are these GREAT horses?

[Sam]

And yet, it's a little obtuse to stick to your guns over a literal statement when intent was, perhaps, something a bit more.

I don't care about intent. I'm not here to mind-read. If someone is trying to express intent, then they need to do so. I'm not interested in what someone meant, I'm taking issue with what they said. If nothing else, it makes them think before they speak.

I'm not even trying to posit that Lava Man is a better horse than Easy Goer. I'm merely trying to point out the flaw in the thinking that Lava Man is a bum because he "can't win a major race outside CA." That has always been the complete statement. Rarely have there been conditions attached. It wasn't until I pointed out that Easy Goer never won a major race outside of NY that the conditions/caveats started being attached. And now the condition being attached is "Yeah, but Easy Goer set a record in the stake he did win". I DON'T CARE. At least not in THIS discussion. The POINT is that he never won a major race outside of NY -- Just like Lava Man has not (yet) won a major race outside of CA.

[Sam]

And it was sensationalized that Lava Man tied Native Diver's HGC total?

And, of course, all of the above presumes that everyone did 'sensationalize' Lava Man tying Diver's record ... and probably that everyone in CA idolized Native Diver.

I don't fall into either camp.

[Rokeby Forever]

And it was sensationalized that Lava Man tied Native Diver's HGC total?

And, of course, all of the above presumes that everyone did 'sensationalize' Lava Man tying Diver's record ... and probably that everyone in CA idolized Native Diver.

I don't fall into either camp.

You don't fall into either camp? Who asked? Who cares? Your argument here is that Easy Goer deserves the same criticism as does Lava Man. That's what you keep stressing here.

[Sam]

Your argument here is that Easy Goer deserves the same criticism as does Lava Man. That's what you keep stressing here.

Exactly, which means that entire post of yours was irrelevant, Roke, since NO ONE mentioned Native Diver.

[Sam]

We all know who the best horse to come out of Florida is (Dr. Fager)

But what about Cali?

Swaps

[Rokeby Forever]

The thread is called "Are these great horses?" My argument is that Native Diver is not.

Your argument is about Easy Goer deserving any criticism that Lava Man deserves. Since your argument doesn't answer the question of the thread, it's TOTALLY irrelevant.

Not unlike you to go on a tangent, anyway. Instead of addressing the thread's question, you bring up that Easy Goer beat a Handicap champion and a Horse Of The Year, and a few other bums that are a vague memory.

[Sam]

The thread is called "Are these great horses?" My argument is that Native Diver is not.

Your argument is about Easy Goer deserving any criticism that Lava Man deserves. Since your argument doesn't answer the question of the thread, it's TOTALLY irrelevant.

Not unlike you to go on a tangent, anyway. Instead of addressing the thread's question, you bring up that Easy Goer beat a Handicap champion and a Horse Of The Year, and a few other bums that are a vague memory.

If that is the game you want to play, then your comments about Native Diver are STILL irrelevant since the OP was asking about 4 specific horses: Lava Man, Ouija Board, Rags, and Invasor. My comments of Easy Goer are directly related to Lava Man (QED "If Easy Goer ranks, then so should Lava Man"). You started comparing Easy Goer to Native Diver. Had you been comparing Native Diver to Lava Man, you'd have been able to better state your case... of course, that would have also worked to support Lava Man's inclusion on the list, which you don't want to do.

eta

BTW, I was the first person to answer the original question (that of whether those four horses belonged). YOU never did.

P.S. I've now done 4 edits (for grammar and one additional comment) to this post... where's the edit notation, Roke?

[ageecee]

Yep Sammie is always right Rok dont you know that?

[Rokeby Forever]

Typical circular bullshit from you, Sam. The original question was:

Do these horses deserve to be ranked in the top 100 of all time?

1. Oujia Board
2. Lava Man
3. invasor
4. Rags to Riches


I wrote that your argument about Easy Goer made me rethink and conclude that Native Diver was NOT a great horse (one that is on the top 100). If anything, I gave you credit for that.

As such, I put sensationalizing Lava Man's 3 HGC's as tying Native Diver's feat into perspective. That's called "supporting an argument." Lava Man is NOT a great horse, and I'm justifying that by comparing him to another Californian that I don't think was a great horse - one that Lava Man just tied for HGC wins.


I have to wonder where all these people who discount Lava Man because he can't win outside of CA were when Easy Goer was running. Other than the Swale, Easy Goer NEVER won a stake outside of New York. He was as dominating in NY as Lava Man is in CA. Outside of New York he was second rate -- but I never heard people bag on him for "needing his track/state."

