Flightline vs. Candy Ride-Pacific Classic

[classhandicapper]

Hell, I'll even take the Euro bridesmaid Mishriff as a worthy foe to validate Flightline's actual greatness as opposed to the Washington Generals-like CA older horse corps he got to toy with last weekend.

I hear and agree with everything you are saying, but you can only beat who they put in front of you. Beating an admittedly subpar Pacific Classic field (as historic PC fields go) doesn't "prove" greatness, except he did it by 19+ lengths with something left. That's a hint. On my well researched and tested non time based numbers it's a very strong hint (132 on Beyer scale and for reference Arrogate's Travers got a 124 which was a whopper). I'm almost as interested in how much the track may have helped him as I am in what's going to happen if he takes actual Grade 1 heat early. I might be crazy enough to try to beat him anyway.

[elhelmete]

Originally Posted by castaway01

While horses not running as often as they used to and leaving us to guess their "greatness" based on a 4-race campaign is mostly definitely a 2000s issue, people should check the field sizes most of the 1970s legends faced in their best performances. Memory can be deceiving.

Of course someone will say "no one wanted to face them". Well okay, same thing now.

Egg zackaly
Look at Candy Ride's PPs...in Argentina field sizes of 11-11-15
in the US 6-5-4

[Tom]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I hear and agree with everything you are saying, but you can only beat who they put in front of you.

I don't know how many they could put in front of Flightlinr, but I'm pretty sure they have put another 19-1/4 BEHIND him!


btw, I hear they other horses on track are calling him Frightline.

[zico20]

Originally Posted by BarchCapper

Number of races AND surfaces! Unless he wins some graded stakes on the turf he'll always come up short against Secretariat (and John Henry, and Kelso, etc.) in my book. Let's see him on the grass, on an off track, etc. Doing it ALL is what defines "ALL-time great" ability for me. Some will agree, others won't, and that's fine.

I agree with you 100% but I would like to add one thing to your post. I can't consider a horse one of the all time greats unless they run say 10 times in 8 months and win most or all of them. The truly great horses didn't need months between races to perform to their best.

[cj]

Originally Posted by zico20

I agree with you 100% but I would like to add one thing to your post. I can't consider a horse one of the all time greats unless they run say 10 times in 8 months and win most or all of them. The truly great horses didn't need months between races to perform to their best.

I can't argue with that sentiment, but as the game stands now the book is closed. Nobody will ever again meet that criteria unless the game changes again.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by cj

I can't argue with that sentiment, but as the game stands now the book is closed. Nobody will ever again meet that criteria unless the game changes again.

sad sport that there will never be another all time great.

[BarchCapper]

Originally Posted by cj

I can't argue with that sentiment, but as the game stands now the book is closed. Nobody will ever again meet that criteria unless the game changes again.

We just need Norman "Lynn" Cash to get a hold of a good, sound one!!!!!