy."

One of the most endearing things I know about Charles Ives, IMHO America's greatest composer, is that, when he was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for his Third Symphony, he didn't attend the ceremony. "Prizes are for boys," he told the committee. "I'm all grown up."

I hereby call for a four-year--at least!--moratorium on the hoary old practice of citing surveys or polling the "experts" to bolster one's argument or to "justify" personal opinion. Cervantes, Flaubert, Shakespeare, Yeats; Bach, Mendelssohn, Schubert, Strauss; Heifetz, Menuhin, Perlman, Stern; Dean, Grove, Koufax, Matthewson; Citation, Colin, Kincsem, Judge Smells (undefeated!--ergo, even better than Dr. Fager, Native Dancer, or Secretariat?)--they're all there for us to enjoy and appreciate, so what's the hang-up on delimiting ourselves to a "best" or "top ten"?

To paraphrase our estimable colleague, toetoe: I want to hear your take on things, not just some survey results that flatter your predilections or prejudices. The coprophage is not a gourmet just because he craves the same fare as the largest terrestrial biomass (the "ten trillion flies can't be wrong" argument).
couldn't agree more with this. unless they have a chance to race against each other I have almost zero interest in lists, rankings, or awards of one sort or another.

[statik27]

Can you please explain the formula you used for this static? :confused:

Thanks.

:blush: lol Dan, I found my notes this morning and realized I had short changed both horses. Chalk it up to lack of sleep, and yes I'll blame that on my 6 month old daughter.

It should read:

Secretariat's Belmont- 1.5 miles- 2:24 flat- 55 ft per second
Weight carried: 126 lbs

Flying Childers- 3 miles 6 furlongs 93 yards- 6:40 flat- 50.1975 ft per second.
Weight Carried: 128 lbs

The formula is just converting the miles etc into feet and dividing by the seconds clocks. It doesnt account for ground lost or gained. They didn't have
Trackus in 1973 or 1721 lol.

statik

[46zilzal]

Name another animal, dirt or turf, who ran fractions like this:
25 1/5, 24, 23 4/5, 23 2/5 and 23.


In all the years I have been following pace ratings, I only found only one close and that was Steinlen at 8.0 furlongs on the turf at Anita, but then you would expect that distribution on the grass.

[DanG]

No problem Statik, I thought you were on to some new formula that we weren’t privy to! :)

All the best to you and your young one! :ThmbUp:

[DanG]

Name another animal, dirt or turf, who ran fractions like this:
25 1/5, 24, 23 4/5, 23 2/5 and 23.


In all the years I have been following pace ratings, I only found only one close and that was Steinlen at 8.0 furlongs on the turf at Anita, but then you would expect that distribution on the grass.
I make no bones about my admiration for big Red.

However…As awe inspiring as his triple crown series was, setting 3 (not 2) track records in succession. It is still not entirely possible to compare eras and racing circumstances. For example; Tough to judge Sunday Silence by his Derby time during a hail storm. :eek:

Track records in particular need all the stars aligned to make a run at them, taking NOTHING away from one of the true greats. Virtually all marks fall when there is a rabbit present, perfect firm condition, perfect amount of moisture in the surface,the wind is just right, top class animals at their peak etc.

Having said all that…His Belmont is the American measuring stick for our generation. Regardless of the variant and / or circumstances his stride from the backstretch to the wire is our standard for the ultimate in raw thouroughbred power.

[MrSuave1]

It is always relatively easy to debate an ignorant (not stupid mind you, as the two are different. Donald Rumsfeld is stupid) "johnny come lately" because there is so much data to use against them. Old Goethe was fond of saying; "There is nothing more dangerous than ignorance in action." The well known phrase also fits that "a little bit of knowledge is dangerous." Both phrases fit the bill to a "T" here.

Chris Lincoln on the old Thoroughbred Sport Digest presented a special and stated, quite logically, that if you were a Hollywood writer and did a screenplay using the FACTS behind Secretariat, not fiction, your peers would reject it on the basis of it being too corny, too illogical. They would accept a "Salty O'Rourke", or "Boots Malone" before believing the real story behind this one.

It is the 1970's and Meadow Stud is in financial trouble. The patriarch (Harvard Emeritus economics professor and brother to Collier's magazine editor, Christopher Chenery) is ill and he gives the reins to his trusted daughter Penny. The family is pushing for the sale of the operation, but on his deathbed, Professor Chenery is informed that one of their charges has won the Kentucky Derby. It is as if that were the punctuation on his life's work, and he dies in January 1973 knowing that he has won the big one at last and a younger monster is in the barn. THIS after the losing coin flip many years previous with the Phipps at Saratoga when the family had to get the 2nd choice of the Bold Ruler-Somethingroyal breeding while the Phipps got a plug who went four starts without a win.

On July 4th a RED horse in WHITE and BLUE silks makes his first start and gets clobbered but comes back with a late move to be out of the money the only time in his career. Penny Chenery's instincts are correct and she "kills two birds with one stone" getting together with Seth Hancock and some of the most knowledgeable equine breeder's in the world (the Phipps and Paul Mellon amongst them - guess they didn't know what they were investing in either huh?) line up to syndicate this one for a world's record price. The farm is saved, and she gets control until the Fall of the next year when he goes to Paris, Kentucky.