If Easy Goer makes #34 with only a listed stake outside of NY to his credit, I would think Lava Man might rank in the top 100 since he's been able to win multiple G1s on 3 different surfaces.

So, your bringing up Easy Goer is relevant to judging the Californian Lava Man but my comparing the Californian Native Diver to the Californian Lava Man via your argument of Easy Goer isn't...when Lava Man's new claim to fame is that he tied something that Native Diver did?

Interesting statement that Easy Goer was "second rate" outside NY when he lost the Preakness by a nose to an eventual HOY and Hall Of Famer, after finishing second to that horse in the KY Derby. Would you consider Alydar "second rate" outside of NY? He lost the Preakness by a neck to an eventual HOY and Hall Of Famer and a horse that he finished second to in the KY Derby....Easy Goer came a few inches closer in the Preakness than Alydar did. Who are some of the horses that finished 2nd to Alydar outside of NY....Raymond Earl and Noon Time Spender? Let's talk "second rate." LOL!!!!!

[Rokeby Forever]

SAM now writes:

BTW, I was the first person to answer the original question (that of whether those four horses belonged). YOU never did.

Even though on page 1, I wrote:

Comparing horses of today, I think Invasor is a great horse. Triple Crown in South America, dominant in the US, and he won the Dubai Cup. What else could he have done?

I never did, huh? Yeah, Ageecee....Sammy is always right.

[Tucumcari]

Easy Goer wasn't much outside of NY, either.

Please don't compare Easy Goer outside NY vs. Lava Man outside California.

The worst EG ever ran outside NY was 2nd. 2nd in the BC Juvy on a sloppy track, 2nd again in the Derby on yet again a sloppy CD's track, 2nd by a NOSE in the Preakness and 2nd again by a HEAD in the BC Classic to the horse who was HOTY. Easy Goer had actually run the fastest 7 furlongs of the Gulfstream meet in his 1st start of 1989 in the Swale Stakes. Guess 2nds in 4 Grade 1's ain't much..... Where has Lava Man finished in his races outside California??

And for the record, when Easy Goer ran a head 2nd in the Classic at Gulfstream, that was at the conclusion of a campaign that saw him win more Grade 1 races in a season than any other 3yr old male since Spectacular Bid in 1979. Not one single champion 3yr old male since Bid has won that many Grade 1's.

Thanks, I was thinking the same thing. Not even in the same category as far as I am concerned.... That said I tell Lava's hot walker to get that Cal bred peiece of sh/crap out of my shedrow daily... so you know I'm not a fan....

[Tucumcari]

I don't hear people saying "He loses badly and finished last in every race", I hear "Lava Man can't win outside of CA." Well, "Easy Goer couldn't win outside of NY."[/quote]

BUT he was atleast in the hunt... not backing out of it gamely evey time

[Sam]

I don't hear people saying "He loses badly and finished last in every race", I hear "Lava Man can't win outside of CA." Well, "Easy Goer couldn't win outside of NY."

BUT he was atleast in the hunt... not backing out of it gamely evey time

Agreed, and again, I'm not saying Lava Man is a better horse than Easy Goer. What I said was that if the argument is Lava Man is not a 'great' because can't win a major race outside of CA -- WITHOUT ANY OTHER QUALIFYING ATTACHMENT -- then the same applied to Easy Goer. It wasn't until I pointed out EG never won a major stake outside NY that people started throwing out this "but at least he didn't lose by a mile" qualifier.

[pfrsue]

I don't care about intent. I'm not here to mind-read. If someone is trying to express intent, then they need to do so. I'm not interested in what someone meant, I'm taking issue with what they said. If nothing else, it makes them think before they speak.

In which case, I'll remind you that you launched into the Lava Man/Easy Goer commentary by quoting what I said:

2. Lava Man - no, but if the Breeders Cup had been run in California, maybe I'd have a different answer.

I hadn't said anything about his losing outside of California, nor that I thought he was a bum. You can clearly read what I said. By quoting me and going off on the Easy Goer tangent you were apparently inferring what I meant. In fact, you did correctly read my intent, but certainly not by the literal translation of what I said.

Just sayin'.

[Sam]

By quoting me and going off on the Easy Goer tangent you were apparently inferring what I meant

If I'd specifically addressed you, PF, you would be correct. I didn't. I quoted you only as a start point for a free-assocation comment. I could just as easily NOT quoted you and the post wouldn't have changed because I didn't really even respond directly to anything you wrote. If I'm addressing someone directly, I won't just quote them. I make it a point to use their name (like I just did) or emphasis "you" by capitalizing or bolding the word.