FRANKEL - THE GREATEST (regret)....

[UK View]

is that this magnificent beast will not run as a 5yo.

But enjoy him on Saturday as he takes on arguably his toughest task to date. Taking on Cirrus Des Aigles and Nathaniel over 10f on soft ground (and the soft over here is what you guys would call bottomless).

I think it will be a long time until we see another horse who simply destroys everything he runs against. I urge anyone who hasn't really studied his runs to at least watch these 3 races. Simply awesome.

Enjoy :)

http://frankel.juddmonte.com/race-career/2011/qipco-2000-guineas.aspx

http://frankel.juddmonte.com/race-career/2012/queen-anne-stakes-ascot.aspx

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mr_ChX6Jv4s

[depalma113]

No the greatest regret is the horse was named after an American trainer who took a 6 furlong sprinter and turned him into the fastest Breeders Cup Classic winner ever. It's so ironic that they would honor this trainer by not letting his namesake run in races Bobby Frankel wouldn't think twice about running in.

[UK View]

No the greatest regret is the horse was named after an American trainer who took a 6 furlong sprinter and turned him into the fastest Breeders Cup Classic winner ever. It's so ironic that they would honor this trainer by not letting his namesake run in races Bobby Frankel wouldn't think twice about running in.

Well no, because Bobby Frankel was an American trainer training US horses on Dirt.

There was never any intention to send Frankel to the Breeders Cup and why should there be? It's never been on his radar.

Not sure what your point is?

[horses4courses]

Well no, because Bobby Frankel was an American trainer training US horses on Dirt.

There was never any intention to send Frankel to the Breeders Cup and why should there be? It's never been on his radar.

Not sure what your point is?

Bobby Frankel trained many excellent turf runners as well.

But the depalma post is ridiculous.
No appreciation for anything outside his country.
Takes the view that any horse running outside the US is unproven.
Utter nonsense......

[Humph]

Bobby Frankel trained many excellent turf runners as well.

But the depalma post is ridiculous.
No appreciation for anything outside his country.
Takes the view that any horse running outside the US is unproven.
Utter nonsense......

the best english trained in many, many years, no question about it . but they'll always be a few who'll what to knock him , sadly.

[UK View]

Bobby Frankel trained many excellent turf runners as well.

But the depalma post is ridiculous.
No appreciation for anything outside his country.
Takes the view that any horse running outside the US is unproven.
Utter nonsense......

True, but I'm sure Henry Cecil would've trained plenty of Dirt winners if we had any Dirt tracks in the UK....but we don't.

There was no way Frankel was ever going to run at Santa Anita.

What would you do?
Run on Dirt? No point, no interest.
Run in the Mile and beat Excelebration again? Possibly but not really a challenge.
Run in the Turf and beat a load of UK horses that aren't anywhere near his class?
Or run in the Champion Stakes against the 2nd and 4th best rated horses in the world over their ideal trips and going?

[horses4courses]

True, but I'm sure Henry Cecil would've trained plenty of Dirt winners if we had any Dirt tracks in the UK....but we don't.

There was no way Frankel was ever going to run at Santa Anita.

What would you do?
Run on Dirt? No point, no interest.
Run in the Mile and beat Excelebration again? Possibly but not really a challenge.
Run in the Turf and beat a load of UK horses that aren't anywhere near his class?
Or run in the Champion Stakes against the 2nd and 4th best rated horses in the world over their ideal trips and going?

I don't disagree with you.
On good ground, I might have liked to have seen them try the Arc, but they made the right choice, given the conditions at Longchamps.
I haven't seen as good a turf miler since Brigadier Gerard, and he was able to win the King George at a mile and a half. I think Frankel could have, too.

[UK View]

I definitely would've liked to see him try the Arc. Which is why it is such a shame he won't race as a 5yo.

Think how much of a household name Zenyatta became because she raced so long. She certainly lost nothing in defeat in her final race.

It also highlights the case of Sea The Stars. If he had raced at 4, who knows what he would've achieved?

Frankel could easily take in a light 5yo campaign. He could even go to Dubai in March for the World Cup or Sheema Classic? Then the Prince Of Wales at Ascot, followed by the Juddmonte (again) and Champion Stakes (again) or the King George and the Arc (if they wanted to go 1m4f).

I've no doubt he would get the 1m 4f easily now because he "switches off" much better in his races now.

Maybe if there is an outpouring from the public to stay in training Khalid Abdullah may reconsider, but I doubt it.

[Some_One]

Talk of a slight possibly of scratching tomorrow if it continues to rain and the course is heavy/unsafe, could be interesting as BC noms aren't due till Monday.

[UK View]

Talk of a slight possibly of scratching tomorrow if it continues to rain and the course is heavy/unsafe, could be interesting as BC noms aren't due till Monday.

No chance I'm afraid.

Stopped raining now, about 7pm and forecast dry all day tomorrow. Should be proper soft ground but safe enough to run.

[nijinski]

I definitely would've liked to see him try the Arc. Which is why it is such a shame he won't race as a 5yo.

Think how much of a household name Zenyatta became because she raced so long. She certainly lost nothing in defeat in her final race.

It also highlights the case of Sea The Stars. If he had raced at 4, who knows what he would've achieved?

Frankel could easily take in a light 5yo campaign. He could even go to Dubai in March for the World Cup or Sheema Classic? Then the Prince Of Wales at Ascot, followed by the Juddmonte (again) and Champion Stakes (again) or the King George and the Arc (if they wanted to go 1m4f).

I've no doubt he would get the 1m 4f easily now because he "switches off" much better in his races now.

Maybe if there is an outpouring from the public to stay in training Khalid Abdullah may reconsider, but I doubt it.

Sea The Stars accomplished exactly what the Tsui's wanted in his racing career . They owned his Dam , Urban Sea throughout her racing and breeding career . She died as STS burst onto the scene and they were committed , very emotionally so in carrying on her legacy . They took alot of
harsh words from critics , but this is what they wanted .

Every horse's circumstance is different and we don't always know the underlying reasons .

We were fortunate to see Zenyatta race as as an older mare , older when compared to other stars . But she also was a late bloomer .

Can't wait to see Frankel go to post again . Would love to see him here but the bottom line is whatever the connections feel is in his best interest . It is
exciting just to watch this champion .

[depalma113]

Bobby Frankel trained many excellent turf runners as well.

But the depalma post is ridiculous.
No appreciation for anything outside his country.
Takes the view that any horse running outside the US is unproven.
Utter nonsense......

I appreciate plenty of races outside of the US. I appreciate trainers that aren't afraid to test their horse. This horse isn't being tested. They are already preparing the public for a scratch.

His connections have no balls. They passed the Arc, they aren't taking him to Hong Kong, no showdown with Black Caviar, No trip to America or Dubai.

[UK View]

I appreciate plenty of races outside of the US. I appreciate trainers that aren't afraid to test their horse. This horse isn't being tested. They are already preparing the public for a scratch.

His connections have no balls. They passed the Arc, they aren't taking him to Hong Kong, no showdown with Black Caviar, No trip to America or Dubai.

This is complete rubbish. He will only be scratched if it rains more (none forecast).

As for not being tested? This is by far his toughest test (much tougher than the BC Mile or the Turf would've been). What more can you ask than taking on the 2nd best horse in the world on his ideal conditions?

As for Black Caviar, thats laughable.

I really do wonder what you expect him to do?

[UK View]

Incidentally I have heard fron a 100% reliable source, that there is a miniscule chance that he may take in ONE more race!! Either the BC or HK.

But, given the test and the ground he faces today, retirement is almost certain.

[olddaddy]

Twinspires doesnt have Ascot listed today on wagering menu, What gives?

[depalma113]

This is complete rubbish. He will only be scratched if it rains more (none forecast).

As for not being tested? This is by far his toughest test (much tougher than the BC Mile or the Turf would've been). What more can you ask than taking on the 2nd best horse in the world on his ideal conditions?

As for Black Caviar, thats laughable.

I really do wonder what you expect him to do?


Sorry, but run him in Dubai and I might buy that he is being tested. Today is not a test. He should crush this field with ease regardless of the going.

And it's quite convienent for you to beleive that he's facing the second best horse in the world. I watched the Arc, there is nothing in this race that even remotely compares to Orferve.

[olddaddy]

Now Ascot is on TS wagering menu.

[Robert Fischer]

Now Ascot is on TS wagering menu.

I started a thread in Selections area

Anyone who wants to post some picks or insights is welcome

[Robert Fischer]

Also - you ADW may have the course listed as "GOOD" , while the track has Ascot listed as "SOFT(HEAVY IN PLACES)"

[Dahoss9698]

This is complete rubbish. He will only be scratched if it rains more (none forecast).

As for not being tested? This is by far his toughest test (much tougher than the BC Mile or the Turf would've been). What more can you ask than taking on the 2nd best horse in the world on his ideal conditions?

As for Black Caviar, thats laughable.

I really do wonder what you expect him to do?
Instead of going back and forth, while ignoring his point....his idea of testing would have either been to run in the Arc, or travel to the US, Dubai or Hong Kong to finish out his career.

Maybe some of it is selfish. What are the odds Juddmonte names a horse for Bobby Frankel, a US trainer, and he turns out to be this good? People here want to see him run here.

He's obviously great. I don't think anyone is denying that.

[ArlJim78]

Bobby Frankel trained many excellent turf runners as well.

But the depalma post is ridiculous.
No appreciation for anything outside his country.
Takes the view that any horse running outside the US is unproven.
Utter nonsense......
give it a rest. it's so tiresome how you try to work this angle into as many threads as possible like a johnny-one-note.
he didn't say any horse running outside of the US is unproven or that he has no appreciation for anything outside his country. He is suggesting that they should have run him in tougher races. this is the same criticism that most every top US runner faces at one point or another and I would gather that there are some people in the UK with this same view regarding Frankels races. people want to see great horses face the best. While Frankel looks to be a great horse you can't convince me that this race today is some kind of tough test.

[olddaddy]

Frankel is an outstanding grass horse but it seems to me to be considered the best of all time, he has to beat the best at the classic european distance of 1 1/2.

[horses4courses]

give it a rest. it's so tiresome how you try to work this angle into as many threads as possible like a johnny-one-note.
he didn't say any horse running outside of the US is unproven or that he has no appreciation for anything outside his country. He is suggesting that they should have run him in tougher races. this is the same criticism that most every top US runner faces at one point or another and I would gather that there are some people in the UK with this same view regarding Frankels races. people want to see great horses face the best. While Frankel looks to be a great horse you can't convince me that this race today is some kind of tough test.

I stand by what I said.
Some people are never satisfied.

[Steve R]

Frankel is an outstanding grass horse but it seems to me to be considered the best of all time, he has to beat the best at the classic european distance of 1 1/2.
Seems like a rather arbitrary requirement to me. Here's another re Secretariat. He lost two of three starts to older horses on dirt so I guess that excludes him from being the greatest to race in the U.S.

[Valuist]

This is complete rubbish. He will only be scratched if it rains more (none forecast).

As for not being tested? This is by far his toughest test (much tougher than the BC Mile or the Turf would've been). What more can you ask than taking on the 2nd best horse in the world on his ideal conditions?

As for Black Caviar, thats laughable.

I really do wonder what you expect him to do?

Nobody is claiming Frankel isn't the best horse in the world. But to state as fact that Cirrus des Aigles is the 2nd best horse in the world may be questionable.

[Steve R]

Sorry, but run him in Dubai and I might buy that he is being tested. Today is not a test. He should crush this field with ease regardless of the going.

And it's quite convienent for you to beleive that he's facing the second best horse in the world. I watched the Arc, there is nothing in this race that even remotely compares to Orferve.
Interesting. Timeform, the Racing Post and the World Thoroughbred Rankings all rate Cirrus des Aigles from two to three pounds superior to Orfevre. Each organization has years of experience in evaluating international Thoroughbred performance but we are supposed to ignore their assessments and accept yours because you "watched the Arc" and decided otherwise. Unbelievable!

[Valuist]

Interesting. Timeform, the Racing Post and the World Thoroughbred Rankings all rate Cirrus des Aigles from two to three pounds superior to Orfevre. Each organization has years of experience in evaluating international Thoroughbred performance but we are supposed to ignore their assessments and accept yours because you "watched the Arc" and decided otherwise. Unbelievable!

And they never, ever are wrong?

They told us Dancing Brave was the best horse in 50 years. I don't care about shipping or heat, if you are THAT good, you at least can finish in the money.

[horses4courses]

Interesting. Timeform, the Racing Post and the World Thoroughbred Rankings all rate Cirrus des Aigles from two to three pounds superior to Orfevre. Each organization has years of experience in evaluating international Thoroughbred performance but we are supposed to ignore their assessments and accept yours because you "watched the Arc" and decided otherwise. Unbelievable!

Good point.
It's Orfevre this time.
Next, it will be any other G1 horse that comes to mind that Frankel hasn't beaten.
There is, also, the Frankel name factor. It angers many US racing fans that a horse named for a great US trainer does not race here.

Just sit back and appreciate greatness. Please.

[Ca9]

Nobody is claiming Frankel isn't the best horse in the world. But to state as fact that Cirrus des Aigles is the 2nd best horse in the world may be questionable.

We may not know who the second best horse in the world is,but i could assure you its no one whos running in this years Breeders Cup.

[Dahoss9698]

We may not know who the second best horse in the world is,but i could assure you its no one whos running in this years Breeders Cup.
Where is Jaycito running next?

[Si2see]

I don't think they will ride for second place money here, horse is worth too much. Taking a chance against him , although I have never seen a grass horse this good in my lifetime.

[Si2see]

won in a hand ride. Impressive

[Hoofhearted]

Well, that was easy enough after a missed start. :)
winning dist 1.75 lengths.

[Robert Fischer]

:jump: well done Frankel

[classhandicapper]

That was a terrific farewell against a very worthy adversary. It's a shame he won't come to the US because I would have loved to have seen him, but there's nothing to prove here.