AGAIN one cannot compare trans-generationally, but to deny this one a UNIQUE place in the hallowed ground arena exposes an inability to comprehend perspective, and overt denial of established norms of thoroughbred understanding.

Tom was right. You present opinions as facts, and insert tons of inconsequential, irrelevant material. Meanwhile, as you are calling me ignorant and stupid (which I never called you), you have not refuted a single point I have made. Either you can't or choose not to refute them. But someone who has an ego as large as yours would relish refuting them if he could, so I assume you can't. Since you refuse to post intelligently and engage in a lively, coherent debate, let's simply agree to disagree.

[46zilzal]

You don't read well nor comprehend well do you? A product of no child left behind?

QUOTE:"It is always relatively easy to debate an ignorant (not stupid mind you, as the two are different)."

You made a point? Just where in all that was a point? Only one I found was that you are out of touch with history.

[Tom]

46 - are you saying MrSuave is not entitled to his opinion?

Because that is all ANYONE has on this subject - opinions. You can cite facts all night long ( and you probably will!) but the bottom line is horses from generation to generation cannot be precisely compared. We look at them, thier records, their victories, thier losses and we form opinions. I happened to live thorugh Big Red's 1973 season and think he is the greatest ever, but my Grandfather, who saw Man o'War commented right after the Belmont, that Sec was almost as good as MOW. I know others who do not agree Sec was the best, too, for various reasons.

When you come to a debate, bring facts, when you come to an opinion poll, bring opinions. MrSuave apparently did not witness Sec's performances and he is thus free from the obvious bias you and I share. His criteria is his criteria.

[falconridge]

Old Goethe was fond of saying; "There is nothing more dangerous than ignorance in action." The well known phrase also fits that "a little bit of knowledge is dangerous."
"You don't read well nor comprehend well do you?"--46zilzal

Actually, the line is:

A little learning is a dangerous thing;*
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.

--Alexander Pope, Essay on Criticism, Part ii, Line 15.

* my emphasis

While we're at it, at least one of this forum's participants might be well served to note Antonio's counsel in The Merchant of Venice:

Mark you this, Bassanio,
The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.*
An evil soul, producing holy witness,
Is like a villain with a smiling cheek,
A goodly apple rotten at the heart.
O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!

Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, Act I, Scene III, ll. 79-84.

*again, my emphasis.

[46zilzal]

but the bottom line is horses from generation to generation cannot be precisely compared.

I said that repeatedly. My point was that this one is a unique animal and used BOTH fact and numerous opinions of those closer to it than you and I to highlight that point. To deny this one belongs, on his overall ability, physicality, history and accomplishments is to not understand the entire sport's standards of excellence.

[cj]

To deny this one belongs, on his overall ability, physicality, history and accomplishments is to not understand the entire sport's standards of excellence--as I see them, anyway.

Fixed that for you.

[Tee]

The Best Ever in Thoroughbred Racing?

Kind of like debating Jack Nicklaus vs Tiger Woods - strong opinions no real definitive answer.

Not yet anyway & to some there never will be.

[RXB]

Confining my views to the 1970's-- not old enough to see horses of previous years, and no animal in the 80's and beyond has matched their greatness -- Secretariat's best 3YO performances are a notch above those of Seattle Slew, Affirmed, and Spectacular Bid.

His three TC races are just incredible. The consecutively faster quarters in the Derby, the mind-bending first-turn move in the Preakness and the awesome Belmont, as a trio, are unmatched. Sham is demolishing the other runners, and yet Secretariat is beating him without any real difficulty. I would say that Sham, at that point, was about the equal of 3YO Alydar, and Affirmed wasn't beating Alydar with ease that year.

Secretariat did throw a couple of clunkers, it should be remembered. But on his best days, he was sensational.

Spectacular Bid went stratospheric in California as a 4YO. He was the best older horse I've ever seen, no doubt about it. Same phenomenon, really-- Flying Paster is miles ahead of the other horses, yet he can't seriously threaten Bid. The devastating stretch power in the Malibu, the magnificent backstretch run in the San Fernando, the world record in the Strub, and another delivery of stretch power in the Santa Anita Handicap. In a row. Awesome.

Affirmed had to beat a very strong rival three races in a row to win the Triple Crown. Had a bit of a slump, but regained his form for another strong run of victories. And Seattle Slew was the greatest combination of flat-out speed and stamina-- he would've been one mighty tough hombre in a match race at any distance.

Great horses, love 'em all.

[46zilzal]

I flew to California to see Bid and was rewarded with this note on the infield tote board as he was a scratch from the Gold Cup.

[46zilzal]

SO, I went to Claiborne to see him. He must have know of our history as he tried, in vain, to bite me.

[RXB]

:D

Ralph probably told him to bite you.

[46zilzal]

couldn't hold a candle to the champ however.

