Kflack wrote This one hurts. I thought Invasor was on the verge of real greatness. It\'s a shame he got hurt given that they were actually going to run him.
Might i add he won 11 0f 12 races for 7.8 million that million dollars
his last 3 races all winners were the breeders cup the donn handicap and the dubia world cup.
at what point to you call a horse great? if you were the owner wouldn\'t this be a great horse. he too on all comers and how about that won.
I would have liked to have seen a little more in the US because I think he was on his way to being top 10 in my lifetime. IMHO, he was still improving. That\'s a very scary thought.
Hey guys are you not jumping the gun a little here?
He raced how many times in the US??? Five
Yah he won in Dubai and the Classic and was 5 for 5 in America.
But who accomplished more???
Silver Charm or Invasor........
We are saying the same thing. His US/Dubai career was a little too short for a coronation, but the fact that he was still relatively lightly raced and improving makes you wonder what he could have accomplished this year given how much he did accomplish so quickly.
If you consider the fact that thousands of horses are born each year, many don\'t make it to the track, many don\'t ever win, even fewer win a graded stakes race, even fewer than that win a G1 race....then consider that this horse won the 2 biggest dirt races in the world with a solid win in between...I consider him GREAT! Maybe he wasn\'t greater than Silver Charm or Ghostzapper or Cigar or rank anywhere near your personal top 25 \"greatest\" horses but he was definitely a great horse.
At some point the line is drawn at great and very good.
To call him great, despite his impressive brief resume, does a disservice to the truly GREAT horses like Forego, Secretariat, Bid, etc...
Theres a reason its called the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good. The word great is thrown around all too often in conversation, so much that it loses its meaning.
I\'m not knocking him, just don\'t call him great in the same breath as those that have truly earned that distinction.
>I\'m not knocking him, just don\'t call him great in the same breath as those that >have truly earned that distinction.
Well put. I mean what are we talking about here. A little more well traveled version of Mineshaft, Gentleman and Tiznow..............
P Dub:
NASCAR is experimenting this year with the Car of Tomorrow (COT). Invasor is
clearly a Great Horse of the present age, and it is not fair to compare him to
the outstanding horses of yesteryear:
Forego--a great will to win, which carried him to victory on days when he was
ouchy, when the track condition or distance or pace scenario worked against
him, when he was matched against much more lightly weighted rivals. As a
gelding,the economics of the sport/business of racing never worked against his
longevity. A lot of sentiment and subjectivity here, but the greatest of the
great ones I have seen--he knew where the wire was, and he wanted to be there
first.
Secretariat-- yes he had trouble in races that started with \"W\", but many
forget that his last two career (turf) races were two of the fastest races ever
run on that surface (if not the fastest) at that point in time. Beyer
retroactively assigned a number like 130 to his Belmont, a race where he was
doing it all on his own.
Spec Bid-- Champion 2YO, Champion 3YO and Horse of the Year at 4. Ran 7/8s in
1:20 and 1-1/4 in 1:57.4. 26 for 30 lifetime.
I am very happy to have seen all 3 of these champions, and the economics of
the sport dictate that I may never see the likes of them again.
These are horses that put fannies in the seats.
Richie...
You clearly are the master of the keyboard. I was frustrated reading the comparisons of Invasor to the all time greats and clearly agree with your thoughts.
I\'m not sure you can compare the generations. Kind of like comparing Babe Ruth to Barry Bonds.
NC Tony
NCT:
Thanks for your kind words. Invasor can be called \"great\", as long as P
Dub\'s big 3 are called \"Immortal\". And strange to say that their \"Immortality\"
was not all it could have been-- Forego of course was gelded, Secretariat was
better known as a sire of broodmares than a sire of champions, and Bid was
pretty much a bust at stud.
As to Bonds, I have no comment. Ruth has two \"asterisks\" next to his name:
the positive one points out that he was an accomplished pitcher in his day; the
negative one reminds us that a lot of potentially great players were excluded
from baseball during Ruth\'s years. IMO the player who gets lost in the shuffle
is the oft injured Ken Griffey Jr., who probably had all the skills to be a
Baseball \"Immortal\", and may not get all the credit he is due when all is said
and done.