[RXB]

Of all the horses that have made their mark at 8f-10f on the grass, only Brigadier Gerard can be mentioned in the same breath. And that is truly saying something. What a horse.

Frankel's favourite foil won his third G1 mile in facile fashion in the preceding race.

[horses4courses]

Of all the horses that have made their mark at 8f-10f on the grass, only Brigadier Gerard can be mentioned in the same breath. And that is truly saying something. What a horse.

Frankel's favourite foil won his third G1 mile in facile fashion in the preceding race.

That, of course, would be Excelebration.
We may well see him in the BC Mile.
Should be a great race between him, Wise Dan, and Moonlight Cloud.

[Robert Fischer]

Is Cirrus Des Aigles now considered the best turf horse in training ?

[Steve R]

Interesting observation from Willie Carson: "This is the best horse ever. To make up three or four lengths on this ground, he has had to use a lot of energy up in those first two furlongs. He went past the French horse on the bridle, but he did get a bit tired in the last furlong."

Frankel got the last furlong in :11.4 on heavy ground.

[OntheRail]

fsSk2S-s1w8

Bet they thought they had him today.... :faint:.

[Hoofhearted]

I'm grateful to have been around to have seen one of the very best of all time.
But all good things come to an end, I guess, and if the horse is half as successful at stud as he was on the track we can look forward to some decent little Frankelettes in the coming years.
Thanks for the memories, old boy.
Your record is quite extraordinary.

Unbeaten in fourteen starts.
Ten of those starts were Group 1 races.
He's beaten 60 individual winners of 243 races.
He's beaten 22 Group 1 winners of 49 Group 1 races.
He's beaten 40 horses who between them won 130 Group races.

[Steve R]

I'm grateful to have been around to have seen one of the very best of all time.
But all good things come to an end, I guess, and if the horse is half as successful at stud as he was on the track we can look forward to some decent little Frankelettes in the coming years.
Thanks for the memories, old boy.
Your record is quite extraordinary.

Unbeaten in fourteen starts.
Ten of those starts were Group 1 races.
He's beaten 60 individual winners of 243 races.
He's beaten 22 Group 1 winners of 49 Group 1 races.
He's beaten 40 horses who between them won 130 Group races.
Thanks for this information. Do you have any comparative data for other horses of the modern era, specifically how many Group 1/Grade 1 horses they defeated and how many Group 1/Grade 1s those defeated horses won?

[Hoofhearted]

Off-hand, Steve, I'm afraid I don't know ( without doing a bit of research).
I reckon Sea The Stars multiple victories over various Group1 winners would deserve mention, but I doubt if the quantity of same would match Frankel's count.

[Some_One]

This year he has defeated the 2nd, 4th, 6th, 10th (X2 tie), 22nd ranked horses in the world, do you really think there is anyone else that has put a record like that in recent years?

[Gorgeous George]

this is the first time i have been on the forum in 2 years, hello to anyone that remembers me. i always thought sea the stars would be the greatest horse i would ever see in my lifetime but ive been truly blessed to have witnessed another superstar, an equine monster. And how fitting that he was named after another superstar:)

[Relwob Owner]

fsSk2S-s1w8

Bet they thought they had him today.... :faint:.


Thanks for posting that....unreal horse and a good race call as well, I thought.

[classhandicapper]

Not to change the topic, but Excelebration is clearly a very good horse also and he's coming to the US to face Wise Dan - who I regard as one of the better US milers in quite some time. I can't wait! :jump:

[RXB]

This year he has defeated the 2nd, 4th, 6th, 10th (X2 tie), 22nd ranked horses in the world, do you really think there is anyone else that has put a record like that in recent years?

Would depend on the definition of "recent." Steve referred to "modern" and while I don't know if Dancing Brave beat a greater quantity of G1 winners--probably not, since he ran 10 races to Frankel's 14-- Dancing Brave definitely ran against (and mostly defeated) better horses. Bering and Shahrastani were a cut above anything that Frankel faced. Acatenango, Shardari and Triptych were other nice runners that he beat, and I'd rate Frankel's best victims at around their level but not up with Bering or Shahrastani.

[UK View]

Would depend on the definition of "recent." Steve referred to "modern" and while I don't know if Dancing Brave beat a greater quantity of G1 winners--probably not, since he ran 10 races to Frankel's 14-- Dancing Brave definitely ran against (and mostly defeated) better horses. Bering and Shahrastani were a cut above anything that Frankel faced. Acatenango, Shardari and Triptych were other nice runners that he beat, and I'd rate Frankel's best victims at around their level but not up with Bering or Shahrastani.

Bering 136
Shahrastani 135
Cirrus Des Aigles 133*
Excelebration 133*

*before today

Better? Yes. A cut above? No, not really.

[RXB]

Bering 136
Shahrastani 135
Cirrus Des Aigles 133*
Excelebration 133*

*before today

Better? Yes. A cut above? No, not really.

Timeform has always had pretty much the lowest opinion/ratings of that group of 1986 European horses. Most others rate Dancing Brave and the rest of them more highly. So that's the relatively pessimistic end of the range for Bering and Shahrastani.

[UK View]

Sorry, but run him in Dubai and I might buy that he is being tested. Today is not a test. He should crush this field with ease regardless of the going.

And it's quite convienent for you to beleive that he's facing the second best horse in the world. I watched the Arc, there is nothing in this race that even remotely compares to Orferve.

Oh dear :bang:

Cirrus Des Aigles IS the 2nd best horse in the World according to the ratings. I am not proclaiming this to be true, just stating the fact.

"run him in Dubai and I might buy that he is being tested".

WHY????

Lets look at Dubai's big 3 races....

Last year's 1-2 in the Sheema Classic were Cirrus Des Aigles and St Nicholas Abbey. Why does he have to travel to Dubai to beat them when he has already done so?

Last year's 3rd in the Dubai World Cup, Planteur, beaten 19l by Frankel when they met.

Last year's runaway Dubai Duty Free winner, Cityscape. Twice 2nd to Excelebration. And Excelebration of course has been beaten 5 times by Frankel!!

So, for Frankel to be "tested" as you put it. He must go to Dubai and beat a load of horses he has already proven superior to?

By your argument to go to Dubai and beat Cirrus Des Aigles IS a test. To run at Ascot and beat Cirrus Des Aigles (on his ideal conditions) is NOT a test.

An argument that I am struggling to fathom.
:confused:

[Steve R]

Timeform has always had pretty much the lowest opinion/ratings of that group of 1986 European horses. Most others rate Dancing Brave and the rest of them more highly. So that's the relatively pessimistic end of the range for Bering and Shahrastani.
I'm not sure where you're coming from on this. I looked the the top five Timeform horses for 1986, 1996, 2010 and this year. I don't see any bias against the 1986 horses from this sample.

1986:
Dancing Brave 140
Bering 136
Sharastani 136
Shardari 134
Triptych 131

1996:
Cigar 138
Mark of Esteem 137
Helissio 136
Halling 132
Bosra Sham 132

2010:
Harbinger 140
Workforce 133
Goldikova 133
So You Think 133
Nakayama Festa 132

2012 (prior to today):
Frankel 147
Black Caviar 136
Cirrus des Aigles 133
Excelebration 133
Hay List 132
So You Think 132

[RXB]

I remembered that at the time a whole lot of people felt that Dancing Brave's Arc was as great as any performance that they'd seen, based on the fact that he dusted what was at the time a highly regarded field, and that Timeform had shortchanged him. However, after doing some Google research it does seem that most of the respected present day handicappers are more in line with Timeform's opinion of DB's performance and therefore of the horses that he beat, with some claiming that even Timeform's 140 is too high for Dancing Brave.

So yes, with a little more study and knowledge under my belt I now agree that Timeform's ratings of those 1986 horses are close to the centre of what is probably the most informed range of opinion.

[Humph]

I remembered that at the time a whole lot of people felt that Dancing Brave's Arc was as great as any performance that they'd seen, based on the fact that he dusted what was at the time a highly regarded field, and that Timeform had shortchanged him. However, after doing some Google research it does seem that most of the respected present day handicappers are more in line with Timeform's opinion of DB's performance and therefore of the horses that he beat, with some claiming that even Timeform's 140 is too high for Dancing Brave.

So yes, with a little more study and knowledge under my belt I now agree that Timeform's ratings of those 1986 horses are close to the centre of what is probably the most informed range of opinion.

Former senior handicapper Geoffrey Gibbs on DB's official 141 rating : " It was arguable as to what he (Dancing Brave) should be , and in retrospect it was was something we took rather light-heartedly which we shouldn't have done "

[Humph]

Not to change the topic, but Excelebration is clearly a very good horse also and he's coming to the US to face Wise Dan - who I regard as one of the better US milers in quite some time. I can't wait! :jump:

yeah , is going to be a race to savour , and'll give us an idea of how the form stacks up , europe against here , seeing as excelebration has spent much of his racing time looking at frankel's arse . ( apparently excelebration has lost only once , on his debut , when frankel hasn't been present.)

[Steve R]

yeah , is going to be a race to savour , and'll give us an idea of how the form stacks up , europe against here , seeing as excelebration has spent much of his racing time looking at frankel's arse . ( apparently excelebration has lost only once , on his debut , when frankel hasn't been present.)
Excelebration is rated just three pounds better than Wise Dan by both Timeform and the Racing Post. The former's best races have been on soft going so it remains to be seen whether that three pound differential will be nullified by the green concrete carpet they call a turf course at Santa Anita. I'd say the edge goes to Wise Dan if his form hold up, although if the BC Mile were run at Ascot I think Excelebration would beat him by open lengths.

[horses4courses]

Excelebration is rated just three pounds better than Wise Dan by both Timeform and the Racing Post. The former's best races have been on soft going so it remains to be seen whether that three pound differential will be nullified by the green concrete carpet they call a turf course at Santa Anita. I'd say the edge goes to Wise Dan if his form hold up, although if the BC Mile were run at Ascot I think Excelebration would beat him by open lengths.

There is a link between Wise Dan and Euro form - through Cityscape.
How close is that horse rated to Excelebration and Midnight Cloud?

Wise Dan easily beat Cityscape two races back at Woodbine.
I think Wise Dan will take some beating in the BC Mile, and that the current odds of better than 3-1 in the UK are good value.

Santa Anita will have the turf course watered and in fine order for BC.
The ground will be far from rock hard.

[Steve R]

There is a link between Wise Dan and Euro form - through Cityscape.
How close is that horse rated to Excelebration and Midnight Cloud?

Wise Dan easily beat Cityscape two races back at Woodbine.
I think Wise Dan will take some beating in the BC Mile, and that the current odds of better than 3-1 in the UK are good value.

Santa Anita will have the turf course watered and in fine order for BC.
The ground will be far from rock hard.
Cityscape was rated at 121 by the Racing Post in the Woodbine Mile (123 in the QEII and a lifetime best of 126) to Wise Dan's 127. Excelebration was rated at 131 in the QEII. Moonlight Cloud's best figure is 127 with a 123 in his last in September. So on current form Cityscape and Moonlight Cloud are both rated 8 pounds below Excelebration. Wise Dan earned a 124 in the Shadwell Turf Mile, so he is 7 pounds behind Excelebration on current form (but only 3 behind in terms of lifetime best).

[Cratos]

At present many athletes achievements are assessed in the moment and bestowed with accolades and greatness that are not necessarily supported by their efforts.

After yesterday’s victory in the Champion Stakes at Ascot by Frankel, there were some if not many calling him the greatest ever.

I agree that he is a great racehorse, but in my opinion the greatest ever should go to the incomparable Secretariat and he has the efforts to back up my claim.

I didn’t reach my decision in a spurious whimsical manner. I carefully reviewed Secretariat’s lifetime past performances to see if there were any evidence to support my claim beyond his exceptional Belmont performance and there was.

Secretariat’s last 4 four lifetime races were nothing short of spectacular and in my opinion the best performances of his career; yes exceeding his record breaking Triple Crown victories.

These last four races occurred in the last 43 days of his racing career and here is what he did:

• On September 15, 1973 he set a world record at 1 1/8 miles against a stellar field which included the previous year’s handicap horse of the year in stable mate, Riva Ridge.

• He came back 14 days later on September 29 on a sloppy track and was beaten by the very good Prove Out; finishing second, but still ran the 1 ½ miles faster at 2:26.55; which is faster than most thoroughbreds ever run the distance in their lifetime.

• But he saved his best for the turf when he was put to the test for the first time on grass in the Man O’ War on October 8 and he came up nothing short of spectacular as the destroyed a very good field of turf runners including Tentam (the previous year turf champion) in a final time of 2:24.8 with a new Belmont turf record for 1 ½ miles.

• But he wasn’t finished because on October 28 he was entered in the Canadian International which included Canada’s turf champion in Kennedy Road and by all accounts he toyed with the field as the covered the 1 5/8 distance at Woodbine in a very good 2:41.8 final time.

Therefore from those races, I calculated what max weight he could tote on his 1200 pound 16.2 hands frame and perform well at 2000 meters (the Champion Stakes distance).

I used a method similar to what Timeform uses in assessing weight to a horse to determine where it rank with other greats on their list and for Secretariat I came up with 154 pounds.

Using the Timeform scale of 1 pound per length at 1 ¼ miles (2000 meters) he would be 7 lengths ahead of Timeform’s current top placeholder, Frankel who is tabbed with 147 pounds by Timeform.

The calculation involved using the laws of physics to calculate his energy quotient at 100,474.1 watts over 2000 meters toting 154 pounds.

Frankel is great, but Secretariat, affectionately called Big Red is the best ever in my opinion on either dirt or grass.

[gracwalk]

At present many athletes achievements are assessed in the moment and bestowed with accolades and greatness that are not necessarily supported by their efforts.

After yesterday’s victory in the Champion Stakes at Ascot by Frankel, there were some if not many calling him the greatest ever.

I agree that he is a great racehorse, but in my opinion the greatest ever should go to the incomparable Secretariat and he has the efforts to back up my claim.

I didn’t reach my decision in a spurious whimsical manner. I carefully reviewed Secretariat’s lifetime past performances to see if there were any evidence to support my claim beyond his exceptional Belmont performance and there was.

