There's no excuse for just using one pan shot. A horse race is not a platform for "artistic" direction.

NBC did fine on Arrogate in the BC but did a terrible job showing Zenyatta's moves because of camera switches.

They include the DWC in earnings, why not write up charts for these races?

This is why I wanted to see the chart. I couldn't tell how far back Arrogate was for a large part of the race. It's hard to talk of when he began his run and such based on the view I saw.

I'd probably ask Equibase before me.

This is a fabulous racehorse running a great race.

I was 30 yo when Secretariat won the Triple Crown and I can't honestly say that he was a better horse than Arrogate.

I think that these comparisons with Secretariat are greatly premature...as well as greatly exaggerated.

It is a total pipe dream, but I'd love to see Arrogate run for two more years after this year, rack up 3 more BC Classic championships, 2 more Dubai World Cups, and some G1s on the turf (maybe even overseas).

He's going to be likely retired in '17, but it is what it is. Most recognize that his talent is amazing, but what will keep him from being compared to other greats will be his short career. I think the quality of his competition has been debatable, but he is no doubt a major freak.

Honestly, the BC Classic win over Chrome is very legitimate. I don't know why so many people here hate Chrome, but CC ran his very best race that day, was far in front of a field full of stakes winners, and Arrogate beat him on the square and they both ran huge Beyers.

Shaman Ghost also flattered Arrogate in the Big Cap.

Arrogate has plenty of class IMO.

gotta love the 'who he beat' crowd, I get a kick out of people who rate horse A's talent by the talent of horse B rather than just rating the inherent talent of horse A in the first place.

The who he beat crowd is essentially saying ' I'm not able to rate the talent of horse A as an individual, but instead I'm going to rate horse Bs talent and make an inference as to the talent of horse A by what I think of horse B. '

If a handicapper can accurately rate horse B (and C, D, etc.) why not just skip the middle man and rate horse A on his own?

I think it's obvious he's much better than the average Grade 1 horse based on his margins of victory over horses that have been very solid Grade 1 performers multiple times, including beating California Chrome (albeit with a weight advantage) while those 2 were well ahead of the rest of the field.

I don't think it's as obvious yet that he belongs in the same breath as some of the all time greats I have seen since the mid 70s, but fortunately he's got more to do and show.

In fairness, who a horse beat is asked about almost all the greats. Ruffian comes immediately to mind but we don't mind giving her great status. Her opponent was the clock. The two greats who ran against and beat the best were probably Fager and Affirmed. Beating CC in the BC was probably as good as anything Secretariat beat.

The margin of her victories and the manner of her performances leaves little doubt that she was monstrously better than her opposition, who in some cases looked dominant when they didn't run against her.

I was there when she broke down. I still have the button they gave out for the great match race somewhere. What incredible breeding. Sire was by Bold Ruler and the dam was by Native Dancer. One of racing's greatest tragedies.

IMO, he was clearly a lot better than the official margin over Gun Runner (who is a solid Grade 1 winner at this stage). But IMHO the impact of the slow start and wide trip are being overrated a bit.

IMO, it's way tougher to be away slowly and rushed into the pace wide than it is to be away slowly and race wide at the back of the pack. I put way more emphasis on extra energy consumption than literal ground loss or where you come from in the pack. He was ridden exactly the way a horse like him should have been ridden once he got bounced around and wound up further back than he would normally race. I would not say the track was playing to the outside, but a few other horses ran quite well despite significant ground loss and the track was certainly more friendly to deep closers than the typical dirt track.

I have no problem throwing around the word "great" for this horse after just 4 well spaced high level stakes races because of the way he's done it. But imo calling him the best since Secretariat is a bit of a stretch at his stage.

Would this horse be a mortal lock against horses that would get the jump on him like Affirmed, Seattle Slew, and Ghostzapper?

How about other greats like Spectacular Bid, Forego, and Alydar.

It's not a mortal lock he would have beaten peak Sunday Silence or Easy Goer.

We didn't get to see a fully matured American Pharoah who was faster early and still clearly moving forward quickly when he retired.

It sounds like he's going to get 3 more well spaced races. I don't see anyone that can threaten him, but we should at least see if he can sustain this level and beat back anyone else that does try before we start dissing some amazing horses between Secretariat and now.

Old fogey syndrome. 😀