[GaryG]

Look, posting all of your pictures does not make Secretariat the greatest racehorse that ever lived. The whole thing is much too subjective, especially considering those champions from many years ago. Only someone as pompous and self-important as yourself could possible say with certitude that any particular horse was that far superior to the rest. I am waiting for your next sure loser....lets see, Rags, HS...:lol: :lol:

[MrSuave1]

Look, posting all of your pictures does not make Secretariat the greatest racehorse that ever lived. The whole thing is much too subjective, especially considering those champions from many years ago. Only someone as pompous and self-important as yourself could possible say with certitude that any particular horse was that far superior to the rest. I am waiting for your next sure loser....lets see, Rags, HS...:lol: :lol:

Amen ...

[MrSuave1]

Confining my views to the 1970's-- not old enough to see horses of previous years, and no animal in the 80's and beyond has matched their greatness -- Secretariat's best 3YO performances are a notch above those of Seattle Slew, Affirmed, and Spectacular Bid.

His three TC races are just incredible. The consecutively faster quarters in the Derby, the mind-bending first-turn move in the Preakness and the awesome Belmont, as a trio, are unmatched. Sham is demolishing the other runners, and yet Secretariat is beating him without any real difficulty. I would say that Sham, at that point, was about the equal of 3YO Alydar, and Affirmed wasn't beating Alydar with ease that year.

Secretariat did throw a couple of clunkers, it should be remembered. But on his best days, he was sensational.

Spectacular Bid went stratospheric in California as a 4YO. He was the best older horse I've ever seen, no doubt about it. Same phenomenon, really-- Flying Paster is miles ahead of the other horses, yet he can't seriously threaten Bid. The devastating stretch power in the Malibu, the magnificent backstretch run in the San Fernando, the world record in the Strub, and another delivery of stretch power in the Santa Anita Handicap. In a row. Awesome.

Affirmed had to beat a very strong rival three races in a row to win the Triple Crown. Had a bit of a slump, but regained his form for another strong run of victories. And Seattle Slew was the greatest combination of flat-out speed and stamina-- he would've been one mighty tough hombre in a match race at any distance.

Great horses, love 'em all.

Well thought-out post, and I agree for the most part. For me, the mystery is Sham. Looking at his career, it is not very impressive. But in the Derby and Preakness, he was sensational. Racing against Secretariat seemed to bring out the best in him (and let's not forget that in the Derby he managed to come in second in the second fastest time while seriously wounded).

[Hank]

my opinion, is that given the make up of a given field these would all be capable of beating one another on a given day.Dr. Fager or Slew with their blazing speed and fierce gameness could beat ANYBODY loose on the lead.

[MrSuave1]

46 - are you saying MrSuave is not entitled to his opinion?

Because that is all ANYONE has on this subject - opinions. You can cite facts all night long ( and you probably will!) but the bottom line is horses from generation to generation cannot be precisely compared. We look at them, thier records, their victories, thier losses and we form opinions. I happened to live thorugh Big Red's 1973 season and think he is the greatest ever, but my Grandfather, who saw Man o'War commented right after the Belmont, that Sec was almost as good as MOW. I know others who do not agree Sec was the best, too, for various reasons.

When you come to a debate, bring facts, when you come to an opinion poll, bring opinions. MrSuave apparently did not witness Sec's performances and he is thus free from the obvious bias you and I share. His criteria is his criteria.

Thank you Tom to coming to my defense, not that I take 46 seriously. I have made the same arguments on YouTube to the same kind of Secretariat worshippers and have made plenty of enemies and have been called worse names.

I am 59 years old and saw Secretariat run when in college. Although not a horseracing fan then, I saw his face on Time Magazine and TV shows about him. As previously mentioned, at first I, too, was a Sec idolator. He did some amazing things. Then I read about Citation, who did things Secretariat never even dreamed of. Talking times is unfruitful, as they inevitably get better over the years. Looking at the Preakness times, they have been quite low for the past 10 years, not as true with the Derby times (because of the huge fields?), and definitely less so with the Belmont. Why, Citation's time of 2:28.4 (which tied Count Fleet's record time), compares favorably with many times of today. I wonder why.

Also, the tracks out West are much faster (Citation set his world record for the mile out west). That is probably why so many records are set out there. Another argument for the precariousness of time.

I respect your opinion, based on facts, that Secretariat was the best. Thank you for respecting my opinion, also based on facts, that Citation was numero uno. Again, I have no argument with Secretariat--some of his fans, however, are real horse's arses.

[MrSuave1]

Well, I wouldn't place Bid above Big Red. Here is how I see it:

MAN O'WAR / SECRETARIAT no way to really compare them, but the two best

Then I would take Citation. Total domination as a 3yo. He lost some of his luster when they brought him back at age 6 (I think) in order to become the first millionaire. He held the two turn mile world record for a long time.

Gary, I think you are the only one, plus myself, on this thread who seems to be aware of Citation. Lots of people know every single fact about Secretariat, but about nothing else. If more people were informed about Citation's third year of racing, and what this amazing bay did that no other horse before or since has come close to doing, it would be end of discussion.