Secretariat’s last 4 four lifetime races were nothing short of spectacular and in my opinion the best performances of his career; yes exceeding his record breaking Triple Crown victories.

These last four races occurred in the last 43 days of his racing career and here is what he did:

• On September 15, 1973 he set a world record at 1 1/8 miles against a stellar field which included the previous year’s handicap horse of the year in stable mate, Riva Ridge.

• He came back 14 days later on September 29 on a sloppy track and was beaten by the very good Prove Out; finishing second, but still ran the 1 ½ miles faster at 2:26.55; which is faster than most thoroughbreds ever run the distance in their lifetime.

• But he saved his best for the turf when he was put to the test for the first time on grass in the Man O’ War on October 8 and he came up nothing short of spectacular as the destroyed a very good field of turf runners including Tentam (the previous year turf champion) in a final time of 2:24.8 with a new Belmont turf record for 1 ½ miles.

• But he wasn’t finished because on October 28 he was entered in the Canadian International which included Canada’s turf champion in Kennedy Road and by all accounts he toyed with the field as the covered the 1 5/8 distance at Woodbine in a very good 2:41.8 final time.

Therefore from those races, I calculated what max weight he could tote on his 1200 pound 16.2 hands frame and perform well at 2000 meters (the Champion Stakes distance).

I used a method similar to what Timeform uses in assessing weight to a horse to determine where it rank with other greats on their list and for Secretariat I came up with 154 pounds.

Using the Timeform scale of 1 pound per length at 1 ¼ miles (2000 meters) he would be 7 lengths ahead of Timeform’s current top placeholder, Frankel who is tabbed with 147 pounds by Timeform.

The calculation involved using the laws of physics to calculate his energy quotient at 100,474.1 watts over 2000 meters toting 154 pounds.

Frankel is great, but Secretariat, affectionately called Big Red is the best ever in my opinion on either dirt or grass.


ITA, I would also like to add its how Secretariat, won his races as per Penny Cheney, Secretariat, took control of his own career lol, a horse that understood racing.

[Sysonby]

If you can find his Canadian Internationale, it's worth watching. It looks like he's having a hell of a good time letting other horses lead for awhile till he feels like running, talk about a paid work. I swear the horse had a twinkle in his eye.

[Sysonby]

Here's a link to Secretariat's Internationale, hope it works.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqliNZvnFoE&feature=related

[RXB]

I used a method similar to what Timeform uses in assessing weight to a horse to determine where it rank with other greats on their list and for Secretariat I came up with 154 pounds.

Using the Timeform scale of 1 pound per length at 1 ¼ miles (2000 meters) he would be 7 lengths ahead of Timeform’s current top placeholder, Frankel who is tabbed with 147 pounds by Timeform.

The calculation involved using the laws of physics to calculate his energy quotient at 100,474.1 watts over 2000 meters toting 154 pounds.

I didn’t reach my decision in a spurious whimsical manner.


Oh, okay.

[Steve R]

At present many athletes achievements are assessed in the moment and bestowed with accolades and greatness that are not necessarily supported by their efforts.

After yesterday’s victory in the Champion Stakes at Ascot by Frankel, there were some if not many calling him the greatest ever.

I agree that he is a great racehorse, but in my opinion the greatest ever should go to the incomparable Secretariat and he has the efforts to back up my claim.

I didn’t reach my decision in a spurious whimsical manner. I carefully reviewed Secretariat’s lifetime past performances to see if there were any evidence to support my claim beyond his exceptional Belmont performance and there was.

Secretariat’s last 4 four lifetime races were nothing short of spectacular and in my opinion the best performances of his career; yes exceeding his record breaking Triple Crown victories.

These last four races occurred in the last 43 days of his racing career and here is what he did:

• On September 15, 1973 he set a world record at 1 1/8 miles against a stellar field which included the previous year’s handicap horse of the year in stable mate, Riva Ridge.

• He came back 14 days later on September 29 on a sloppy track and was beaten by the very good Prove Out; finishing second, but still ran the 1 ½ miles faster at 2:26.55; which is faster than most thoroughbreds ever run the distance in their lifetime.

• But he saved his best for the turf when he was put to the test for the first time on grass in the Man O’ War on October 8 and he came up nothing short of spectacular as the destroyed a very good field of turf runners including Tentam (the previous year turf champion) in a final time of 2:24.8 with a new Belmont turf record for 1 ½ miles.

• But he wasn’t finished because on October 28 he was entered in the Canadian International which included Canada’s turf champion in Kennedy Road and by all accounts he toyed with the field as the covered the 1 5/8 distance at Woodbine in a very good 2:41.8 final time.

Therefore from those races, I calculated what max weight he could tote on his 1200 pound 16.2 hands frame and perform well at 2000 meters (the Champion Stakes distance).

I used a method similar to what Timeform uses in assessing weight to a horse to determine where it rank with other greats on their list and for Secretariat I came up with 154 pounds.

Using the Timeform scale of 1 pound per length at 1 ¼ miles (2000 meters) he would be 7 lengths ahead of Timeform’s current top placeholder, Frankel who is tabbed with 147 pounds by Timeform.

The calculation involved using the laws of physics to calculate his energy quotient at 100,474.1 watts over 2000 meters toting 154 pounds.

Frankel is great, but Secretariat, affectionately called Big Red is the best ever in my opinion on either dirt or grass.
There are many ways to evaluate greatness. Singular performances like the Belmont Stakes are one way. The quality of competition is another. Consistency at the highest level is a third. There may be more. But no one seems to care that Secretariat lost two of three lifetime starts against older horses on dirt. The turf horses he defeated were modest American-raced grass horses in an era when American grass racing was even less compelling than it is today. There is no doubt that Secretariat's TC races and Marlboro Cup are of legendary quality. Then again, so are some of Frankel's races. His Queen Anne Stakes is considered the greatest performance in Europe in at least 70 years and better than any in North America over the last 15 or so since Timeform began rating American runners. His 2,000 Guineas is considered the greatest in the history of that race as well. The best horse Secretariat ever defeated was probably dual classic winner and multiple champion Riva Ridge who is ranked 57th among the top North American runners of the 20th century. He never had the chance to race against and defeat the second and fourth highest rated horses in the world in the same race, so we'll never know how that would have worked out. In the end, however, Secretariat lost several races that he shouldn't have. Frankel never did, and his individual performances by European standards are at least a match for Secretariat's. I've been watching Thoroughbreds since I was a child 60 years ago. I never thought I would see one I considered better than Secretariat, until now. But that's just my opinion.

[OntheRail]

I can not watch a replay of Secretariat's without getting a emotional rush. One other thing he did not have or need a rabbit in every race to help out. Frankel is an amazing horse but he's still looking up too Secretariat. I wish him well in his new career on the farm.

[gracwalk]

[QUOTE=Steve R]There are many ways to evaluate greatness. Singular performances like the Belmont Stakes are one way. The quality of competition is another. Consistency at the highest level is a third. There may be more. But no one seems to care that Secretariat lost two of three lifetime starts against older horses on dirt. The turf horses he defeated were modest American-raced grass horses in an era when American grass racing was even less compelling than it is today. There is no doubt that Secretariat's TC races and Marlboro Cup are of legendary quality. Then again, so are some of Frankel's races. His Queen Anne Stakes is considered the greatest performance in Europe in at least 70 years and better than any in North America over the last 15 or so since Timeform began rating American runners. His 2,000 Guineas is considered the greatest in the history of that race as well. The best horse Secretariat ever defeated was probably dual classic winner and multiple champion Riva Ridge who is ranked 57th among the top North American runners of the 20th century. He never had the chance to race against and defeat the second and fourth highest rated horses in the world in the same race, so we'll never know how that would have worked out. In the end, however, Secretariat lost several races that he shouldn't have. Frankel never did, and his individual performances by European standards are at least a match for Secretariat's. I've been watching Thoroughbreds since I was a child 60 years ago. I never thought I would see one I considered better than Secretariat, until now. But that's just my opinion.


Secretariat, lost (4) times in reality one disqualification to second for bumping.

In Secretariat, defense his first lost Jockey's error the lost to Onion, due to a virus with a low grade fever lost to Angle Light, with a nasty abscess in his mouth should have been scratched in both races.

The lost to Prove Out, Secretariat, should have never been thrown into that race at the last minute to replace Riva Ridge, therefore, he was unprepared he was training on turf for the Man O' War race. When Secretariat, was 100%, he did not lose any of races.

[depalma113]

Oh dear :bang:

Cirrus Des Aigles IS the 2nd best horse in the World according to the ratings. I am not proclaiming this to be true, just stating the fact.

"run him in Dubai and I might buy that he is being tested".

WHY????

Lets look at Dubai's big 3 races....

Last year's 1-2 in the Sheema Classic were Cirrus Des Aigles and St Nicholas Abbey. Why does he have to travel to Dubai to beat them when he has already done so?

Last year's 3rd in the Dubai World Cup, Planteur, beaten 19l by Frankel when they met.

Last year's runaway Dubai Duty Free winner, Cityscape. Twice 2nd to Excelebration. And Excelebration of course has been beaten 5 times by Frankel!!

So, for Frankel to be "tested" as you put it. He must go to Dubai and beat a load of horses he has already proven superior to?

By your argument to go to Dubai and beat Cirrus Des Aigles IS a test. To run at Ascot and beat Cirrus Des Aigles (on his ideal conditions) is NOT a test.

An argument that I am struggling to fathom.
:confused:

It was only a test because in the minds of those that think he is the greatest ever, it had to be a test. Rather than accepting that it was a race he was going to win because he was simply better than the 5 horses he was facing.

As for going to Dubai or Hong Kong or Japan or America. Well at least it would be an attempt to show he is the greatest in the world after they skipped the biggest race in Europe.

[tucker6]

Here's a link to Secretariat's Internationale, hope it works.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqliNZvnFoE&feature=related
One of the most nonchalant wins we'll ever see. Made it look like a workout on the backstretch. Secretariat was incomparable most of the time. Loved seeing the crowd rush the outside rail as he came for home.

[tucker6]

There are many ways to evaluate greatness. Singular performances like the Belmont Stakes are one way. The quality of competition is another. Consistency at the highest level is a third. There may be more. But no one seems to care that Secretariat lost two of three lifetime starts against older horses on dirt. The turf horses he defeated were modest American-raced grass horses in an era when American grass racing was even less compelling than it is today. There is no doubt that Secretariat's TC races and Marlboro Cup are of legendary quality. Then again, so are some of Frankel's races. His Queen Anne Stakes is considered the greatest performance in Europe in at least 70 years and better than any in North America over the last 15 or so since Timeform began rating American runners. His 2,000 Guineas is considered the greatest in the history of that race as well. The best horse Secretariat ever defeated was probably dual classic winner and multiple champion Riva Ridge who is ranked 57th among the top North American runners of the 20th century. He never had the chance to race against and defeat the second and fourth highest rated horses in the world in the same race, so we'll never know how that would have worked out. In the end, however, Secretariat lost several races that he shouldn't have. Frankel never did, and his individual performances by European standards are at least a match for Secretariat's. I've been watching Thoroughbreds since I was a child 60 years ago. I never thought I would see one I considered better than Secretariat, until now. But that's just my opinion.
Sorry Steve, but on this occasion, you seem to be glossing over some facts in order to make your point more valid. You choose to pick on Sec's dirt record against older horses, yet failed to mention that:

he had two smashing grass performances against older horses, and all you'll say is that his grass competition was lacking. However, you failed to mention that his individual performances in those races were stellar.
Tentam and Kennedy Road were modest horses? I know they weren't top ten all time, but I think you're lowering their quality to make your point more valid.
It is hard to fault Sec for his performance against Prove Out. Few horses in history ever ran that fast. Sometimes there is no shame in losing to a better performance.
You seem to be glossing over a couple ailments Sec had before two performances in which he lost and forgot that he was mugged coming out of the gate once and disqualified another time. I'd be willing to state that he lost fair and square only once without excuse.
A horse can only race against those put on the track that day. Most horses, including Frankel (I love the horse) race to the competition. Sec sometimes raced to whatever fancy he had that day (see Belmont or Preakness). To be able to run a race regardless of what the field is doing is a different kind of greatness that I have never seen in another horse. Have you?
Like I said, I have the greatest admiration for Frankel. A great horse. However, there is no need to diminish other horses in an attempt to improve Frankel's standing.

[depalma113]

Black Caviar is coming back for 2013.

You would think the connections of the greatest horse that ever lived could try to race their charge a couple of more times.

[horses4courses]

Black Caviar is coming back for 2013.

You would think the connections of the greatest horse that ever lived could try to race their charge a couple of more times.

Maybe they'll reconsider.
Just for you, depalma.

[Steve R]

Sorry Steve, but on this occasion, you seem to be glossing over some facts in order to make your point more valid. You choose to pick on Sec's dirt record against older horses, yet failed to mention that:

he had two smashing grass performances against older horses, and all you'll say is that his grass competition was lacking. However, you failed to mention that his individual performances in those races were stellar.
Tentam and Kennedy Road were modest horses? I know they weren't top ten all time, but I think you're lowering their quality to make your point more valid.
It is hard to fault Sec for his performance against Prove Out. Few horses in history ever ran that fast. Sometimes there is no shame in losing to a better performance.
You seem to be glossing over a couple ailments Sec had before two performances in which he lost and forgot that he was mugged coming out of the gate once and disqualified another time. I'd be willing to state that he lost fair and square only once without excuse.
A horse can only race against those put on the track that day. Most horses, including Frankel (I love the horse) race to the competition. Sec sometimes raced to whatever fancy he had that day (see Belmont or Preakness). To be able to run a race regardless of what the field is doing is a different kind of greatness that I have never seen in another horse. Have you?
Like I said, I have the greatest admiration for Frankel. A great horse. However, there is no need to diminish other horses in an attempt to improve Frankel's standing.
As I said, it's my opinion. At the level of performance under discussion it's the mistakes that make the difference, as between a 10.0 and a 9.95 in gymnastics. Frankel had no glitches in his record. Secretariat did. Excuses don't matter. Actually, the Champion Stakes did it for me, but perhaps you didn't see the race the way I did. I follow international racing very closely. Cirrus des Aigles, justifiably rated the second best horse in the world and in absolutely top form going into the race has been virtually unbeatable over that type of going with an average margin of victory of almost 8 lengths and he was running at his ideal distance. Despite that, and despite being left at the gate and being used early to regain position, Frankel was able to recover and overtake him easily in the last 100 meters and gradually pull ahead. If you watch the race you will see that Peslier on the lead was working frantically on Cirrus des Aigles from 200 meters out while Queally was sitting like ice on Frankel until he drew on even terms with the leader and edged away under urging, all on ground he didn't particularly like. I think this performance was far superior to what is suggested only by the margin of victory.