Listen both of you. Barry Bonds is a jerk, a steroid user and GREAT PLAYER. He and Babe Ruth share one thing in common. They both withstood the test of time.
Invasor did not...........
There are usually two criteria to be labeled great: Brilliance and Longevity.
There is a very high probability we may never see another GREAT HORSE ever again.............
Silver Charm,
He ran until he was 5. Not his fault he was born in Uruguay. How many horses can you say won both the Uruguayan Triple Crown and then go on to win the Breeders Cup, followed by the Dubai 6 Million. HE beat everyone, including the so called unbeatable Super Horse Bernadini.Raced all over the country and world. He couldn\'t have done much more in this day and age of Horse racing.
Back in the day, horses Ran, it was a sport. In todays game they run once every 6-8 weeks. (if that). Now it is more of a monetary end game than a sporting event. Sort of like the NBA.
And as you say, only time will tell true greatness. Don\'t really know why we are judging now. In 10-15 years, if you still have a good memory, you might think back and say, geez remember how great the INVASOR was? By that time good Horses will race two or three times a year, Derby runners will be coming directly out of MSW wins, etc etc. and NYRA will enforce all wagers to be purchased via computer under one id so it can tax all winnings.
NC Tony
IMO, horses like Ghostzapper and Invasor occupy a different place than Bid, Slew, Affirmed, Secretariat, Forego etc...., but not necessarily because of ability.
They are horses that demonstrated something beyond a single extremely fast figure, peak season, or record of intermittent great races. Their record of development and consistency right from the start of their careers suggests that had they continued running they would have joined that elite group above.
IMO, you just can\'t assume they would have accomplished a lot more had they continued, but they certainly rate above the horses that ran exceptionally well in spots and deserve some kind of special recognition for that.
Invasor was \"great\" and accomplished , perhaps top percent of this century and top 20 or so in the last 50 yrs . Maybe it\'s best to say Invasor was Great Race Horse and just leave it at that ...
Also , \"great\" photo essay / article(s) today about Invasor at Bloodhorse.com and The Case for Saving Aqueduct @ euidaily.com
would you consider Ruffian a great horse or a great 3 year old? Do we categorize
accomplishments based on age,duration,gender,competition?
Flach wrote
\"IMO, horses like Ghostzapper and Invasor.........certainly rate above the horses that ran exceptionally well in spots and deserve some kind of special recognition for that.\"
I believe they got that when they were named Horse of the Year.........
Five years from now you will struggle to remember their names. But you will never forget Bid, Slew, Affirmed, Big Red and others like Man O\'War and Citation even though you never even saw the latter two even run.
We are very close in our opinions. I guess I think they were better than the \"typical\" horse of the year and will be remembered by most degenerate horseplayers like me for being a bit special. ;-)
I even think it\'s possible Bernardini may have been on the verge of greatness. He will be forgotten by most though.
>Bernardini may have been on the verge of greatness. He will be forgotten by most though.
He has disappeared from everyones memory so quickly he may as well have been named Houdini.............
The only thing more I have to say about these cheap-retire-them-early-great-ones is....
Who is running this weekend???
NC Tony,
My last post in this string I said would be my last on the subject. I guess I lied. Also by all accounts from everyone I have heard about regarding you NC Tony. You are great guy, an expert handicapper, and clearly by your story about being there when Forego mowed em down, a real fan. So this is not an attack on you but just on some of the logic that Invasor was one of the all-time greats. And not that you were leading the charge.
I read Dave Litfins analysis/article in the Sat DRF and in discussing the Suburban he mentioned two horses who were previous winners: Mineshaft and Skip Away. I think I have a pretty good memory but a horse like Skip Away clearly slipped my mind and those calling Invasor great, well it slipped theirs also.
Skip away closed his four year old campaign with dominating wins in the Jockey Club Gold Cup and the BC Classic at Hollywood Park after the connections anti-ed-up and supplemented. Clearly a bold move. Skip Aways five year old season, please read below.
Donn Handicap-126.lbs-WIN
Gulf Park Handicap-127.lbs-WIN
Pimlico Special-128.lbs-WIN
Mass Handicap-130.lbs-WIN
Hollywood Gold Cup-124.lbs-WIN
Iselin Handicap-131.lbs-WIN
Woodward-126.lbs-WIN
Skip Aways ankle began going bad, he lost the last two, one at CD, a track he never really like anyway.