[RXB]

19/20; romped through the Triple Crown; dusted the previous year's Derby and Preakness winners EARLY in his 3YO season.

You're not the only one who's aware of Citation. I'm sure plenty of people know of his exploits. Certainly, his 3YO campaign was the greatest single year on record.

[46zilzal]

Only someone as pompous and self-important as yourself could possible say with certitude that any particular horse was that far superior to the rest
Another one who is a selective reader (reading into posts what they selectively want). Spending too much time on opposites side of the coin in other arenas means being put upon here as well, SO be it. Some cannot tell the difference between off topic and horse discussions.

The only point to my presentations of fact and the opinions of HORSEMEN and scientists who know this game better than anyone here is that the 1970 foal of Somethingroyal is one of the best of all time. Never once was it stated best of all time. That is what others have read into it.

To not include him in discussions of the best is to not understand the game.

Personally my favorites are Phar Lap and Forego.

[46zilzal]

19/20; romped through the Triple Crown; dusted the previous year's Derby and Preakness winners EARLY in his 3YO season.


Went to his nose and almost threw Arcaro in the Belmont. Developed osslets while at Tanforan and was off a year...Never quite the same afterward, when the great Noor rivalry started.

Interesting that an Argentine foal was allowed use of the name in 1986

IBERIENNE (ARG), 1981, =Treviglio (Arg)- =Persane by =

1986 =Citation (Arg),c,Bold Forli unraced
DP = 5-4-10-1-0 DI = 2.33 CD = 0.65

[46zilzal]

Three more matings (Bull Lea - Hydroplane II) could not reproduce him either.
1949 Unbelievable,c,Bull Lea 1 9 3 1 1 9,275 2.95
DP = 12-0-24-6-8 DI = 0.92 CD = 0.04
1952 Siena Way,f,Bull Lea Unraced
DP = 12-0-24-6-8 DI = 0.92 CD = 0.04
1953 St. Crispin,c,Bull Lea Unraced
DP = 12-0-24-6-8 DI = 0.92 CD = 0.04

But then he was a complete failure at stud.

[Greyfox]

I said that repeatedly. My point was that this one is a unique animal and used BOTH fact and numerous opinions of those closer to it than you and I to highlight that point. To deny this one belongs, on his overall ability, physicality, history and accomplishments is to not understand the entire sport's standards of excellence.

1. Sec? The greatest I have seen...so far.
2. My Dad.....did not see him ....said Man O War
3. Generations cannot be compared.
4. Who could possibly deny him on "overall ability,physicality, history...

All of the above is true.
One further fact though, with exceptions, so far...
Not The Greatest Sire!!!

[46zilzal]

After Citation's year off in 1949 his record reflected the injury.

BEFORE: 29 27-2-0 $865,150

AFTER: 16 5-8-2 $220,610

The owner wanted the first millionaire come hell or high water.

[46zilzal]

One further fact though, with exceptions, so far...
Not The Greatest Sire!!!
The little guy with these full brothers and sisters:Northern Native, Northern Ace, Arctic Dancer, Transatlantic is in a class by himself in that regard. HANDS DOWN Unless you want to mention ones like Eclipse etc.

[46zilzal]

Arcaro was NOT Citation's jockey until Albert Snider, Citation's jockey, went boating one day and never returned, presumed lost at sea. Jones gave Arcaro the choice of riding Citation or Coaltown, whom he had ridden early in 1948. Arcaro picked Citation, and the horse responded by winning the Derby (Coaltown was second), Preakness and Belmont. After the Derby, Arcaro gave half of his earnings to Snider's widow.

[Greyfox]

The little guy with these full brothers and sisters:Northern Native, Northern Ace, Arctic Dancer, Transatlantic is in a class by himself in that regard. HANDS DOWN Unless you want to mention ones like Eclipse etc.

Absolutely. The class was : a poor sire.

[MrSuave1]

19/20; romped through the Triple Crown; dusted the previous year's Derby and Preakness winners EARLY in his 3YO season.

You're not the only one who's aware of Citation. I'm sure plenty of people know of his exploits. Certainly, his 3YO campaign was the greatest single year on record.

Big Cy totally dominated at three. He should have been 20 for 20 (his loss was not a stakes, but a stakes trial). In seven races, he beat older horses, Belmont and Preakness winners, record-holders, multi-stake winners. No horse caught him from behind, and no horse outran him. He had 15 straight wins. He won races from 6 furlongs to two miles. He won the Pimlico Special unchallenged (as did The Bid). He won on every conceivable track condition. No horse before or since has done this. Unfortunately, he developed osselets and strained tendons in his last race as a 3 year old because of the greed of his owner (he was shipped in a train boxcar cross country from Maryland to the San Francisco area after an extremely strenuous campaign). Had Cy beren healthy at four, in Arcaro's words, "No man's horse could have touched him."

If everyone knows this, why are Man o' War and Secretariat constantly on peoples' tongues, and not Big Cy? To me it's a no-brainer who the best three year old was.