As for Secretariat's turf races I agree they were first-rate. I also believe that Tentam and Kennedy Road (both of which I liked quite well) were modest turf runners at best even if among the top American grass horses. If you recall, European horses running at about the same time give or take a couple of years included Brigadier Gerard, Mill Reef, Nijinsky II, Rheingold, Bustino, Allez France, Dahlia and Sassafras among others. It's not just a fluke that second-tier European horses come over and routinely whip the best American-raced turf runners. The differential was even greater 40 years ago.

But as I noted, I never thought I'd see one better than Secretariat. Now I believe I have, and the more I review Frankel's races on video, the more I am convinced.

[Steve R]

Black Caviar is coming back for 2013.

You would think the connections of the greatest horse that ever lived could try to race their charge a couple of more times.
I guess a lot of those pesky European all-time greats could be faulted for not racing enough.

Sea-Bird, 8 starts
Tudor Minstrel, 10 starts
Nearco, 14 starts
Mill Reef, 14 starts
Dancing Brave, 10 starts
Dubai MIllennium, 10 starts
Harbinger, 9 starts
Sea The Stars, 9 starts
Shergar, 8 starts
Vaguely Noble, 9 starts
Generous, 11 starts
Reference Point, 10 starts
Alleged, 10 starts
Nijinsky II, 13 starts

[horses4courses]

Good info, Steve.
There are many great horses on that list.

Now, time to vent.
It amazes me how some people think or, apparently, don't.
Causes me to envision Cecil, Grimthorpe, and Abdulla sitting down with a giant list over a coffee, or something stronger (leave out the Prince there).
On the list is every G1-type horse around the world that Frankel has not beaten.

Hmmm, they ponder. Orfevre. Think he's going to Hong Kong, or Singapore?
We could, perhaps, run into him over there.
It's the honorable thing to do, you know?
Or, let me see.......Game On Dude - he's all the rage in California.
There's a good scalp! Breeders' Cup Classic - right, oh.
Australia, you say? Black Caviar - tip top!

These aren't battleships seeking to dominate the high seas.
Frankel has accomplished much. Not enough for some, but plenty in comparison to British racing greats. That concludes the career of an exceptional racehorse. It's nearly November - the flat racing season is over in GB until March, apart from all-weather. Time for stud.
Let's hope he produces plenty of horses with at least half of his ability. :ThmbUp:

[UK View]

It was only a test because in the minds of those that think he is the greatest ever, it had to be a test. Rather than accepting that it was a race he was going to win because he was simply better than the 5 horses he was facing.

As for going to Dubai or Hong Kong or Japan or America. Well at least it would be an attempt to show he is the greatest in the world after they skipped the biggest race in Europe.

But as I proved in my post, your argument is completely flawed.

I may as well say Secretariat was not up to much because he was beaten a few times and never raced overseas. Of course that is rubbish but that is what you might say about a European horse with a similar record.

[Steve R]

It was only a test because in the minds of those that think he is the greatest ever, it had to be a test. Rather than accepting that it was a race he was going to win because he was simply better than the 5 horses he was facing.

As for going to Dubai or Hong Kong or Japan or America. Well at least it would be an attempt to show he is the greatest in the world after they skipped the biggest race in Europe.
Never mind that there wasn't a horse in the Arc rated closer than three pounds of Cirrus des Aigles. The names of races don't matter. It's the horses in those races that determine its quality.

[Robert Fischer]

Never mind that there wasn't a horse in the Arc rated closer than three pounds of Cirrus des Aigles. The names of races don't matter. It's the horses in those races that determine its quality.


the ratings in pounds for the competition is fine when you have a race like Frankel's finale where there is no adversity other than running down lesser horses in a clean stretch run.


It is more of a test to navigate a race like the Arc, and after probable traffic and multiple moves to sustain brilliancy @ 12 furlongs. Regardless of the ratings or rankings.


He basically warmed up for a mile and out-sprinted 2 well-meant horses in the final two furlongs of the 10f Champion Stakes.

In the arc there are maybe 13 or so other well-meant horses, you have to do some internal running, you may face traffic, Frankel may have had to bid early with Ofeavre(sp?) to prevent that one from winning, and on top of all that - the race is 2 furlongs further.

[UK View]

FYI

EXCELEBRATION won in a time of 1m42secs (on a straight course).

FRANKEL ran the final mile of his 1m2f race in 1m42secs (round a bend).

I think that is quite impressive.

[thaskalos]

There are Champions...and then there are undefeated Champions.

Frankel has left us with the impression that we never saw his best...and that only happens once in a lifetime -- if we are lucky.

What a horse...!

[Steve R]

the ratings in pounds for the competition is fine when you have a race like Frankel's finale where there is no adversity other than running down lesser horses in a clean stretch run.


It is more of a test to navigate a race like the Arc, and after probable traffic and multiple moves to sustain brilliancy @ 12 furlongs. Regardless of the ratings or rankings.


He basically warmed up for a mile and out-sprinted 2 well-meant horses in the final two furlongs of the 10f Champion Stakes.

In the arc there are maybe 13 or so other well-meant horses, you have to do some internal running, you may face traffic, Frankel may have had to bid early with Ofeavre(sp?) to prevent that one from winning, and on top of all that - the race is 2 furlongs further.
Adversity? How about being left flat-footed at the gate and having to be used early to regain position? How about testing a severely boggy racing surface for the first time against the world's best performer on that surface?

Navigating the Arc? Did you watch it? Solemia and Orfevre both had dream trips, neither ever facing a single traffic issue. If Frankel ran in the Arc and had the same trip as either of those two you would probably still complain about the lack of traffic not being a test.

Also, this year's Arc was the lowest rated by three pounds in at least 15 years (as far back as I looked). The Champion Stakes was the highest rated by six pounds in at least 15 years. Frankel's performance in the Champion Stakes was rated higher than at least 14 of the last 15 Arc winners and equal to Peintre Celebre (and there were no Peintre Celebres in this year's Arc). Cirrus des Aigles Champion Stakes was rated higher than 9 of the last 15 Arc winners. Even third place finisher Nathaniel was rated equal to or higher than 4 of the last 15 Arc winners.

I guess you and I evaluate performance differently. The again, I've never understood the preoccupation of American racing fans with 10f races as the defining measure of excellence. As far as I can tell, 10f on dirt is about the least competitive division in all of American racing.

[Steve R]

FYI

EXCELEBRATION won in a time of 1m42secs (on a straight course).

FRANKEL ran the final mile of his 1m2f race in 1m42secs (round a bend).

I think that is quite impressive.
Not to mention the sub-12 last furlong which I believe is slightly uphill at Ascot.

[classhandicapper]

the ratings in pounds for the competition is fine when you have a race like Frankel's finale where there is no adversity other than running down lesser horses in a clean stretch run.


It is more of a test to navigate a race like the Arc, and after probable traffic and multiple moves to sustain brilliancy @ 12 furlongs. Regardless of the ratings or rankings.


He basically warmed up for a mile and out-sprinted 2 well-meant horses in the final two furlongs of the 10f Champion Stakes.

In the arc there are maybe 13 or so other well-meant horses, you have to do some internal running, you may face traffic, Frankel may have had to bid early with Ofeavre(sp?) to prevent that one from winning, and on top of all that - the race is 2 furlongs further.

I agree with this line of reasoning.

I think very large deep fields of high quality horses typically require a horse to dig deeper into its reserves of stamina and speed to get, maintain, improve position, and win. Cheaper horses can sometimes beat better horses in small fields because of the less demanding trip, but they get exposed when the going gets really tough.

I'm not saying that's the case with Frankel, but I do think the Arc might have been the tougher assignment even if he beat a better horse in this last race.

(Of course, you can get an easy trip in a big field & vice versa, but in general...)

[classhandicapper]

I didn’t reach my decision in a spurious whimsical manner. I carefully reviewed Secretariat’s lifetime past performances to see if there were any evidence to support my claim beyond his exceptional Belmont performance and there was.

Secretariat’s last 4 four lifetime races were nothing short of spectacular and in my opinion the best performances of his career; yes exceeding his record breaking Triple Crown victories.

These last four races occurred in the last 43 days of his racing career and here is what he did:

• On September 15, 1973 he set a world record at 1 1/8 miles against a stellar field which included the previous year’s handicap horse of the year in stable mate, Riva Ridge.

• He came back 14 days later on September 29 on a sloppy track and was beaten by the very good Prove Out; finishing second, but still ran the 1 ½ miles faster at 2:26.55; which is faster than most thoroughbreds ever run the distance in their lifetime.

• But he saved his best for the turf when he was put to the test for the first time on grass in the Man O’ War on October 8 and he came up nothing short of spectacular as the destroyed a very good field of turf runners including Tentam (the previous year turf champion) in a final time of 2:24.8 with a new Belmont turf record for 1 ½ miles.

• But he wasn’t finished because on October 28 he was entered in the Canadian International which included Canada’s turf champion in Kennedy Road and by all accounts he toyed with the field as the covered the 1 5/8 distance at Woodbine in a very good 2:41.8 final time.

Therefore from those races, I calculated what max weight he could tote on his 1200 pound 16.2 hands frame and perform well at 2000 meters (the Champion Stakes distance).

I used a method similar to what Timeform uses in assessing weight to a horse to determine where it rank with other greats on their list and for Secretariat I came up with 154 pounds.

Using the Timeform scale of 1 pound per length at 1 ¼ miles (2000 meters) he would be 7 lengths ahead of Timeform’s current top placeholder, Frankel who is tabbed with 147 pounds by Timeform.

The calculation involved using the laws of physics to calculate his energy quotient at 100,474.1 watts over 2000 meters toting 154 pounds.

Frankel is great, but Secretariat, affectionately called Big Red is the best ever in my opinion on either dirt or grass.

Cratos,

I respect your opinion, but if you are rating Secretariat at 154 pounds, then what did you rate Prove Out's win over Big Red?

Secretariat was obviously among the top few horses ever, delivered one of the single greatest performances ever, and may have even been the best to ever race in the US, but some of his raw final times are misleading. They used to really juice up the tracks in those days.

I also have to think his US based turf competition was not of the same caliber as the best Europe has to offer now.

154 seems too high to me.

[horses4courses]

Not to mention the sub-12 last furlong which I believe is slightly uphill at Ascot.

Didn't realize he was that quick in final furlong.
That's insane for ground that deep.

[Humph]

Not to mention the sub-12 last furlong which I believe is slightly uphill at Ascot.

from swinley bottom to the wire ( the last mile , in effect ) is uphill at ascot.

[depalma113]

Never mind that there wasn't a horse in the Arc rated closer than three pounds of Cirrus des Aigles. The names of races don't matter. It's the horses in those races that determine its quality.

The epitome of arrogance and complete and utter nonsense.

Had Frankel run in the Arc, you would never make a statement like that.

[Steve R]

The epitome of arrogance and complete and utter nonsense.

Had Frankel run in the Arc, you would never make a statement like that.
I see. So in your mind the BC Classic of 2011 was the same quality as the BC Classic of 2004 because the races have the same name. I think your ignorance trumps my arrogance any day of the week. I guess it's irrelevant that the Europeans rate this year's Arc the worst in recent memory and the Champion Stakes among the best. BTW, in the thread "Frankel to Champion Stakes" I had argued in post #3 back on August 31 that the Champion Stakes was a better choice for Frankel than the Arc because the prospective field looked significantly stronger. But I suppose to you a G1 with the top three earning BSFs in the 90s would be a better race than a G3 where the top three earned BSFs over 100.

[horses4courses]

The epitome of arrogance and complete and utter nonsense.

Had Frankel run in the Arc, you would never make a statement like that.

What a fool you're making of yourself.

Frankel wins the Arc. What then?
There will always be another race, and more horses to beat.
Nothing is ever good enough for some people.

The horse won 14 races at an extremely high level.
He beat many good horses. Some more than once.
Leave it at that.

[horses4courses]

I see. So in your mind the BC Classic of 2011 was the same quality as the BC Classic of 2004 because the races have the same name. I think your ignorance trumps my arrogance any day of the week. I guess it's irrelevant that the Europeans rate this year's Arc the worst in recent memory and the Champion Stakes among the best. BTW, in the thread "Frankel to Champion Stakes" I had argued in post #3 back on August 31 that the Champion Stakes was a better choice for Frankel than the Arc because the prospective field looked significantly stronger. But I suppose to you a G1 with the top three earning BSFs in the 90s would be a better race than a G3 where the top three earned BSFs over 100.

Question for you, Steve.

How much softer do you think the ground was at Longchamps for the Arc (I believe it was close to bottomless) than it was at Ascot last Saturday?

It's all conjecture, but judging by the way Frankel unloaded in the last quarter mile of his final two races,
it seems that a mile and a half was in his reach.

There's no doubt in my mind that he beat the very best over his career.
They may have, however, underestimated his stamina capability.

[UK View]

Question for you, Steve.

How much softer do you think the ground was at Longchamps for the Arc (I believe it was close to bottomless) than it was at Ascot last Saturday?

It's all conjecture, but judging by the way Frankel unloaded in the last quarter mile of his final two races,
it seems that a mile and a half was in his reach.

