Hi DDT,
OK...we're on the same page with grass racing. That, I think, is a realm where it's impossible to conclude who the best grass horse of all time was. Nijinsky? Ribot? Any European great...beats me!
Off hand, I know that as a 4 year old, Affirmed defeated Exceller in the Santa Anita Handicap, in which he ran the fastest Santa Anita Handicap to this date. If you want to compare Belmont Stakes times, compare this to all the great past horses that have won the Santa Anita Handicap. Plus, Exceller in his ownright was a great horse.
You're arguing that most trainers, sportswriters, and racing secretaries (among others) make up the "Best of the best" list, which is correct. But, how many of them saw Man o'War race? How can he be included except by heresay? Same with Citation...he ran 60 years ago. How can people put him on the list if they never saw him run? Would it be based on what people back then had to say? Fine...but they never saw the modern day horses run. How do you know they wouldn't have ranked Affirmed #1 if they were still alive? Ergo, the poll means nothing.
Good sires who have no black type?
Moderators: Roguelet, WaveMaster, madelyn
-
Rokeby Forever
- Darley line
- Posts: 6684
- Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 4:52 pm
- Location: Reno, NV
What synthetics are to California racing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gb0mxcpPOU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gb0mxcpPOU
Rokeby Forever
I see, the poll means nothing to you because you do not agree with it, your opinion of Affirmed means nothing to me because I disagree with you. I would venture to say that if you were going to judge anything the best of the century, most of the judges would not be old enough to actually witness the first 20 or 30 years of the subject at hand and would have to rely on published reports of the era.
But on the subject of Man o' War, he set some records that still stand today, mainly because the distance involved is rarely if ever used. He defeated the best of his day, he defeated Upset several times after his only loss. Racing was major news during his time on the track and was covered in depth, I doubt the people who voted him the best of the 20th Century relied on heresay, unless you consider newspaper and magazine articles heresay. So now the argument is if you did not see them race you cannot have an opinion as to where they should rank because the record books and newspaper and magazine articles somehow are not accurate or worse, only heresay. Man O' War's match race with Sir Barton was the first race to be filmed, so I am sure there is film evidence going to Citation onward, and of course the films could be dubbed to reflect whatever the producer/editor wished.
Again, it matters little what other people think, you are entitled to your opinon.
DDT
I see, the poll means nothing to you because you do not agree with it, your opinion of Affirmed means nothing to me because I disagree with you. I would venture to say that if you were going to judge anything the best of the century, most of the judges would not be old enough to actually witness the first 20 or 30 years of the subject at hand and would have to rely on published reports of the era.
But on the subject of Man o' War, he set some records that still stand today, mainly because the distance involved is rarely if ever used. He defeated the best of his day, he defeated Upset several times after his only loss. Racing was major news during his time on the track and was covered in depth, I doubt the people who voted him the best of the 20th Century relied on heresay, unless you consider newspaper and magazine articles heresay. So now the argument is if you did not see them race you cannot have an opinion as to where they should rank because the record books and newspaper and magazine articles somehow are not accurate or worse, only heresay. Man O' War's match race with Sir Barton was the first race to be filmed, so I am sure there is film evidence going to Citation onward, and of course the films could be dubbed to reflect whatever the producer/editor wished.
Again, it matters little what other people think, you are entitled to your opinon.
DDT
-
Rokeby Forever
- Darley line
- Posts: 6684
- Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 4:52 pm
- Location: Reno, NV
DDT,
Wrong - the poll means nothing because voters did not see all the horses they're voting either for or against. That's why any poll on the best of all time is meaningless. All we can base best horses on is who they beat.
Was Man o'War the best of all time when he beat up on Upset for most of his career? I've never heard anyone claim that Upset was a great horse, so the fact that Man o'War was better than him means what? Was Sir Barton a great horse? He won the TC, but what did the TC mean back then...and how many people ever wrote that Sir Barton was a great horse? Maybe Man o'War was no better than a $50,000 claimer and he beat up on horses equal to $10,000 claimers...who knows?
Another thing to consider: What was the crop size when Man o'War ran? He was the best around, but out of how many compared to horses that came later on? Is being the best of 5,000 the same as being the best of 25,000 or more?
Wrong - the poll means nothing because voters did not see all the horses they're voting either for or against. That's why any poll on the best of all time is meaningless. All we can base best horses on is who they beat.