[toetoe]

falconridge,

I have left messages with Senators Biden ( :sleeping: ) and Lieber-( :sleeping: )man, regarding that stubborn fillip. One of these two gents may agree to perform the "fillipbuster" procedure you apparently require. Biden, Lieberman --- WHO wants it more ?

Once the fillip is removed, presuming it's recognizable as such, you MAY be able to get a car wash at no extra charge.

Watch as I go to the wall for you. >>>>>> :bang:

[BIG RED]

Well, I wouldn't place Bid above Big Red. Here is how I see it:

MAN O'WAR / SECRETARIAT no way to really compare them, but the two best

I agree.

My two user names for the horse racing community is,
BIG RED / Son O'War,

those are, to me , the best. ( Man O'War, Secratariat )

[Hank]

An Aussi would laugh and say with great confidence that The red terror would beat them both.and they might be right. The Bald eagle himself said Phar lap was the best that he had seen and that COUNTS for a LOT in my book.

[46zilzal]

An Aussi would laugh and say with great confidence that The red terror would beat them both.and they might be right. The Bald eagle himself said Phar lap was the best that he had seen and that COUNTS for a LOT in my book.

MOST discussions in this arena tend to leave him out due to the single race (in track record time by the way). I always get a kick out of the equipment notation: s for spurs!! and look at the weight concession.

[JPinMaryland]

Well thought-out post, and I agree for the most part. For me, the mystery is Sham. Looking at his career, it is not very impressive. But in the Derby and Preakness, he was sensational. Racing against Secretariat seemed to bring out the best in him (and let's not forget that in the Derby he managed to come in second in the second fastest time while seriously wounded).


Look what is the great mystery here? Every horse in that 73 derby ran a sub 25 final quarter. Oh except for Shecky Greene who was cheap speed and ran a 25.2 or something. Freakin Navajo ran his final stretch run faster than ALydar or just about any other horse you can think of...

Like 12 horses run a sub 25 in that race. Had the field been 20 probably 18 horses would have run a sub 25. Count how many horses ran a sub 25 in the 1980s or the 1990s I mean in the whole decade.

Its not a great mystery once you account for the track..

[46zilzal]

So another colt overcame THAT in 23.0....all the more impressive.

[MrSuave1]

It's very close. It's very debatable.


ANother guy (I think on this forum) made excellent pt. about Citation that if he had been pushed to beat his stablemate (Twilight Tear, IIRC) his winning streak would have been 20+. A perhaps insurmountable streak.

To me it seems he would have been the most dominant horse to step on a track in his prime. He ran stride for strike w/ Noor when that one won in record time and being spotted weight. This when Citation was already over the hill.

Citation lost to filly Bewitch (one of Blood Horses top 100 thoroughbreds) as a two-year-old by a length in the Washington Park Futurity. Calumet had three runners (add Free America) that day. Ben Jones wanted Bewitch to win and arranged for all the jockeys to share the purse, giving directions that whichever horse was ahead in the stretch should be allowed to win. Citation made up quite a bit of ground in the last furlong, but fell short by a length. Later that year, in the Belmont Futurity, he ran Bewitch down easily (as well as the next two times when he was six).

Cy lost the Chesapeake Stakes Trial (6f) in 1948 by a length to Saggy, who he had easily beaten previously in the Flamingo Stakes, and would beat again in a week in the Chesapeake Stakes. It's a well-known story: Arcaro's first time on him, being carried way wide around the far turn (possible foul?), and Ben Jones' instructions to take it easy on Cy. As Arcaro put it, "I wasn't about to beat up that horse for a $8,500 pot with all those $100,000 purses (Triple Crown) ahead of us!"

In short, two excusable losses. Citation should have been 29 wins for 29 starts his first two years, an untouchable record for the ages.

[MrSuave1]

[QUOTE=JPinMaryland]Actually every horses time that derby was impressive. Out of 13 horses 12 of them ran sub 25 sec. final quarters. Can you find another derby where that happened? Or any other race in history?
/QUOTE]

Hard to believe. Maybe an abnormally fast track?

[MrSuave1]

Look what is the great mystery here? Every horse in that 73 derby ran a sub 25 final quarter. Oh except for Shecky Greene who was cheap speed and ran a 25.2 or something. Freakin Navajo ran his final stretch run faster than ALydar or just about any other horse you can think of...

Like 12 horses run a sub 25 in that race. Had the field been 20 probably 18 horses would have run a sub 25. Count how many horses ran a sub 25 in the 1980s or the 1990s I mean in the whole decade.

Its not a great mystery once you account for the track..

Enlighten me. What was it about the track?

Someone wrote elsewhere that it the Belmont track was "freakishly fast" and that in the race prior to the 1973 Belmont Stakes, a track record was set, and that many other records were set that year at Belmont. Is this true?

[46zilzal]

Personal Ensign 13 13-0-0 $1,679,880

Native Dancer 22 21-1-0 $785,240

Miesque 12 9-2-1 $900,000

a few others near the top with better records.

Six track records were set in 1973 at Belmont. Still that takes nothing away with a race which everyone uses as the benchmark for greatness.