There's no doubt in my mind that he beat the very best over his career.
They may have, however, underestimated his stamina capability.

I was at Ascot on Saturday and believe me, it was pretty damn testing!! As for the Arc meeting I willl ask a friend who was there and walked the course but I do not think it was that much heavier?

[UK View]

The epitome of arrogance and complete and utter nonsense.

Had Frankel run in the Arc, you would never make a statement like that.


I think this Depalma guy is having a laugh with us? Nobody could really believe his statements.

Nobody is that misguided and ill informed surely?

[thaskalos]

I think this Depalma guy is having a laugh with us? Nobody could really believe his statements.

Nobody is that misguided and ill informed surely?

You'd be surprised...

[Cratos]

As I said, it's my opinion. At the level of performance under discussion it's the mistakes that make the difference, as between a 10.0 and a 9.95 in gymnastics. Frankel had no glitches in his record. Secretariat did. Excuses don't matter. Actually, the Champion Stakes did it for me, but perhaps you didn't see the race the way I did. I follow international racing very closely. Cirrus des Aigles, justifiably rated the second best horse in the world and in absolutely top form going into the race has been virtually unbeatable over that type of going with an average margin of victory of almost 8 lengths and he was running at his ideal distance. Despite that, and despite being left at the gate and being used early to regain position, Frankel was able to recover and overtake him easily in the last 100 meters and gradually pull ahead. If you watch the race you will see that Peslier on the lead was working frantically on Cirrus des Aigles from 200 meters out while Queally was sitting like ice on Frankel until he drew on even terms with the leader and edged away under urging, all on ground he didn't particularly like. I think this performance was far superior to what is suggested only by the margin of victory.

As for Secretariat's turf races I agree they were first-rate. I also believe that Tentam and Kennedy Road (both of which I liked quite well) were modest turf runners at best even if among the top American grass horses. If you recall, European horses running at about the same time give or take a couple of years included Brigadier Gerard, Mill Reef, Nijinsky II, Rheingold, Bustino, Allez France, Dahlia and Sassafras among others. It's not just a fluke that second-tier European horses come over and routinely whip the best American-raced turf runners. The differential was even greater 40 years ago.

But as I noted, I never thought I'd see one better than Secretariat. Now I believe I have, and the more I review Frankel's races on video, the more I am convinced.


Steve, if you are arguing that there were better European turf runners when Kennedy Road and Tentam were on the track you will not get any rebuttal from me, but that is not the argument, it is who is the greatest and granted that will be an individual opinion; again in my opinion Secretariat is the best and to put it in the words of his groom at the time, Eddie Sweat, “he (speaking of Secretariat) was the mostest of the most.”

Also it should not be overlooked that Secretariat was retired as a 3yo whereas Frankel was running up to 4yo and Secretariat raced on both dirt and turf; Frankel is exclusively a turf runner.

I only wonder what a more matured and muscular Secretariat would have done at 4yo.

[Cratos]

FYI

EXCELEBRATION won in a time of 1m42secs (on a straight course).

FRANKEL ran the final mile of his 1m2f race in 1m42secs (round a bend).

I think that is quite impressive.

If you think that Frankel’s performance was exceptional by running the final mile in 1:42 while going around a bend (a turn in North America) then what do you think of Secretariat’s performance in the 1973 Man O’ War on Belmont’s Inner Turf track where he negotiated two tight turns (bends) of 1,246.5 feet in length en route to a 2:24.8 track record breaking final time.

[Cratos]

Cratos,

I respect your opinion, but if you are rating Secretariat at 154 pounds, then what did you rate Prove Out's win over Big Red?

Secretariat was obviously among the top few horses ever, delivered one of the single greatest performances ever, and may have even been the best to ever race in the US, but some of his raw final times are misleading. They used to really juice up the tracks in those days.

I also have to think his US based turf competition was not of the same caliber as the best Europe has to offer now.

154 seems too high to me.

Secretariat’s energy quotient calculated higher than any horse I ever calculated and second to him was Dr. Fager who I gave 149 pounds too; this is also better than Timeform’s 147 pound rating given to Frankel. I didn’t put Seattle Slew on the list of recent runners because he did not run on the turf.

I didn’t rate Prove Out because I was evaluating turf performances. The 154 number was actually 154.12 and this number is derived from an energy quotient based on “Race Shape” which is a function of “pace” and “style”; and “Sustainability” which is a function of “strength” and stamina.” This is not a linear function and the curve is logarithmic.

What number would you assign Secretariat? Also how did they “juice up” a turf track?

Yes, a dirt track can be made slightly faster, but the real retardant to the measurement of speed on the dirt racetrack is the hoof slip in the direction of motion occurring when the ratio of total horizontal to vertical components of the ground-reaction forces exceeds the static coefficient of friction of the hoof–surface interaction.

[Steve R]

Question for you, Steve.

How much softer do you think the ground was at Longchamps for the Arc (I believe it was close to bottomless) than it was at Ascot last Saturday?

It's all conjecture, but judging by the way Frankel unloaded in the last quarter mile of his final two races,
it seems that a mile and a half was in his reach.

There's no doubt in my mind that he beat the very best over his career.
They may have, however, underestimated his stamina capability.
Longchamp was rated heavy and Ascot was rated soft with some heavy patches. Frankel didn't love the ground at Ascot so I'll assume he wouldn't have cared for the going in France either.

The colt seems bred for a mile and a half and acted like it in his last two. I don't know if his connections underestimated his ability at 12f or chose instead to maximize his speed at shorter distances. Maybe they just like the idea of a Timeform 140 at 8f or 10f instead of a Timeform 135 at 12f. In any case, he beat a better horse at that horse's ideal distance/surface than any he would have faced in the Arc, and he did it fairly easily despite a dubious trip.

After watching horses for so long I don't get as worked up about distances as some do. A world-class horse at any distance is still world class and since they are all part of the same gene pool and time records at all distances fall essentially on a straight line it simply means that the fastest horses are all bumping up against the genetic frontier of Thoroughbred speed, only at different parts of the time-distance spectrum. It's not an accident that the 12f record holder will never also be the 6f record holder. And people seem to ignore the fact that the winning speed of every record holder at any distance is slower than the winning speed of the record holder at the next shorter distance. In the end it's cultural choices that favor so-called classic distances in the U.S. Other racing venues don't seem nearly as biased, certainly not the British, Irish or Australians. And frankly, I got chills when I watched Groovy run and I personally favor him over 95% of the American classic winners I've seen in recent years.

For me the difference between Frankel and Secretariat is consistency, not absolute ability. Sure, Secretariat would most likely beat Frankel at 12f on dirt. I'm equally convinced Frankel would have kicked Secretariat's ass at 8f or 10f on grass.

[Steve R]

[snip]...Also how did they “juice up” a turf track?

Maybe by not watering it. The course variant at Belmont on the day Secretariat set the course record was 1, by far the lowest in his career. His speed rating was 103, so his SR+TV was 104. More typically, his SR+TV numbers were in the 110 to 120 range.

BTW, I believe the Man o' War was run on the Widener course. At least that's the way it looks on the video.

[Cratos]

For me the difference between Frankel and Secretariat is consistency, not absolute ability. Sure, Secretariat would most likely beat Frankel at 12f on dirt. I'm equally convinced Frankel would have kicked Secretariat's ass at 8f or 10f on grass.

On dirt or turf and at any distance Frankel against Secretarial would have been like Michael Spinks vs. Mike Tyson; no contest. And at 8 furlongs the results would’ve been just as bloody if Frankel was in against Dr. Fager.

I am not into revisionist history, but I would like to see any two horses better than Secretariat and Dr.Fager over the last 50 years.

Also please define consistency in terms of horseracing performances because in his three losses, Secretariat had two seconds and one third; all in graded company. His other loss was a disqualification.

Taking nothing away from Frankel’s 14-0 record, but I would like for you to explain why 7 of his races had 6 or less horses entered including Frankel.

[the little guy]

If you think that Frankel’s performance was exceptional by running the final mile in 1:42 while going around a bend (a turn in North America) then what do you think of Secretariat’s performance in the 1973 Man O’ War on Belmont’s Inner Turf track where he negotiated two tight turns (bends) of 1,246.5 feet in length en route to a 2:24.8 track record breaking final time.

The Inner Turf Course at Belmont is 1 1/4 miles. It hardly has tight turns. The only bigger turf course in the US is the Widener at Belmont. The Woodbine course is now the biggest in North America.

[5k-claim]

I see. So in your mind the BC Classic of 2011 was the same quality as the BC Classic of 2004 because the races have the same name. I think your ignorance trumps my arrogance any day of the week. I guess it's irrelevant that the Europeans rate this year's Arc the worst in recent memory and the Champion Stakes among the best. BTW, in the thread "Frankel to Champion Stakes" I had argued in post #3 back on August 31 that the Champion Stakes was a better choice for Frankel than the Arc because the prospective field looked significantly stronger. But I suppose to you a G1 with the top three earning BSFs in the 90s would be a better race than a G3 where the top three earned BSFs over 100. Especially if the G1 in question was named The Kentucky Derby or Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe? I would definitely consider it "better", if by "better" you mean more historic and prestigious. And the race that I would rather compete in and win.

Who wouldn't want to win a G1 over a G3, and what would BSFs have to do with anything?

It sometimes reads as if you kind of build your experience of horse racing around a core comprised of these various handicapper "ratings"... or am I wrong about that?

.

[Cratos]

Maybe by not watering it. The course variant at Belmont on the day Secretariat set the course record was 1, by far the lowest in his career. His speed rating was 103, so his SR+TV was 104. More typically, his SR+TV numbers were in the 110 to 120 range.

BTW, I believe the Man o' War was run on the Widener course. At least that's the way it looks on the video.

Sorry to disappoint you but track variants and speed ratings have minimal scientific value because of lack of homogeneity. However, I am willing to listen to a logical and proven explanation.

If it was the Widener Course the turn length would be 1,538.5 feet, but that would not change fact that he set a track record.

However this is what Bill Doolittle wrote about the Man O’ War: “On this day, jockey Ron Turcotte steered Secretariat across the dirt track and on to the inner “turf” track at Belmont, an oval of lush, deep grass.”

[Cratos]

The Inner Turf Course at Belmont is 1 1/4 miles. It hardly has tight turns. The only bigger turf course in the US is the Widener at Belmont. The Woodbine course is now the biggest in North America.

The Inner Turf Course according to the DRF records and several other sources is 1-3/16 miles plus 103 feet. In terms of figuring centripal acceleration and angular velocity for a racehorse anything less than 1,320 (1/4 mile) feet becomes “tight.”

[the little guy]

The Inner Turf Course according to the DRF records and several other sources is 1-3/16 miles plus 103 feet. In terms of figuring centripal acceleration and angular velocity for a racehorse anything less than 1,320 (1/4 mile) feet becomes “tight.”

You're correct. My confusion comes from your other inaccurate statement. Please explain how they run 1 1/2 mile races on the Inner Turf Course, given that the distance from the top of the stretch plus the course distance is under 1 1/2 miles?

The answer? They don't.

[foregoforever]

And the answer is ...

KNHJkz5K6uk

[gracwalk]

On dirt or turf and at any distance Frankel against Secretarial would have been like Michael Spinks vs. Mike Tyson; no contest. And at 8 furlongs the results would’ve been just as bloody if Frankel was in against Dr. Fager.

I am not into revisionist history, but I would like to see any two horses better than Secretariat and Dr.Fager over the last 50 years.

Also please define consistency in terms of horseracing performances because in his three losses, Secretariat had two seconds and one third; all in graded company. His other loss was a disqualification.

Taking nothing away from Frankel’s 14-0 record, but I would like for you to explain why 7 of his races had 6 or less horses entered including Frankel.

People tend to forgot the reasons why Secretariat, loss his races (no excuses).

Frankel, never raced sick or thrown into a race at the 11th hour with his 14, victories.

If Secretariat, had been scheduled to race from the beginning he would have been properly trained and prepared imo, he would have beaten Prove Out.

[UK View]

On dirt or turf and at any distance Frankel against Secretarial would have been like Michael Spinks vs. Mike Tyson; no contest. And at 8 furlongs the results would’ve been just as bloody if Frankel was in against Dr. Fager.

I am not into revisionist history, but I would like to see any two horses better than Secretariat and Dr.Fager over the last 50 years.

Also please define consistency in terms of horseracing performances because in his three losses, Secretariat had two seconds and one third; all in graded company. His other loss was a disqualification.

Taking nothing away from Frankel’s 14-0 record, but I would like for you to explain why 7 of his races had 6 or less horses entered including Frankel.


Errr..possibly quality over quantity. It is rare in the UK for a Group 1 race of a mile plus to have more than 9 runners. Unless it is either one of the classics or the Arc. Certainly not unusual.

Surely it is better to beat 3 top quality horses than 10 mediocre ones?

Just look at the Arc de Triomphe this year. By far the worst standard quality wise I can remember. And that has nothing to do with Frankel.

[horses4courses]

On dirt or turf and at any distance Frankel against Secretarial would have been like Michael Spinks vs. Mike Tyson; no contest. And at 8 furlongs the results would’ve been just as bloody if Frankel was in against Dr. Fager.

I am not into revisionist history, but I would like to see any two horses better than Secretariat and Dr.Fager over the last 50 years.

Also please define consistency in terms of horseracing performances because in his three losses, Secretariat had two seconds and one third; all in graded company. His other loss was a disqualification.

Taking nothing away from Frankel’s 14-0 record, but I would like for you to explain why 7 of his races had 6 or less horses entered including Frankel.


Errr..possibly quality over quantity. It is rare in the UK for a Group 1 race of a mile plus to have more than 9 runners. Unless it is either one of the classics or the Arc. Certainly not unusual.

Surely it is better to beat 3 top quality horses than 10 mediocre ones?

Just look at the Arc de Triomphe this year. By far the worst standard quality wise I can remember. And that has nothing to do with Frankel.

Unbelievable.
Field sizes reduce dramatically when there is an overwhelming favorite.
That is commonplace throughout the world in stakes races.
Some people seem to go through life with their eyes open, but seeing nothing.