Was Man o'War the best of all time when he beat up on Upset for most of his career? I've never heard anyone claim that Upset was a great horse, so the fact that Man o'War was better than him means what? Was Sir Barton a great horse? He won the TC, but what did the TC mean back then...and how many people ever wrote that Sir Barton was a great horse? Maybe Man o'War was no better than a $50,000 claimer and he beat up on horses equal to $10,000 claimers...who knows?
Another thing to consider: What was the crop size when Man o'War ran? He was the best around, but out of how many compared to horses that came later on? Is being the best of 5,000 the same as being the best of 25,000 or more?
Rokeby Forever
Wrong, the poll means nothing to you, that does not mean that it has no meaning for others.
Again, besides Alydar and Exceller and Sirlad, who did Affirmed beat up on except for nothing 3 year olds and maybe some good, not great, older horses.
All of the so called experts in the field are wrong because they disagree with your choice. That is a real open minded way to look at it.
I do not care about the size of the foal crop, the percentage of superior runners has remained approximately the same, so if the crop only had 3,500 foals maybe 100 of them were superior performers, he was obviously the best of his year, and he beat the TC winner of the previous year. Whether he was a $50,000 claimer or not, he was the best of his time, and the manner in which he won 20 out of 21 races indicates that to even the casual observer.
In my opinion, Affirmed was not even the best Triple Crown winner, and judging by the reslults of the meaningless Bloodhorse poll, which incidently had voters that did see Citation, Count Fleet, Secretariat, Seattle Slew and Affirmed run, agree with that opinion.
DDT
Wrong, the poll means nothing to you, that does not mean that it has no meaning for others.
Again, besides Alydar and Exceller and Sirlad, who did Affirmed beat up on except for nothing 3 year olds and maybe some good, not great, older horses.
All of the so called experts in the field are wrong because they disagree with your choice. That is a real open minded way to look at it.
I do not care about the size of the foal crop, the percentage of superior runners has remained approximately the same, so if the crop only had 3,500 foals maybe 100 of them were superior performers, he was obviously the best of his year, and he beat the TC winner of the previous year. Whether he was a $50,000 claimer or not, he was the best of his time, and the manner in which he won 20 out of 21 races indicates that to even the casual observer.
In my opinion, Affirmed was not even the best Triple Crown winner, and judging by the reslults of the meaningless Bloodhorse poll, which incidently had voters that did see Citation, Count Fleet, Secretariat, Seattle Slew and Affirmed run, agree with that opinion.
DDT
-
Rokeby Forever
- Darley line
- Posts: 6684
- Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 4:52 pm
- Location: Reno, NV
DDT,
Now, wait a minute. If they conducted a poll 70 years ago asking, "What President had the best singing voice?", Teddy Roosevelt might have won it. But if they took the same poll today, would Teddy Roosevelt still be a top choice, or not a choice at all? I have no idea what Teddy Roosevelt sounded like, do you? The same applies to a horse poll spanning 90 years.
Exceller is the only horse in history to defeat two Triple Crown winners....I'd say he was better than "good." And, I thought you wrote that Spectacular Bid was one of the greats. Now, he's not worthy of this list?
Earlier, you used Secretariat's Belmont Stakes final time to support your point that he was a superior three year old. Using YOUR OWN logic, let's compare Affirmed's 2:26 4/5 to the other Triple Crown winners you just wrote about, that the polled experts consider to be better than Affirmed:
Count Fleet: 2:28 1/5
Citation: 2:28 1/5
Seattle Slew: 2:29 3/5
All of a sudden, your own argument about final time doesn't apply any more?
I agree that Man o'War was the best of his time...but the best ever? Again, what was the level of competition back then to make that judgment? If it's strictly based on his 20 out of 21 wins, why isn't Native Dancer rated as highly? What if Native Dancer didn't get a botched KY Derby ride and retired undefeated (22 for 22)...wouldn't these same polled people have to put him in the top five all time? So, to them, a neck defeat because of a poor ride keeps him out of the top five...and those are opinions that you trust?
OK, you made your point and I made mine. We could go around in circles for weeks...wanna pick another topic?
Now, wait a minute. If they conducted a poll 70 years ago asking, "What President had the best singing voice?", Teddy Roosevelt might have won it. But if they took the same poll today, would Teddy Roosevelt still be a top choice, or not a choice at all? I have no idea what Teddy Roosevelt sounded like, do you? The same applies to a horse poll spanning 90 years.
DDT wrote:Again, besides Alydar and Exceller and Sirlad, who did Affirmed beat up on except for nothing 3 year olds and maybe some good, not great, older horses.