Skip Away did this over the same 12 month span that stretched the entire 12 month American racing career of Invasor. Skip Away competed in major races at two, ran in all three Triple Crown races at 3. Ran in the Travers and beat Cigar in the Jockey Club Gold Cup the same year.
His resume compared to those of horses such as Invasor and Bernardini is so lopsided that to even mention them in his class is a disgrace. The financial incentives today may be so great that to continue risk running horses is not worth the odds. Be that as it may, no one should be bringing down the achievements of GREAT HORSES who ran and competed before the currents ones.
Simply in an effort to send the current ones off to some highly publicized stud career..............
I hope you aren\'t including me in the group that \"lead the charge\" for calling Invasor an all time great because I lead the charge for calling him a \"pontential all time great\". ;-)
I do think there\'s a difference between horses like Skip Away/Mineshaft Invasor/Ghostzapper and some of the all time greats (I didn\'t forget either Mineshaft or Skip Away).
Obviously greatness is a somewhat subjective topic. We aren\'t all going to have the same criteria. For me, I want more than a single year or series of great races to be called an all time great. A great year or great series of races is just that, a great series or great year.
I like when they come out running great at 2 and continue developing from there. That\'s why my list tends to include horses like Fager, Slew, Affirmed, Bid, Secretariat etc.... Obviously, I\'m going to include Forego because even though he started a little slow he didn\'t just get sharp for awhile. He dominated for years.
Invasor fits my criteria well because he was a champion right from the start and was still getting better. The issue is whether he did enough. To me, he and Ghostzapper didn\'t do enough to be included in that elite group above, but they performed well all the way and may have reached that elite level if just given more time on the track. That\'s different from Skip Away.
I am not putting Skip Away in the level of,
\"horses like Fager, Slew, Affirmed, Bid, Secretariat etc....\"
But Flach don\'t you think the Skip Away\'s of racing history are at an even higher level of greatness than the Invasors and Ghostzapers. I mean for gods sake when the Racing Secretary put 119 on Ghostzapper in the Iselin and 123 in the Met Mile Frankels comments were,
\"They\'re trying to kill him.\"
This debate wont go away, so I cant go away.
1) You can call Mineshaft, Skip Away, Ghostzapper,Invasor,the Professor and
all the rest \"Great\", as long as you call Fager/Secretariat/Slew/Bid/Forego \"Immortal\".
Its been 30 years since the \"Decade of Champions\". If people are still talking
about racing in 30 years, I dont think they will be talking about \"Shaft\",
\"Skip\",\"Zapper\" and Invasor.
Notes: (a) Of the \"Great\" 4 above, I dock some points from the Zapper, who did
most of his \"Great\" work over one strip: Belmont;
(b) Skippy was campaigned like one of the bluebooded owned runners of the
Decade of Champions. His owners/trainer, Sonny and Caroline Hine, kept him
running out of love and pride. Skippy beat Cigar, who somehow is not usually
mentioned on these \"Great\" lists. I dont know what the TG stallion index says,
but the get of Skippy has been good to me especially on turf and off going;
will be interested to see synthetic numbers on his runners.
(c) If Invasor was not injured, he would have run no more than four more races
in his career. (There would have been the possibility that Jerkens could have
beat him at 15/1 in the Suburban, no?). If he repeated in the BC Classic, it
could be said that he put together two consecutive years which were borderline
Immortal.
(d) Fkach, I do not understand why you would put that much emphasis
on \"precocity\", brilliance as a 2YO. I guess as careers get shorter it will
become ever more important though.
(e) Unfortunately, the Triple Crown and especially the Derby will be accorded
too much weight in judging the historical ranking of runners.The Triple Crown
is an aberration as far as racing goes. Many Triple Crown runners will never
compete in a 20 horse field ever again after the Derby. Many Triple Crown
runners will never be tried at 10 or 12 furlongs ever again. Many Triple Crown
runners will not be weighted at 126 ever again in their careers. The 3 race in 5
week series is more a question of endurance than racing brilliance. The
emphasis on the Derby in specific and the Triple Crown has been one of the
culprits in early equine retirement.