[Steve R]

On dirt or turf and at any distance Frankel against Secretarial would have been like Michael Spinks vs. Mike Tyson; no contest. And at 8 furlongs the results would’ve been just as bloody if Frankel was in against Dr. Fager.

I am not into revisionist history, but I would like to see any two horses better than Secretariat and Dr.Fager over the last 50 years.

Also please define consistency in terms of horseracing performances because in his three losses, Secretariat had two seconds and one third; all in graded company. His other loss was a disqualification.

Taking nothing away from Frankel’s 14-0 record, but I would like for you to explain why 7 of his races had 6 or less horses entered including Frankel.
Consistency in this case means never losing a single race, earning a record four Timeform ratings over 140 pounds and winning nine consecutive Group/Grade 1 races, an all-time European record and equal to Zenyatta's North American record.

The average number of horses in Secretariat's 21 lifetime races was 7.6. The average in Frankel's 14 races was 7.3. Ten of Secretariat's 21 races also had six or fewer starters. In his 12 starts at three only five had more than six starters.

[UK View]

From my point of view I must make clear that (despite being too young to remember) I am a MASSIVE fan of Secretariat. Even from the UK lol. There is no doubt his greatness in my opinion.

It is not a competition between the two. Frankel is the best I have ever seen. Or will ever see.

What does make me laugh is people questioning Frankels's greatness. If they had a logical reasoned argument then fine. But there are none. he has no chinks in his armour. He has beaten the best there is to beat and he has beaten them all easily.

People have criticised him for not running in the Arc. Fair enough, but if he had won the Arc people would be saying it was a terrible Arc (which it was).

If he had run in Dubai he would've beaten anybody in the Turf or Sheema Classic.

He wouldn't have run in the Dubai World Cup because the surface is a joke and the race is terrible these days. (We haven't had a horse PLACE at less than 10/1 in the last 3/4 years!!)

And as for the Breeders Cup. Well the only feasible target, the Mile was never on the agenda because Frankel had stepped up to 10f at that stage of his career.

The Turf is not really a test enough for him and as for the Classic, well, no chance. Dirt racing = No interest.

[ceejay]

UK-

no doubt Frankel is an excellent horse, even "great" if you will. To paraphrase a failed US vice presidential candidate I do remember Secretariat: Frankel is no Secretariat. Secretariat was accomplished multiple distances on multiple surfaces and ran the best race ever. Frankel is effectively a Miler who raced past the distance twice.. So, back to your original question, the greatest regret is like yours , that he did not have a more diverse career.

[Blenheim]

SteveR,

I've watched the videos of all of Frankel's races at your site and also watched the videos of Sea-Bird in the Epsom and the Arc - can't see how Frankel beats Sea-Bird. Of course that is just my opinion. How well do you think Frankel would have done in the 1965 Arc running against some of the best horses in the world at that time? Of the horses that Frankel has beaten how would they have stacked up against the runners in the 65' Arc or the 65' Epsom? What are the Roman Performance Figures for Frankel when compared to Sea-Bird or some of the other Timeform highweights?

Thanks

[UK View]

From my point of view I must make clear that (despite being too young to remember) I am a MASSIVE fan of Secretariat. Even from the UK lol. There is no doubt his greatness in my opinion.

It is not a competition between the two. Frankel is the best I have ever seen. Or will ever see.

What does make me laugh is people questioning Frankels's greatness. If they had a logical reasoned argument then fine. But there are none. he has no chinks in his armour. He has beaten the best there is to beat and he has beaten them all easily.

People have criticised him for not running in the Arc. Fair enough, but if he had won the Arc people would be saying it was a terrible Arc (which it was).

If he had run in Dubai he would've beaten anybody in the Turf or Sheema Classic.

He wouldn't have run in the Dubai World Cup because the surface is a joke and the race is terrible these days. (We haven't had a horse PLACE at less than 10/1 in the last 3/4 years!!)

And as for the Breeders Cup. Well the only feasible target, the Mile was never on the agenda because Frankel had stepped up to 10f at that stage of his career.

The Turf is not really a test enough for him and as for the Classic, well, no chance. Dirt racing = No interest.


Just wanted to make clear on this point. I wasn't saying that Frankel was better. Just that Frankel was the best that I had seen.

Comparisons between the two are pretty pointless to be honest. People will always think the horse they saw was the best.

[UK View]

Frankel 147
Sea Bird 145
Reliance 137 (2nd in 1965 Arc)
Excelebration 135
Canford Cliffs 133

Can't find any more from 65 sorry.

Of course you are saying that Frankel wouldn't have beaten Sea Bird. but over what trip?

1m2f or 1m4f? I guess 1m4f which would be impossible to equate as Frankel never ran over it.

[RXB]

Frankel's 147 was earned at a mile. His two 10f races were both rated below Sea-Bird's Arc; plus, SeaBird earned that 145 as a 3YO.

Frankel is a stupendous miler. I'd say he's slightly less at 10f, though still truly outstanding and would be a legitimate contender in any hypothetical champions race at that distance. At 12f, I think he would've found it tough against the true greats, though of course we'll never know for sure.

[RXB]

On dirt or turf and at any distance Frankel against Secretarial would have been like Michael Spinks vs. Mike Tyson; no contest.

With this, you've achieved a new height of absurdity.

[Cratos]

With this, you've achieved a new height of absurdity.

Thank you; I will try to do better and without the personalizations.

[PaceAdvantage]

Secretariat LOOKED and RAN like a TREMENDOUS MACHINE.

Frankel is downright scrawny by comparison...or maybe it's the way Euro video looks so funky when shown on American TV...

[Blenheim]

I do understand there was an earthquake down there in Costa Rica, I believe a 6.6 on the Richter Scale - so we might have to wait for a short bit to get a response from SteveR. Lookin' forward to readin' his comments. Hope you fared well SteveR . . .
~
For those interested, here is a rather sharp color video and rather sharp black and white video of two of the finest performances by a racehorse. Of course that is just my opinion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzXPXjUcOaA

What interests me most about Sea Bird II is how fast he was moving in the last two, three furlongs. I keep lookin' for a furlong marker and takin' a look at the clock tryin' to figure how fast he was movin', haven't been able to come up with anything but I figure he was movin' at least 60 feet per second, likely faster - never felt the whip.

Sea Bird II versus Secretariat, that my friends would have been a hoss'race!

[SharpCat]

Great comments about Secretariat on espn sports century. I was there at 6 o'clock in the morning. I was there all night I fell asleep against a tree by his barn. The fittest I have ever seen a horse. His eyes were big a saucers, his nostrils were flared, he was nickering, his ears were playing, his muscles were rippling and he's walking around on his hind legs and I remember thinking to myself boy what are we gonna see today. I'm looking at him and i'm thinking I never seen him walk like this before. He looks like the execution man he's going to the gallows. He's about to dispatch somebody. Jack Nickalus once called me over and said you were at the Belmont you saw that race and I said yes. I was all alone in my living room watching and has he came down the stretch pulling away I applauded and I cried. Jack don't you understand. All of your life in your game you've been striving for perfection. At the end of the Belmont you saw it.

[gracwalk]

[QUOTE=SharpCat]Great comments about Secretariat on espn sports century. I was there at 6 o'clock in the morning. I was there all night I fell asleep against a tree by his barn. The fittest I have ever seen a horse. His eyes were big a saucers, his nostrils were flared, he was nickering, his ears were playing, his muscles were rippling and he's walking around on his hind legs and I remember thinking to myself boy what are we gonna see today. I'm looking at him and i'm thinking I never seen him walk like this before. He looks like the execution man he's going to the gallows. He's about to dispatch somebody. Jack Nickalus once called me over and said you were at the Belmont you saw that race and I said yes. I was all alone in my living room watching and has he came down the stretch pulling away I applauded and I cried. Jack don't you understand. All of your life in your game you've been striving for perfection. At the end of the Belmont you saw it.[/


Bill Nack, made that comment.

[SharpCat]

That's right.

[Humph]

Secretariat LOOKED and RAN like a TREMENDOUS MACHINE.

Frankel is downright scrawny by comparison...or maybe it's the way Euro video looks so funky when shown on American TV...

saw frankel in the flesh when he won his 2000 guineas and scrawny isn't a word i'd use to describe him , even if he is no oil painting . but so what ! when has this game ever been a beauty pageant ?

[castaway01]

The only regret I have about Frankel is that we didn't get to see him race more than 14 times. He's won, often with tremendous ease, over the best horses in Europe (horses who have come here and won Breeders Cup races; horses who have in turn dominated their competition), putting up huge Timeform figures. By both objective and subjective measures he's been amazing. He has a tremendous turn of foot, just stunning to watch. I have no idea if he's the first, third, sixth, or ninth best horse ever, but I do know it's been a pleasure to watch him run.

[PaceAdvantage]

saw frankel in the flesh when he won his 2000 guineas and scrawny isn't a word i'd use to describe him , even if he is no oil painting . but so what ! when has this game ever been a beauty pageant ?Scrawny BY COMPARISON to Secretariat...an important distinction that you failed to acknowledge in your reply.

[Steve R]

Especially if the G1 in question was named The Kentucky Derby or Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe? I would definitely consider it "better", if by "better" you mean more historic and prestigious. And the race that I would rather compete in and win.

Who wouldn't want to win a G1 over a G3, and what would BSFs have to do with anything?

It sometimes reads as if you kind of build your experience of horse racing around a core comprised of these various handicapper "ratings"... or am I wrong about that?

.
You're absolutely wrong. There was a time when races were not graded and there were no published ratings, so I wonder how people could even tell which races were the good ones. There once was a race that included Damascus, Dr. Fager and Buckpasser. I would think winning that one would be more significant than winning this year's Kentucky Derby even if you called it an allowance race. As I implied, I couldn't care less about a grade assigned to a race by an "elite" committee. Half the G1s won by Zenyatta were, except for her presence in the event, low level affairs more like listed or restricted races. My experience in racing came from watching Native Dancer, Swaps, Nashua, Round Table, Secretariat, Ruffian, Forego, Kelso, Affirmed, Seattle Slew, Affirmed, Spectacular Bid et al. When I see second tier horses like Curlin, Zenyatta and Rachel Alexandra proclaimed as "greats" it makes me cringe. I judge races by the level of competition, not their name. Frankly, this year's Arc sucked big time. The Champion Stakes was a premier event. But I guess to some, winning a piece of crap race with a big name is preferable to winning a spectacular race without one.

[Steve R]

SteveR,

I've watched the videos of all of Frankel's races at your site and also watched the videos of Sea-Bird in the Epsom and the Arc - can't see how Frankel beats Sea-Bird. Of course that is just my opinion. How well do you think Frankel would have done in the 1965 Arc running against some of the best horses in the world at that time? Of the horses that Frankel has beaten how would they have stacked up against the runners in the 65' Arc or the 65' Epsom? What are the Roman Performance Figures for Frankel when compared to Sea-Bird or some of the other Timeform highweights?

Thanks
There are no Performance Figures for those years or for European racing. But I'll put it this way. Sea-Bird earns a Timeform 145 at 12f and Frankel earns a Timeform 147 at 8f. I'm guessing Sea-Bird wins at the longer distance and Frankel at the shorter. Perhaps the real challenge would be at 10f which is a middle distance event in Europe and realistically is the best test of balance between speed and stamina. As I've noted previously, I just don't understand the American preoccupation with 10f on dirt as the most important races in the country. They are part of the least competitive division in all of U.S. racing. Just look at the fields in almost any Kentucky Derby. You're lucky to find more than a coupe of legitimate mile and quarter types. Sometimes there are none. Yes, there have been plenty of Kentucky Derby winners that didn't stay the full 10f as a 3yo.

[Steve R]

saw frankel in the flesh when he won his 2000 guineas and scrawny isn't a word i'd use to describe him , even if he is no oil painting . but so what ! when has this game ever been a beauty pageant ?
Exactly. Secretariat was a magnificent specimen...as long as you didn't look at his knees.

[Tom]

We didn't even have grades staked until 1973.

[gracwalk]

Exactly. Secretariat was a magnificent specimen...as long as you didn't look at his knees.


What's about Secretariat's knees?

[KingChas]

What's about Secretariat's knees?

Since he never saw the greatest one in person, he must be basing this opinion solely on the TV horses he saw play Big Red in the recent Secretariat movie........ :confused:

[classhandicapper]

What number would you assign Secretariat? Also how did they “juice up” a turf track?

Yes, a dirt track can be made slightly faster, but the real retardant to the measurement of speed on the dirt racetrack is the hoof slip in the direction of motion occurring when the ratio of total horizontal to vertical components of the ground-reaction forces exceeds the static coefficient of friction of the hoof–surface interaction.

I try not to put exact numbers on performances because I'm fortunate not to have to :lol: (not a figure maker) and because IMO some aspects of ability can't be captured within a single performance. You sort of have to see a series of races.

I don't think I'm even capable of giving a solid appraisal of Secretariat's turf form relative to say Frankel. He was damn good? ;) Hows's that?

I think I understand Frankel well because I have a pretty good line on Euro turf form relative to the US these days and specifically some of Frankel's opponents. I didn't have that ability back in the 70s. So I have no idea what Secretariat was beating on the turf in the US. I would just guess they were weaker than our dirt horses and the best European turf horses.

Turf courses can be even tougher to compare using times because they get dry and hard, soft and deep, the grass can be cut to varying lengths etc... So I wouldn't look at Secretariat's incredible turf times & automatically assume anything unless I had solid track variants for those days (even then I'd still want to know about the field quality)

I'm not questioning either horse's all time greatness, but I think at a mile on turf with a gun to my head, I'd take Frankel over Secretariat. I'd go the other way at 12F. At 10F, I'd pray the gun had blanks in it. :lol:

[Robert Fischer]

There are no Performance Figures for those years or for European racing. But I'll put it this way. Sea-Bird earns a Timeform 145 at 12f and Frankel earns a Timeform 147 at 8f. I'm guessing Sea-Bird wins at the longer distance and Frankel at the shorter. Perhaps the real challenge would be at 10f which is a middle distance event in Europe and realistically is the best test of balance between speed and stamina. As I've noted previously, I just don't understand the American preoccupation with 10f on dirt as the most important races in the country. They are part of the least competitive division in all of U.S. racing. Just look at the fields in almost any Kentucky Derby. You're lucky to find more than a coupe of legitimate mile and quarter types. Sometimes there are none. Yes, there have been plenty of Kentucky Derby winners that didn't stay the full 10f as a 3yo.