Exceller is the only horse in history to defeat two Triple Crown winners....I'd say he was better than "good." And, I thought you wrote that Spectacular Bid was one of the greats. Now, he's not worthy of this list?
Earlier, you used Secretariat's Belmont Stakes final time to support your point that he was a superior three year old. Using YOUR OWN logic, let's compare Affirmed's 2:26 4/5 to the other Triple Crown winners you just wrote about, that the polled experts consider to be better than Affirmed:
Count Fleet: 2:28 1/5
Citation: 2:28 1/5
Seattle Slew: 2:29 3/5
All of a sudden, your own argument about final time doesn't apply any more?
I agree that Man o'War was the best of his time...but the best ever? Again, what was the level of competition back then to make that judgment? If it's strictly based on his 20 out of 21 wins, why isn't Native Dancer rated as highly? What if Native Dancer didn't get a botched KY Derby ride and retired undefeated (22 for 22)...wouldn't these same polled people have to put him in the top five all time? So, to them, a neck defeat because of a poor ride keeps him out of the top five...and those are opinions that you trust?
OK, you made your point and I made mine. We could go around in circles for weeks...wanna pick another topic?
Rokeby Forever
Yes. I agree that we have gone round and round, and I loved Affirmed, and if it sounded as if I didn't, I will say here and now that he would be very high on any list you care to look at. I said earlier, many times, that final times are not a good measure, and I only used the Belmont final time of Secretariat to try to get my point over that he was a best Triple Crown winner according to final time. Man O' War won at least 3 times carrying 130 pounds as a a two year old and 138 as a three year old. Horses were trained and raced much different than today, or even in the 70's.
Exceller's win over two Triple Crown winners happened in the same race, and in my opinion it was Seattle Slew's best race even though he lost, he fought back when passed by Exceller.
When I said Affirmed raced against nothing 3 year olds I was talking about his 3 year old season, Spectacular Bid was only 2 at the time.
I never said I trusted the logic and voting of the poll, I merely used the outcome to point out that the "experts" involved did not share your opinion as to Affirmed.
One last point, if we had a poll as to who was the best President in the last 100 years, meaning which President accomplished the most during their term, and not who could sing better, the voters would have to examine the records to decide who and why they were voting for, but again, how much weight should be given to the records would be up to the individuals involved. Opinions are opinions.
DDT
Yes. I agree that we have gone round and round, and I loved Affirmed, and if it sounded as if I didn't, I will say here and now that he would be very high on any list you care to look at. I said earlier, many times, that final times are not a good measure, and I only used the Belmont final time of Secretariat to try to get my point over that he was a best Triple Crown winner according to final time. Man O' War won at least 3 times carrying 130 pounds as a a two year old and 138 as a three year old. Horses were trained and raced much different than today, or even in the 70's.
Exceller's win over two Triple Crown winners happened in the same race, and in my opinion it was Seattle Slew's best race even though he lost, he fought back when passed by Exceller.
When I said Affirmed raced against nothing 3 year olds I was talking about his 3 year old season, Spectacular Bid was only 2 at the time.
I never said I trusted the logic and voting of the poll, I merely used the outcome to point out that the "experts" involved did not share your opinion as to Affirmed.
One last point, if we had a poll as to who was the best President in the last 100 years, meaning which President accomplished the most during their term, and not who could sing better, the voters would have to examine the records to decide who and why they were voting for, but again, how much weight should be given to the records would be up to the individuals involved. Opinions are opinions.
DDT
-
Rokeby Forever
- Darley line
- Posts: 6684
- Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 4:52 pm
- Location: Reno, NV
Hi DDT,
I agree with all your points.
It's so sad that the era of horses carrying weight is over. Now, two year olds carry 122 pounds in a Maiden Special Weight but the highweight in a Grade 1 Handicap will be assigned only 119 pounds. Ridiculous!
Seattle Slew ran so many terrific races, it's a bit hard to pinpoint which one was best. Certainly, his easy Champagne victory in 1:34 2/5 would have to be considered, as well as his three year old debut run in 1:20 3/5 - these races were freakishly fast and run with seemingly no effort. When Seattle Slew broke slowly in the KY Derby and bullied his way to the lead, I think it showed just how much class he had - he would have run through a brick wall to get to the lead. Certainly, his Marlboro Cup win over Affirmed in 1:45 4/5 was an effort that exemplified his greatness. I think his JCGC loss proved his heart - he ran a :45 1/5 half in a 1 1/2 mile race and he was still fighting back at the end - only a "superhuman" horse would be capable of that.