(f) The closest thing I may have seen to \"Immortality\" since the turn of the
Century may be Ouija Board.
\"Fkach, I do not understand why you would put that much emphasis
on \"precocity\", brilliance as a 2YO. I guess as careers get shorter it will
become ever more important though.\"
Not a lot of emphasis, but I like to see greatness stretched over multiple years and you rarely get a multi-year older horse career except with geldings. So the 2YO and 3YO record counts for me.
When a horse starts out great and continues to develop through their 3YO and 4YO season, that consistent level of greatness often says something about their ability that getting razor sharp for a few races or a single season does not.
Look at all the legendary horses. Almost all of them came out running and kept getting better. There are some exceptions that were either handled improperly early or that were geldings with long careers, but for the most part they came out running.
Best Pal and Formal Gold ran some astonishing races in their careers when they were going extremely well, but their overall careers were not great.
Cigar is one of those \"exception\" horses I talked about above where you just have to discount his early career on turf because they didn\'t know what they had. I do consider him a great horse, but I think he was overrated (that\'s another story. ;-)
I agree that Ouija Board was as close to immortal as we\'ll ever see again. She was owned by Lord Derby who puts the competition of racing over the money made in the shed. No, I\'m the first to admit that she wouldn\'t beat Big Red or the Bid going 1 1/4 on the dirt but I doubt you can name ANY filly or mare that could have beaten her covering a bit of ground on the turf. In that corner of the racing world she was and is the best I\'ve ever seen or probably will ever see. I got goosebumps watching her pull away in the \'06 BC stretch knowing that I was seeing one of the truly great ones.
For me, Pride would beat Ouija Board any day of the week.
coachbowlin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>but I doubt you can name ANY filly
> or mare that could have beaten her covering a bit
> of ground on the turf.
Richie lets put this in perspective.
If Invasor and Ghostzapper are two of the greatest horses of all-time as the articles I read this past week were saying.
Then Ernie Els and Jim Furyk are two of the greatest golfers of all-time.
Phil Mickleson is off the charts...........
SC:
The people who call Invasor and Ghostzapper \"Great\" need to do this to promote
the sport. If you put Invasor or Ghostzapper on the track with Fager,
Secretariat, Affirmed, Slew, Bid or Forego, there are only 2 words which
describe Invasor and Ghost: \"Also Ran\".
Funny you mention PGA golf, which is becoming more and more like Racing, with
the big names playing less and less. For the second straight week, there is a
wild finish at the PGA event which involves none of the household names.
I\'ve embraced golf with renewed fervor this Spring, and have been able to lower
my handicap by a couple of strokes. Part of my renewed interest in Golf has
been enabled by an absolute lack of interest in racing in New York; the current
Belmont meet looks a lot like Colonial at Belmont to me, with card after card
composed of one meaningless turf race after another.
I was expecting someone to call me on Pebbles or Miss Alleged but not that one. Excuse me for not knowing any background on Pride but I know she\'s not won two BC races with a runner up in between. OBoards most impressive stat may be that she got beat less than 2 lengths in the Arc as a 3 year old against the best grass horses in the world. That same year she also won the Irish Oaks, the Epsom Oaks by 7...Pride must have been really, really good. Sorry that I never heard of her. Can you give me some background on her? I\'m not saying she isn\'t a great horse, I just don\'t know anything about her.
Give me a ten race series, 1M to a mile and a quarter races, and this is how I see the all-time greats finishing.
1. Secretariat
2. \'Bid
3. Fager
4. GZ
5. Swaps*
6. Affirmed
7. Alydar
8. Forego
9. Invasor
10. Bernardini
11. Northern Dancer
* I don\'t see Swaps getting enough mention in the \"Greats\" category. A quick review:
Most people in racing can tell you that Swaps beat Nashua in the 1955 Kentucky Derby and that Nashua beat Swaps in the famous match race later that year at Washington Park. But, most aren\'t aware that the match race was Swaps only loss in nine starts as a three-year old.
And much like another horse almost 25 years later -- Spectacular Bid -- if Swaps was a super star at three, he was an absolute monster at four. Both lost the Horse of the Year vote at three, but came back to be Horses of the Year at four.