The Derby is 10F and usually has several entries who are coming off recent High Speed Figure wins at around 8F.
A rough analogy would be the ARC, where you have 18horses and 2more furlongs distance and it can be a much greater Test. ;)

You also praise European turf racing by referencing the fact that 10f is a middle distance. That doesn't exactly flatter Frankel's case for being an all time great.


Just giving you some jabs from our previous debate on the subject, :p I actually think Frankel was probably the best horse in training in the world, and i wouldn't rule him out of being among the all time racehorses.

[Cratos]

I try not to put exact numbers on performances because I'm fortunate not to have to :lol: (not a figure maker) and because IMO some aspects of ability can't be captured within a single performance. You sort of have to see a series of races.

I don't think I'm even capable of giving a solid appraisal of Secretariat's turf form relative to say Frankel. He was damn good? ;) Hows's that?

I think I understand Frankel well because I have a pretty good line on Euro turf form relative to the US these days and specifically some of Frankel's opponents. I didn't have that ability back in the 70s. So I have no idea what Secretariat was beating on the turf in the US. I would just guess they were weaker than our dirt horses and the best European turf horses.

Turf courses can be even tougher to compare using times because they get dry and hard, soft and deep, the grass can be cut to varying lengths etc... So I wouldn't look at Secretariat's incredible turf times & automatically assume anything unless I had solid track variants for those days (even then I'd still want to know about the field quality)

I'm not questioning either horse's all time greatness, but I think at a mile on turf with a gun to my head, I'd take Frankel over Secretariat. I'd go the other way at 12F. At 10F, I'd pray the gun had blanks in it. :lol:

At a mile I will take Dr. Fager and you can put bullets in the gun.

[Steve R]

[snip]... You also praise European turf racing by referencing the fact that 10f is a middle distance. That doesn't exactly flatter Frankel's case for being an all time great...[snip]
Actually, I'm not sure for which race Brigadier Gerard earned his Timeform 144, but it just may be that Frankel's Juddmonte International at Timeform 143 is the highest rated European 10f race (actually 10 1/2f) in the organization's history. So it's likely Frankel has the highest ever ratings at both 8f and 10 1/2f. I think that confirms his credentials as an all-time great.

[Cratos]

You're absolutely wrong. There was a time when races were not graded and there were no published ratings, so I wonder how people could even tell which races were the good ones. There once was a race that included Damascus, Dr. Fager and Buckpasser. I would think winning that one would be more significant than winning this year's Kentucky Derby even if you called it an allowance race. As I implied, I couldn't care less about a grade assigned to a race by an "elite" committee. Half the G1s won by Zenyatta were, except for her presence in the event, low level affairs more like listed or restricted races. My experience in racing came from watching Native Dancer, Swaps, Nashua, Round Table, Secretariat, Ruffian, Forego, Kelso, Affirmed, Seattle Slew, Affirmed, Spectacular Bid et al. When I see second tier horses like Curlin, Zenyatta and Rachel Alexandra proclaimed as "greats" it makes me cringe. I judge races by the level of competition, not their name. Frankly, this year's Arc sucked big time. The Champion Stakes was a premier event. But I guess to some, winning a piece of crap race with a big name is preferable to winning a spectacular race without one.

The race you referred too which included Damascus, Buckpasser, and Dr. Fager was the 1967 Woodward Handicap at Belmont Park which some considered being the greatest race of the 20th Century at the time. Incidentally, I was there and that was my first trip to a big time race.

[Steve R]

Since he never saw the greatest one in person, he must be basing this opinion solely on the TV horses he saw play Big Red in the recent Secretariat movie........ :confused:
Actually I did spend about an hour with Secretariat at Claiborne Farm in 1982 (photo here: http://www.chef-de-race.com/images/Secretariat.jpg). There were rumors about his knees throughout his racing career and when I saw him his knees were clearly offset and enlarged. The offset part was consistent with Bold Ruler line stallions. The enlarged knees were most likely the result of excessive wear and tear during his racing career.

[gracwalk]

[QUOTE=Steve R]Actually I did spend about an hour with Secretariat at Claiborne Farm in 1982 (photo here: http://www.chef-de-race.com/images/Secretariat.jpg). There were rumors about his knees throughout his racing career and when I saw him his knees were clearly offset and enlarged. The offset part was consistent with Bold Ruler line stallions. The enlarged knees were most likely the result of excessive wear and tear during his racing career.[/


Jimmy The Greek, started the rumors (The Kentucy Derby) Secretriat, had problem with his knees and he was lame.

The rumors were false there were nothing wrong with Scretariat's, legs or his knees (during his racing career), I read this in Bill Nack's book also Espn, video on YT.

[Steve R]

The race you referred too which included Damascus, Buckpasser, and Dr. Fager was the 1967 Woodward Handicap at Belmont Park which some considered being the greatest race of the 20th Century at the time. Incidentally, I was there and that was my first trip to a big time race.
I wasn't arguing the greatness of the 1967 Woodward. I agree it may have been the greatest American race of the 20th century. My point was that it didn't need to be designated by grade or name to be great. It could have been called a special exhibition race and been just as great. So for me, an historic Champion Stakes is more significant than a crappy Arc, even if history books don't make that differentiation. IMHO beating a Timeform 135 horse like Cirrus Des Aigles as easily Frankel did in the Champion Stakes is a much greater achievement than beating a Timeform 124 horse like Solemia in the Arc.

[Robert Fischer]

Actually, I'm not sure for which race Brigadier Gerard earned his Timeform 144, but it just may be that Frankel's Juddmonte International at Timeform 143 is the highest rated European 10f race (actually 10 1/2f) in the organization's history. So it's likely Frankel has the highest ever ratings at both 8f and 10 1/2f. I think that confirms his credentials as an all-time great.

That's a good point, and to be fair, it's not really accurate to typecast Frankel a "miler".

[Steve R]

[QUOTE=Steve R]Actually I did spend about an hour with Secretariat at Claiborne Farm in 1982 (photo here: http://www.chef-de-race.com/images/Secretariat.jpg). There were rumors about his knees throughout his racing career and when I saw him his knees were clearly offset and enlarged. The offset part was consistent with Bold Ruler line stallions. The enlarged knees were most likely the result of excessive wear and tear during his racing career.[/


Jimmy The Greek, started the rumors (The Kentucy Derby) Secretriat, had problem with his knees and he was lame.

The rumors were false there were nothing wrong with Scretariat's, legs or his knees (during his racing career), I read this in Bill Nack's book also Espn, video on YT.
I bred and raised horses for almost 40 years. I saw Secretariat's knees, albeit a decade after he retired, and they were the size of small grapefruits. Bill Nack and ESPN notwithstanding, their condition was confirmed to me by a Lexington veterinarian at the time. Horses, like the Storm Cats, In Realitys and many others race successfully with serious conformation faults all the time. But there is a tendency by advocates to diminish the faults of their favorites. OTOH, I saw Affirmed at Spendthrift Farm at the same time and he was conformationally as close to perfection as any horse I ever saw, absolutely balanced from every angle.

[KingChas]

I bred and raised horses for almost 40 years. I saw Secretariat's knees, albeit a decade after he retired, and they were the size of small grapefruits.

The reason for my response Steve.
During his racing years hard to find a flaw with this beast.

Of course his knees ballooned up after years of fighting laminitis.
His tremendous structure turned against him.
If you saw Big Red near his end you would not have recognized him at all.
Overweight,hunchbacked...etc...just in a lot of pain.

Something I wish I had never seen.

[Blenheim]

Are the Timeform Ratings "a true representation, a fair representation of what Frankel is about"?

Here is an interview with Dominic Gardner Hill who is the Deputy Head of Handicapping with the British Horse Racing Authority. He has some interesting things to say about the weights assigned to Frankel . . . Y-k98u2wBts

More importantly, an interview with the chief Timeform correspondent Jamie Lynch and the methodologies involved with the Timeform ratings . . .MW80krcX7CA

Finally, same moderator discussing if Frankel is the greatest with Steve Millish and Brough Scott. -I1ODxwm3sc

~

I don't know, Frankel may be better than I think, but numbers aside, when I watch the replays of Sea Bird run in the Epsom and the Arc and how smooth and effortlessly he moved, how he kept his head quiet and straight, how he won those two races just breezin' and then I watch the replays of Frankel . . .

[RXB]

Watch the Queen Anne again. Near the 3f pole, when Frankel starts to pull away (although still in hand initially), Excelebration is the only one that goes with him. Within about a furlong, Excelebration leaves the rest of the field five or six lengths adrift... but Frankel is running away from him. :eek:

Excelebration is so gassed in the last furlong from his vain chase that he almost gets caught by one of the horses he ran away from a couple furlongs earlier, Side Glance, a Gr2 animal that wouldn't finish within five lengths of him under normal circumstances. (As proved in the QEII last Saturday when they met again). Frankel, meanwhile, continues in full flight to win by 11.

"Greatest horse ever" could be defined in a number of ways and involve a variety of different measurements/accomplishments. I'm not going there. But Frankel was an utterly amazing grass miler, and his performance in the Queen Anne was as great as any I've ever seen.

[Steve R]

[snip]..."Greatest horse ever" could be defined in a number of ways and involve a variety of different measurements/accomplishments...[snip]
That is absolutely right. Many things contribute to a horse's ultimate historical standing. What hasn't been mentioned, however, is that Frankel won this year's Sussex Stakes at a mile by 6 lengths carrying 133 pounds and the Juddmonte International at 10 1/2 furlongs by 7 lengths carrying 131 pounds. Just wondering, when was the last time an American-raced horse carried 130 or more going a mile and a quarter or longer?

[Blenheim]

From what I understand The International Federation of Horse Racing's World Rankings Committee meets in Hong Kong in December and "its gonna be the focus of some fair in depth discussion, not only what ranking Frankel will finish up with, but also whether all the members of the committee are happy with his relativity to Dancing Brave." Their current rankings: http://www.horseracingintfed.com/resources/2012Rankings/2012_10_WTR.asp#
(http://www.horseracingintfed.com/resources/2012Rankings/2012_10_WTR.asp#)

[RXB]

Just wondering, when was the last time an American-raced horse carried 130 or more going a mile and a quarter or longer?

Spectacular Bid, I'm guessing. That's 32 years ago. Skip Away and Cigar toted 130 but not at 10f.

[RXB]

Got to wondering about John Henry. Sure enough, 130 pounds in the Santa Anita Hcp in 1982. Apparently he carried 130 in two other races as well. Anyway, I'm almost certain that he's the last to do so at 10f+, so it's been about three decades.

[Blenheim]

No doubt and I agree, greatness can be defined in many ways.

Been fun hangin' out with you guys in this, the time of the Breeders' Cup. Wouldn't rather be doin' anything else and as I was a searchin' on the internet, I found that special video of that horse I consider so special, its a wonderful video that includes comments from his trainer, gotta watch this one . . .

BXaWeZLmlC4

[UK View]

Are the Timeform Ratings "a true representation, a fair representation of what Frankel is about"?

Here is an interview with Dominic Gardner Hill who is the Deputy Head of Handicapping with the British Horse Racing Authority. He has some interesting things to say about the weights assigned to Frankel . . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-k98u2wBts&feature=relmfu

More importantly, an interview with the chief Timeform correspondent Jamie Lynch and the methodologies involved with the Timeform ratings . . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=MW80krcX7CA&feature=endscreen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=MW80krcX7CA&feature=endscreen)

Finally, same moderator discussing if Frankel is the greatest with Steve Millish and Brough Scott. http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=-I1ODxwm3sc&feature=endscreen

~

I don't know, Frankel may be better than I think, but numbers aside, when I watch the replays of Sea Bird run in the Epsom and the Arc and how smooth and effortlessly he moved, how he kept his head quiet and straight, how he won those two races just breezin' and then I watch the replays of Frankel . . .


Many thanks for these links. I urge everyone to watch them as it does make interesting viewing.

But at the end of the day, no matter what we guys all think of these magnificent beasts that race for our entertainment..............
....the first 3 comments on one of those youtube links are admiring remarks about Lydia's rack!! :faint:

[UK View]

That is absolutely right. Many things contribute to a horse's ultimate historical standing. What hasn't been mentioned, however, is that Frankel won this year's Sussex Stakes at a mile by 6 lengths carrying 133 pounds and the Juddmonte International at 10 1/2 furlongs by 7 lengths carrying 131 pounds. Just wondering, when was the last time an American-raced horse carried 130 or more going a mile and a quarter or longer?

Also, don't forget he ran 10.58 in the 6th furlong in the Queen Anne!!

That was faster than ANY of the sprinters in the G1 Kings Stand (5f).

And also he ran 6 furlongs in a faster time (on officially slower ground) than Black Caviar in her race.

[SharpCat]

Also, don't forget he ran 10.58 in the 6th furlong in the Queen Anne!!

That was faster than ANY of the sprinters in the G1 Kings Stand (5f).

And also he ran 6 furlongs in a faster time (on officially slower ground) than Black Caviar in her race.