[RXB]

Yes, it was fast. But, none of the other horses who set track records at Belmont that year won a Grade 1 race by 31 lengths.

[falconridge]

Gary, I think you are the only one, plus myself, on this thread who seems to be aware of Citation. Lots of people know every single fact about Secretariat, but about nothing else. If more people were informed about Citation's third year of racing, and what this amazing bay did that no other horse before or since has come close to doing, it would be end of discussion.
Debonair One,

Type "Citation" in the Search function on the tool bar above, and see just how many of your PaceAdvantage colleagues know of, and accordingly appreciate, Citation. Not to toot my own horn, but here's a for-instance: http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26386&highlight=Greatest+Single+Season (post #21).

By the way, kudos for your recent post describing the extenuating circumstances of Big Cy's losses to Bewitch and Saggy. You're absolutely right, of course, but could you let us in on your source?

Sincerely,
falconridge

[toetoe]

Didn't Saggy have a famous son ? :confused:

[falconridge]

Didn't Saggy have a famous son ? :confused:
Yep. The union of Saggy and Joppy produced the multiple classic-winning Carry Back, "The Low-Born Aristocrat."

High-born plebeian,
f.r.

[JPinMaryland]

So another colt overcame THAT in 23.0....all the more impressive.


Is that all you got 46? I thought you wanted to debate facts, not engage in semantics?

Hell, why not chop another 100 yards of the track and then Shecky Greene can run a 2:01? Then we can really ponder who great Sec. was to "overcome" that. :lol:

[RXB]

Sham beat the third-place finisher by eight lengths in both the Derby and Preakness. Obviously, he was a very talented horse and in fine form. Yet he couldn't threaten Secretariat at all. Only a great, great horse could've dismissed Sham so easily on those days.

[46zilzal]

Is that all you got 46? I thought you wanted to debate facts, not engage in semantics?


Find another one that closed in the Derby in that range and only ONE comes to mind: Rumbo. Moving that fast that late at that distance in that time is RARE.

[statik27]

These types of threads always seem to bring out strong emotions on all sides and as I'm bored right now, I thought I would throw out some other, perhaps forgotten candidates for the title of best ever. Lets start by looking outside the U.S.

If you want undefeated, look no further then the mare Kinscem who between 1876 and 1879 ran off an incredible 54 races in a row(Citation who?). She won in five different countries: Austria, England, France, Hungary and Germany. On one occasion she won a race by 30 plus lengths, giving 28 lbs to her nearest rival. She even once ran off 3 victories in the space of 4 days. She certainly must be up there with the immortals.

Brigadier Gerard was perhaps the greatest middle distance horse the UK has ever produced. He won the first 15 races of his career and 17 of 18 over all. His list of victories includes every major British race over 8f including the 2k guineas in which he beat another british wonder Mill Reef.

Sea Bird is perhaps a horse that never showed what he was truly capable of, he only had 8 starts, 7 of which were wins. His victory in the Arc de Triomphe was over a field that included preakness winner Tom Rolfe. Timeform rated him at 145, the highest figure ever awarded.

One can't mention Arc winner's unless you talk about the undefeated Italian wonder horse Ribot, a race that he won twice. At the age of 4 he was champion older horse in Italy, England and France. Timeform has him rated as the #3 horse of all time. An Italian newpaper's poll of that countries greatest athlete's of the 20th century had Ribot ranked #4.

There are many many great horses that people all around the world have seen, we shouldn't limit ourselves to the ones that have run in North America.

[46zilzal]

There are many many great horses that people all around the world have seen, we shouldn't limit ourselves to the ones that have run in North America.
I mentioned many of these earlier. There is NO best. Never will be, never was, just greats in their era.

Why not just list all the undeated ones: Kincsem, Eclipse, Ormonde, Ribot, Colin, Nearco, Personal Ensign, Tremont, Asteroid, Barcaldine, Crucifix, Bahram, St. Simon, American Eclipse, Rare Brick, Sensation, El RIo Rey, Regulus, The Tetrach, Ajax, Bay Middleton, Landaluce, Norfolk, Ruffian (actually never lost), Golden Fleece, Lammtarra, Raise a Native.

[ghostyapper]

I mentioned many of these earlier. There is NO best. Never will be, never was, just greats in their era.

Why not just list all the undeated ones: Kincsem, Eclipse, Ormonde, Ribot, Colin, Nearco, Personal Ensign, Tremont, Asteroid, Barcaldine, Crucifix, Bahram, St. Simon, American Eclipse, Rare Brick, Sensation, El RIo Rey, Regulus, The Tetrach, Ajax, Bay Middleton, Landaluce, Norfolk, Ruffian (actually never lost), Golden Fleece, Lammtarra, Raise a Native.

You forgot Vindication ;)

[MrSuave1]

Debonair One,

Type "Citation" in the Search function on the tool bar above, and see just how many of your PaceAdvantage colleagues know of, and accordingly appreciate, Citation. Not to toot my own horn, but here's a for-instance: http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26386&highlight=Greatest+Single+Season (post #21).