Anyway...opinions are like a forehead - everyone has one. And, if we all agreed all the time, there would be no point discussing anything. On to the next matter at hand....the football games today. I have to root against the Giants only because I'm a Jets fan. LOL!
I agree with all your points.
It's so sad that the era of horses carrying weight is over. Now, two year olds carry 122 pounds in a Maiden Special Weight but the highweight in a Grade 1 Handicap will be assigned only 119 pounds. Ridiculous!
Seattle Slew ran so many terrific races, it's a bit hard to pinpoint which one was best. Certainly, his easy Champagne victory in 1:34 2/5 would have to be considered, as well as his three year old debut run in 1:20 3/5 - these races were freakishly fast and run with seemingly no effort. When Seattle Slew broke slowly in the KY Derby and bullied his way to the lead, I think it showed just how much class he had - he would have run through a brick wall to get to the lead. Certainly, his Marlboro Cup win over Affirmed in 1:45 4/5 was an effort that exemplified his greatness. I think his JCGC loss proved his heart - he ran a :45 1/5 half in a 1 1/2 mile race and he was still fighting back at the end - only a "superhuman" horse would be capable of that.
Anyway...opinions are like a forehead - everyone has one. And, if we all agreed all the time, there would be no point discussing anything. On to the next matter at hand....the football games today. I have to root against the Giants only because I'm a Jets fan. LOL!
Rokeby Forever
Jets fan or not you had to like their win over T.O. and the Cowboys. I do think that the Packers will be a lttle too much for them, but I have to admit I lost interest years ago when it became obvious that the team that made fewer mistakes would win, not who had the best players. Give me college or even high school games, then you see players who, for the most part, are playing because they love to play. I hate basketball, but you cannot go to a high school basketball game and not get involved, it's like trying to watch a Bob Hope routine without laughing somewhere along the line.
Would love to see New England go all the way.
Have a great day
DDT
Jets fan or not you had to like their win over T.O. and the Cowboys. I do think that the Packers will be a lttle too much for them, but I have to admit I lost interest years ago when it became obvious that the team that made fewer mistakes would win, not who had the best players. Give me college or even high school games, then you see players who, for the most part, are playing because they love to play. I hate basketball, but you cannot go to a high school basketball game and not get involved, it's like trying to watch a Bob Hope routine without laughing somewhere along the line.
Would love to see New England go all the way.
Have a great day
DDT
-
Rokeby Forever
- Darley line
- Posts: 6684
- Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 4:52 pm
- Location: Reno, NV
Congratulations to both of you-Roke and DDT. I have really enjoyed your discussion. As I'm sure others have also. Amazes me how you come up with all the statistics. I am more a student of pedigrees than racing, so I enjoy all the facts and figures you all throw out. Makes for interesting reading.
Thanks again for such an enlightened discussion and not a belittling argument.
Thanks again for such an enlightened discussion and not a belittling argument.
I have to agree with LG - you guys had 6 pages of a sustained discussion where you were both civil, presented your viewpoints, supported them with facts, and did not resort to childlike behavior because the other didnt agree with your viewpoint.
WELL DONE! I enjoyed reading this thread very much. You two had/have an excellent debate going on here. Bravo for not resorting to childishness and name calling.
WELL DONE! I enjoyed reading this thread very much. You two had/have an excellent debate going on here. Bravo for not resorting to childishness and name calling.
Rokeby Forever wrote:Hi DDT,
I did enjoy seeing the Cowboys lose and seeing Jones in tears, but I'll never admit it to my friends that are Giants fans. I agree - the Pack at home should be too much for the Giants to handle, but with -40 wind chills, who knows?
I prefer the NCAA, as well.
Best to ya - enjoy the weekend!
Well the home field advantage for the Pack went down the toilet (frozen toilet) last night. When the Packers are on their A game, they win. When they go out and play in a lackluster manner, they lose. I went to bed gnashing my teeth over the loss...and what was with the challenge on what was a clearly within bounds catch? 2007 was a great turnaround season for the Pack...but they were caught short in a championship game. I'm no Patriots fan, but I think they are going to spank the Giants.
A horse gallops with his lungs
Perseveres with his heart
And wins with his character. --Tesio
Perseveres with his heart
And wins with his character. --Tesio
-
Rokeby Forever
- Darley line
- Posts: 6684
- Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 4:52 pm
- Location: Reno, NV