Don't forget that Black Caviar was injured and still won the race.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

Frankel's faster 6 furlong than Black Caviar was likely with a flying start. You cannot compare 6f with a flying start vs 6f from a standing start

In any case Black Caviar ran poorly her last 3 runs so beating her efforts then does not count for much

Speaking of Black Caviar her half brother All Too Hard ran a close 2nd in the Cox Plate over 2040m today. So that family is one of the best of all time

[UK View]

Frankel's faster 6 furlong than Black Caviar was likely with a flying start. You cannot compare 6f with a flying start vs 6f from a standing start

Fair point

In any case Black Caviar ran poorly her last 3 runs so beating her efforts then does not count for much

Possibly, but you can't have it both ways. If Frankel had struggled to win the Black Caviar fans wouldn't be saying her victory "did not count for much".
Speaking of Black Caviar her half brother All Too Hard ran a close 2nd in the Cox Plate over 2040m today. So that family is one of the best of all time

Actually, I have checked and Frankel's first 6 furlongs of the Queen Anne (from the stalls) was run over 1 second quicker than Black Caviar who ran on better ground.

[Robert Fischer]

Actually, I have checked and Frankel's first 6 furlongs of the Queen Anne (from the stalls) was run over 1 second quicker than Black Caviar who ran on better ground.

wasn't Frankel a close up 4th after 6 furlongs in the Queen Anne ?

[RXB]

wasn't Frankel a close up 4th after 6 furlongs in the Queen Anne ?

No, he took the lead around 5f and was romping away by 6f.

[Robert Fischer]

No, he took the lead around 5f and was romping away by 6f.

ok , i see now the race doesn't start until 16 seconds of video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ca7ftUbWFI


@ 1:29 on the video Frankel looks to be about 1/2 length in front of the place horse.(1:13? for 6f)

I don't see him separating until about 1:31, 1:32(1:15? for 6f) when he is actually asked around the 6f marker.

The point is that the 6F wasn't incredibly fast. I don't care how great how he is, if the horse hasn't been asked and there are others right there with him it's not a top example sprint speed.

Either the Black Caviar race was fairly weak, or the estimation of the going/surface was off.

[RXB]

According to the sectionals, Frankel is more than half a second ahead of Excelebration at the 6f mark.

Frankel's furlong clockings between 5f-7f are wild for a mile race on that course and that type of ground. It's no wonder that Excelebration was falling apart in the last 1.5f after trying to keep up with that run. A classic example of how ratings that don't include pace consideration frequently fail to capture the true quality of a horse's performance. A lot of people used Excelebration's sub-120 Queen Anne Timeform to claim he was either no good or off-form that day; neither was true. If Frankel wasn't in the race Excelebration would've have ran to his own ability, made his move at the proper moment and won very easily over those other sub-Gr1 animals.

[nearco]

Frankel sectionals in Queen Anne

1f- 15.11
2f -11.79 -26.9
3f -11.96
4f -12.10 - 50.96
5f -11.26
6f -10.58 - 1:12.8

7f -11.04
8f -14.01

Black Caviar sectionals in Diamond Jubilee

1f -14.77
2f -11.73 - 26.5
3f -11.66
4f -11.40 - 49.56
5f -10.84 -
6f -13.70 -1:14.1

Granted, it's not an apples to apples comparison as they are not running over the same parts of the course for the corresponding furlongs (Black Caviar's final 2f were up the hill).

If you compare the final 5f in each race you get this
Frankel - 58.89
Black Caviar - 59.33

And she did run on better ground.

[nearco]

BTW, here are the sectionals for each horse in both those races, every horse in each race was individually chip timed.

Diamond Jubilee
http://www.turftrax.co.uk/pdf/tracking_23-06-12/ASC230612R3%20Report.pdf

Queen Anne
http://www.turftrax.co.uk/pdf/tracking_19-06-12/ASC190612R1%20Report.pdf

[Humph]

Granted, it's not an apples to apples comparison as they are not running over the same parts of the course for the corresponding furlongs (Black Caviar's final 2f were up the hill).



frankel would have finished the queen anne using exactly the same route.

the queen anne is run over the straight mile at ascot ( not to be confused with the round mile , used for races such as the st james's palace ) and the golden jubliee ( and all other races from 7 furlongs and below ) is run over the last 6 furlongs of the same straight course . and regardless which course they use , the straight or the round , the last mile at ascot is uphill , and the final part of any race uses the same stretch of ground ; there is only one way to wire over the last 3 furlongs .

[UK View]

Frankel sectionals in Queen Anne

1f- 15.11
2f -11.79 -26.9
3f -11.96
4f -12.10 - 50.96
5f -11.26
6f -10.58 - 1:12.8

7f -11.04
8f -14.01

Black Caviar sectionals in Diamond Jubilee

1f -14.77
2f -11.73 - 26.5
3f -11.66
4f -11.40 - 49.56
5f -10.84 -
6f -13.70 -1:14.1

Granted, it's not an apples to apples comparison as they are not running over the same parts of the course for the corresponding furlongs (Black Caviar's final 2f were up the hill).

If you compare the final 5f in each race you get this
Frankel - 58.89
Black Caviar - 59.33

And she did run on better ground.

As stated above, they raced on the same track.

[UK View]

According to the sectionals, Frankel is more than half a second ahead of Excelebration at the 6f mark.

Frankel's furlong clockings between 5f-7f are wild for a mile race on that course and that type of ground. It's no wonder that Excelebration was falling apart in the last 1.5f after trying to keep up with that run. A classic example of how ratings that don't include pace consideration frequently fail to capture the true quality of a horse's performance. A lot of people used Excelebration's sub-120 Queen Anne Timeform to claim he was either no good or off-form that day; neither was true. If Frankel wasn't in the race Excelebration would've have ran to his own ability, made his move at the proper moment and won very easily over those other sub-Gr1 animals.


This is 100% spot on!!

The only reason Excelebration ran below par was because he tried to go with Frankel. That was what destroyed him.

[nearco]

frankel would have finished the queen anne using exactly the same route.

the queen anne is run over the straight mile at ascot ( not to be confused with the round mile , used for races such as the st james's palace ) and the golden jubliee ( and all other races from 7 furlongs and below ) is run over the last 6 furlongs of the same straight course . and regardless which course they use , the straight or the round , the last mile at ascot is uphill , and the final part of any race uses the same stretch of ground ; there is only one way to wire over the last 3 furlongs .

THe previous posters were comparing the first 6f in each race. THAT is not an apples to apples comparison.
Nor is the final 6f in each race, as Frankel has a running start at that and BC a standing start.

The only comparison is the final 5f of each race.

[nearco]

As stated above, they raced on the same track.

Dude, furlong 5 and furlong 6 of Frankel's race were NOT THE SAME as furlong 5 and 6 of Black Caviar's race. So you can NOT compare the first 6f of each race.
You can also not compare the time for final 6f of the Queen Anne with the entireity of the Diamond Jublilee, as the latter will be timed from a standing start.

[Robert Fischer]

If you compare the final 5f in each race you get this
Frankel - 58.89
Black Caviar - 59.33

And she did run on better ground.

That looks logical to me. Comparing the final part of Frankel's race makes sense as well as allowing for the start difference.

I can look at Frankel's first 6f on video and see that no one in the race did any running until between 5f and 6f.

here is Frankel @ 5f of the Queen Anne (race start 30 seconds / youtube)
http://oi50.tinypic.com/28245j7.jpg

They started off easy from the gate, and are just now starting to break off into a full sprint after the first 5 furlongs. Frankel is maybe a half length in 2nd? place, and there are a bunch of horses right there close to him, and this is an 8 furlong race.

I don't even have to look at Black Caviar's race. This obviously wasn't some amazing sprint. I can logically agree with the FINAL 5 or 6f being comparable to a sprint, but not the first. If the first 5 or 6 furlong are faster than a sprint -that means the sprint was rather slow or there were other factors (going, start, turns, gale force winds..).

[Blenheim]

Once again, Dominic Gardner Hill Deputy Head of Handicapping with the British Horse Racing on what is next for Frankel's rating: http://www.ipadio.com/broadcasts/PaulStruthers/2012/6/20/Handicapper-Dominic-Gardiner-Hill-on-what-is-next-for-Frankels-rating (http://www.ipadio.com/broadcasts/PaulStruthers/2012/6/20/Handicapper-Dominic-Gardiner-Hill-on-what-is-next-for-Frankels-rating)

Click on the red typed link above the picture and you'll get the radio broadcast - interesting comments and good listening; answers a few questions posed in some of these most recent posts. Lookin' forward to seein' what weight Frankel is assigned come the World Ranking Committee December meeting Hong Kong.

[Steve R]

Weatherbys notwithstanding, this looks pretty clear to me. I understand the reluctance to let go of past legends, but Frankel at 140 (Weatherbys) and Dancing Brave at 141 (Weatherbys) seems pretty silly.

1986 Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe:
Dancing Brave (best Timeform 140) by 1 1/2 lengths over
Bering (best Timeform 136, and highest rated competitor to the winner)

2012 Queen Anne Stakes:
Frankel (best Timeform 147) by 11 lengths over
Excelebration (best Timeform 135)

If Bering and Excelebration are within a pound of each other on Timeform, then the Frankel Timeform rating vs Dancing Brave looks quite reasonable.

Then there is Cirrus Des Aigles at Timeform 135 in the Champion Stakes losing to Frankel by 1 3/4 lengths at Timeform 139. Again, a very reasonable comparison to the 1986 Arc.

[5k-claim]

You're absolutely wrong. There was a time when races were not graded and there were no published ratings, so I wonder how people could even tell which races were the good ones. What difference does that make? We now have grades for stakes races, and at the time connections nominate to and enter these races, G1 races are bigger targets than G3 races. How are you even questioning this?

I judge races by the level of competition, not their name. Frankly, this year's Arc sucked big time. The Champion Stakes was a premier event. But I guess to some, winning a piece of crap race with a big name is preferable to winning a spectacular race without one. Or to some a race like the Derby or Arc is circled on the calendar months in advance.

At what point exactly in the training (and nominating/entering) process are the connections supposed to consult you on what race you personally feel, based on your own ratings or those you've read, is going to have the higher 'rated' horses? And is that what trainers use to counsel their owners on what races to enter now... higher 'competition levels' based on handicapper ratings of a horse or two in the presumed field? Why would they do that, and was that the deal with Frankel?

I guess I am still not understanding where you come into the process. Or why.

.

[Steve R]

What difference does that make? We now have grades for stakes races, and at the time connections nominate to and enter these races, G1 races are bigger targets than G3 races. How are you even questioning this?

How am I questioning this? As I noted earlier, the 2004 and 2011 BC Classics were both designated G1. Regardless of nominations and entries, it is pure idiocy to think of these two races as even remotely comparable in quality. If the 2004 Classic was a Grade 1 in class then the 2011 edition would barely be graded stakes quality. If the current grading system means that history will view the races as equivalent, then the system needs to be changed.

At what point exactly in the training (and nominating/entering) process are the connections supposed to consult you on what race you personally feel, based on your own ratings or those you've read, is going to have the higher 'rated' horses? And is that what trainers use to counsel their owners on what races to enter now... higher 'competition levels' based on handicapper ratings of a horse or two in the presumed field? Why would they do that, and was that the deal with Frankel?

I guess I am still not understanding where you come into the process. Or why.

I'm not in the process at all, but if you had been paying attention to the thread, I favored the Champion Stakes over the Arc as a bigger test for Frankel months ahead of the races based on the Racing Post assessment of the prospective fields. I have no interest at all in how races are graded, only in the quality of the fields. To me, as a racing fan, beating a horse like Cirrus Des Aigles, rated second best in the world going into the Champions Stakes, far surpasses the prospect of beating a second- or third-tier horse like Solemia in notionally the poorest Arc in recent memory. That said, I've been consistent in my views of race grading for many years. I even wrote an article in Owner-Breeder magazine over 20 years ago criticizing the irrational method by which races are graded. And I wrote often of how embarrassing some so-called G1 events are, including several of the allowance quality G1s that Zenyatta won on SoCal plastic. But feel free to use your own evaluation.

[classhandicapper]

At a mile I will take Dr. Fager and you can put bullets in the gun.

I agree that Fager belongs in the GOAT conversation and was unbelievable at a mile on dirt, but this is why I generally don't like that conversation.

Are we talking dirt or turf?

Fager clearly handled turf, but I think a case can be made he was better on dirt.

IMO no horse I have ever seen was equally good across all distances and surfaces. Each set of conditions is more or less conducive to speed or stamina and there are clearly surface preferences. Some horses have a better balance of qualities and others are more of what I'd call a specialist.

I prefer to say:

Horse "X" was the greatest dirt sprinter I ever saw.

Horse "Y" was the greatest turf miler I ever saw.

etc...

Some might win multiple categories, but I prefer categories than the idea of GOAT.

[Cratos]

I agree that Fager belongs in the GOAT conversation and was unbelievable at a mile on dirt, but this is why I generally don't like that conversation.

Are we talking dirt or turf?

Fager clearly handled turf, but I think a case can be made he was better on dirt.

IMO no horse I have ever seen was equally good across all distances and surfaces. Each set of conditions is more or less conducive to speed or stamina and there are clearly surface preferences. Some horses have a better balance of qualities and others are more of what I'd call a specialist.

I prefer to say:

Horse "X" was the greatest dirt sprinter I ever saw.

Horse "Y" was the greatest turf miler I ever saw.

etc...

Some might win multiple categories, but I prefer categories than the idea of GOAT.

I included Dr. Fager in this conversation because of his 1968 United Nations performance ( 1 of 2 of his races which I didn’t see him run; the other being his world record breaking performance for a mile at Arlington Park).

In the United Nations, his competition included Australian champion Tobin Bronze; Flit-to, the 1967 winner of the U.N.; multiple grass stakes winner More Scents; Irish Rebellion, winner of the Pan American Handicap; and the the 1967 D.C. International winner and turf champ Fort Marcy.

I understand your point, but the Good Doctor cannot be left out of this discussion and as Steve Haskin stated about his 1968 United Nations performance: “may have been Dr. Fager’s greatest performance.”

Therefore I will still take the good Doctor at a mile over Frankel and you can still keep the bullets in your gun.

[horses4courses]

This thread has become an exercise in futility...... :rolleyes:

[Humph]

This thread has become an exercise in futility...... :rolleyes:

until saturday , when excelebration becomes bc mile champ.

[depalma113]

until saturday , when excelebration becomes bc mile champ.

Oops.