By the way, kudos for your recent post describing the extenuating circumstances of Big Cy's losses to Bewitch and Saggy. You're absolutely right, of course, but could you let us in on your source?

Sincerely,
falconridge

Google "Citation" and you'll find a lot more sites devoted to Cessna's plane than to the mahogony wonder-horse!

There are only two books I know of that have Big Cy as their main subject, Phil Georgeff's, which was a labor of love, and Pohla Smith's, which is a workman-like biography, but which lacks the passion, anecdotes, quotes, and details of Georgeff's work. Georgeff is a Citation-idolator and describes the two races that Cy lost in detail.

Georgeff convinced me. I just don't see how one can look at the 3 year old careers of MOW, Cy, and Sec objectively, and not conclude that Cy was the true superhorse. Ben Jones' criteria of "Who he beat, how many times he beat 'em, how he beat 'em, and finally time" seems to be very legitimate.

[46zilzal]

Did he make you go "spinning out of the turns?"

[MrSuave1]

Yes, it was fast. But, none of the other horses who set track records at Belmont that year won a Grade 1 race by 31 lengths.

31 lengths. Beating who? No horse of substance. The next year, 1974, Little Current would run the final 1/2 mile faster than Sec did in 1973. For those who believe fractions are magical ...

[46zilzal]

31 lengths. Beating who? No horse of substance. The next year, 1974, Little Current would run the final 1/2 mile faster than Sec did in 1973. For those who believe fractions are magical ...

Isolating ONE fraction out of a race, ANY race means Squat. Evaluating segmental velocity over 12 furlongs at three years old while carrying 126 is unheard of. No fraction above 25 as I recall. By 1/2 furlong segments: 12.1, 11.2, 11.2, 11.1, 12.0, 11.3, 12.1, 12.1, 12.0, 12.4, 12.1, 12.4

If any horse were that far out front, why would a rider force him any faster? The race was over. VERY POOR comparison. You need more study to be able to debate this with any degree of competence.

Name any other horse, anywhere, at anytime who accomplished even close to that on dirt. You simply cannot.

That would have been impressive all by itself, but you add to it the accomplishments that occurred over that entire season and this one remains, as he has been for a long time, considered at the top of the game by anyone who has any depth of understanding of the thoroughbred.

[MrSuave1]

Debonair One,

Type "Citation" in the Search function on the tool bar above, and see just how many of your PaceAdvantage colleagues know of, and accordingly appreciate, Citation. Not to toot my own horn, but here's a for-instance: http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26386&highlight=Greatest+Single+Season (post #21).



Sincerely,
falconridge

Read your post. Brilliant analyses. After his injury, Cy should have been retired to retirement and stud duties. Making him race again was totally unjustified, and then having to race against Noor, and giving him so much weight, well it just ain't fair.

[banacek]

31 lengths. Beating who? No horse of substance. The next year, 1974, Little Current would run the final 1/2 mile faster than Sec did in 1973. For those who believe fractions are magical ...

Okay, that's 41 posts on how great Citation was. That's great - I agree he was a great horse. We can all agree to disagree who was the greatest.

Now care to contribute to this forum in some other way? Handicapping? Giving a selection?

[46zilzal]

Now care to contribute to this forum in some other way? Handicapping? Giving a selection?
He likes Spaghetti Mouse over Forceful Intention and Shacane.

[MrSuave1]

Isolating ONE fraction out of a race, ANY race means Squat. Evaluating segmental velocity over 12 furlongs at three years old while carrying 126 is unheard of. No fraction above 25 as I recall. By 1/2 furlong segments: 12.1, 11.2, 11.2, 11.1, 12.0, 11.3, 12.1, 12.1, 12.0, 12.4, 12.1, 12.4

If any horse were that far out front, why would a rider force him any faster? The race was over. VERY POOR comparison. You need more study to be able to debate this with any degree of competence.

Name any other horse, anywhere, at anytime who accomplished even close to that on dirt. You simply cannot.

That would have been impressive all by itself, but you add to it the accomplishments that occurred over that entire season and this one remains, as he has been for a long time, considered at the top of the game by anyone who has any depth of understanding of the thoroughbred.

You can quote fractions all day (I know them all--I used to be a Sec idolotar, too) ... totally meaningless in judging a horse. What accomplishments? You mean losing the Wood Memorial, Woodward, and Whitney? He beat a few very good horses, but none the caliber that Big Cy vanquished in 1948. Compare their 3 year old records objectively (even though objectivity seems to be something you are incapable of).

Sec's Belmont was brilliant, speed-wise over a super-fast track. No one can take that away from him. A world record ON DIRT. But it's a one-note samba with you ... that's all you talk about. You are a real bore.

[MrSuave1]

Okay, that's 41 posts on how great Citation was. That's great - I agree he was a great horse. We can all agree to disagree who was the greatest.

Now care to contribute to this forum in some other way? Handicapping? Giving a selection?

Sorry ... I don't bet.

[46zilzal]

.. that's all you talk about. You are a real bore.

another one incapable of reading.......

[46zilzal]

Suave- You are contributing to an arena called PACE- advantage. Methinks you should remember that when you try these inane tactics while others describe things in terms of pace.

[RXB]

31 lengths. Beating who? No horse of substance. The next year, 1974, Little Current would run the final 1/2 mile faster than Sec did in 1973. For those who believe fractions are magical ...

You're just making yourself look silly now.

The second best 3YO of the year pushed him to run 1:09 4/5 for the first six furlongs and still he drew away to a monstrous win. The Beyer figure, on today's scale, would be 139. Accomplished off of a strong pace. It was an incredible performance.

[toetoe]

That's one citation and 41 recitations. :faint:

Before & After:

Caller turned scholar --- Phil Georgeff Will. ;)

[banacek]

That's one citation and 41 recitations. :faint:
;):lol: :lol: :lol:

[46zilzal]

I have always admired DRF turf writers "underplay" of most horses. As I recall the year Cougar II was second best on the West coast, but best on turf only to Fort Marcy, Hirsch called him only "a useful horse."

Charles Hatton, then senior columnist for the DRF wrote of Secretariat in the American Racing Manual 1974 p. 30 ..."but a horse's class is not subject to mathematics. Secretariat was a superhorse rather than a transient Horse of the Year. Veteran turfmen, sophisticates of deep experience and broad informed tastes, pronounced him "Horse of the Century." He is the only thoroughbred ever given this identity in an official program.

Secretariat appealed to all levels of the sporting society, professional and public alike. His distinction is based on the awareness and judgment of the former rather than the idolatry of the latter.

Orientals refer to these appraisals as "facts of the mind." Exterminator and Man O' War have come and gone since the present writer's first acquaintance with the sport. Impressions long standing tend to become fixed and assume a prescriptive right not to be questioned. But Secretariat is the most capable horse we ever saw, and geriatrics defeat any thought of seeing his like again.
He was said to be "The best thing that has happened to racing since the innovation of the tote."

If the Chenery homebred's racing record is less than perfect, no three year old within memory was tried in so stern a crucible. His final five starts were against all comers in a vintage year for handicap horses, at classic distances on both turf and dirt. Napoleon's question was ever, "Who did he beat?"

"It is as one conquers adversity he succeeds."

Tom Smith, for many years Australia's leading conditioner exclaimed: "He is incredible, an absolutely perfect horse."

When first he entered public life Secretariat inclined to pound with his forefeet when extended, occasioning some apprehension he would damage his legs or fail to stay. Last season, his action was a buoyant, kinetic pleasure, and it was remarked; "He wouldn't break an egg." The Jockey Club indeed made a filmed slow motion analysis of his stride.

He wore blinkers only to alert him, though at times he displayed a slight tendency to bear in. Never did he were bandages. Medical test indicated his heart weighs from 14 to 17 pounds, perhaps the largest among champions examined. His pulse is that of a horse physiologically well suited to cracking up oxygen into energy and staying big distances.

In fact his breadth of beam was perhaps his most striking feature."

All of this from the typically conservative and under-played descriptions of a man who was a close to racing as anyone, particularly closer than ANYONE at this website ever was.

[46zilzal]

1973 track records at Belmont.
5.5 Raise a Cup 1:03
6f Zulu Tom 1:08 3/5
6.5 Cohasset Tribe 1:15 1/5
7f King's Bishop 1:20 2/5
8f Stop the Music
Forego
Everton 1:33 3/5
8.5 Prove Out
Forego 1:40 2/5
9f Secretariat 1:45 2/5
12f " 2:24

Widener Turf
7f Right On 1:21 1/5
8.5 Star Envoy 1:34 45/5
11f Jogging 2:13
10f Secretariat 2:24 4/5

INNER turf
10f Star Envoy 2:00 4/5
11f Pollution 2:14 4/5

Sounds like the what happened is the same thing as Patrick Robinson's book title Decade of Champions talking about all the very good ones in the 70's. Not set by slouches at all.

[toetoe]

"The best thing that has happened to racing since the invention of the TOETOE !!" :jump:

High praise, indeed. :ThmbUp:

"It is as one conquers adversity he succeeds." :confused: :confused:

[46zilzal]

"It is as one conquers adversity he succeeds." :confused: :confused:
Charles Hatton wrote it I just tanscribed it.

[GaryG]

Alert: hip boots required for this thread.....it is getting pretty deep...:sleeping:

[toetoe]

Okay, I think I get it now. Took a while. :)

[cj's dad]

Alert: hip boots required for this thread.....it is getting pretty deep...:sleeping:

This thread was meant to solicit opinions regarding the "best ever" which is always a subjective question no matter the topic. I hope that the thread provided an insight into who the members here thought was the greatest of all time. I think it is time to let go. I have ben educated as to horses I had not paid much attention, or even realized their greatness,such as:

Phar Lap
Kelso
Dr. Fager
Swaps
Forego
Foolish Pleasure
Alydar
Alysheba
Seattle Slew

and the list goes on and on and >>>>>

Thanks for the input.

CJ's Dad

And now for my next subjective post :)