In the 1956 volume of \"American Race Horses,\" historian Joe Estes reports that Europeans were convinced in the summer of 1956 that the 4-year-old Ribot was the best hose in the world. But in America, people were equally convinced that \"Swaps was the best horse in the world, and in all probability, the best horse that ever laid a hoof on a race track.\"
A sore spot on his right front hoof that plagued Swaps through his sophomore season continued to give him problems at four. It was an injury that could never be expected to heal entirely.
Trainer Mesh Tenney pointed Swaps for the Santa Anita Handicap in the winter of 1956, but the colt\'s tender hoof never permitted proper training. Swaps started only once at Santa Anita, winning an overnight handicap carrying 127 pounds and easily defeating Bobby Brocato (who would go on to win the Santa Anita Handicap).
Swaps then headed for Florida and another possible meeting with Nashua (that was not to be). On April 14, under the impost of 130 pounds, Swaps won the Broward County Handicap, taking a full second off the Gulfstream track record and lowering the world record for one mile and seventy yards to 1:39 3/5.
He returned to Hollywood Park and was beaten a head in the Californian Stakes by Porterhouse when jockey Bill Shoemaker allowed the horse to relax too much in the final sixteenth.
In his next five races -- covering a span of just seven weeks -- Swaps put on an exhibition at Hollywood Park such as had not been seen since Man o\' War ran in 1920. In five consecutive races, Swaps set three new world records, equaled one world record and broke the track record by a full second in the other.
He won the Argonaut Handicap on June 9 under 128 pounds, breaking the track record for one mile by 1 3/5 seconds. The final time of 1:33 1/5 also broke Citation\'s world record.
In the June 23 Inglewood Handicap, under 130 pounds, Swaps ran 1 1/16 miles in 1:39, breaking his own track and world record set a year earlier by 1 2/5 seconds. He passed the mile marker in this race in 1:32 3/5.
On July 4, in the American Handicap, Swaps (130) was eased in the final sixteenth and *only* broke the track record and equaled the world record for 1 1/8 miles set by Noor in 1950 (1:46 4/5).
Ten days later, in the Hollywood Gold Cup, Swaps (130) took one full second off Rejected\'s track record. The final time of 1:58 3/5 for the one mile and one quarter was 2/5s off Noor\'s world record.
Finally, on closing day of the Hollywood Park meeting on July 25, Swaps (130) breezed to an effortless victory in the Sunset Handicap, breaking the world record for one mile and five eighths by 2 2/5 seconds. His final time was 2:38 1/5. That\'s still the world record for dirt in 1997.
Shipped to Washington Park, Swaps was soundly defeated on a soft turf course in the Arch Ward Memorial Handicap. (A year earlier, he had won the American Derby at Washington Park in the fastest 1 3/16 miles ever run on the grass in America.)
On September 3, Swaps ran his last race. In the one-mile Washington Park Handicap, he cruised home in front in a new track record of 1:33 2/5.
While prepping for the United Nations Handicap at Atlantic City, Swaps reinjured his hoof. He was entered in the race and appeared on the program, but was scratched just an hour before the race. Later, at Garden State Park, he suffered two small fractures while training and was retired.
As a sire, Swaps had 35 stakes winners (8%) from 425 foals. His best offspring were without doubt the iron filly Affectionately and the champion colt Chateaugay (Kentucky Derby, Belmont Stakes).
Swaps was put to sleep and buried at Spendthrift Farm in November 1972. Fourteen years later, his remains were reinterred in the gardens of the Kentucky Derby Museum, just a hundred yards of so from the finish line of one of his greatest victories.
\"If Invasor and Ghostzapper are two of the greatest horses of all-time as the articles I read this past week were saying. \"
Which articles suggested that?
I didn\'t read anything like that.
Michael,
One of the problems with going back as far as Swaps is that few if any of us actually saw those horses run or are very familiar with the competition and quality of the impressive final times they might have put up.
I have no doubt that Swaps was a great horse, but the only person I ever met that actually saw most of the old time greats swore up and down that Count Fleet would have destroyed all of them. It\'s hard for me to take that kind of thing too seriously without first hand knowledge.
For me, the modern era starts with Buckpasser, Damascus, Fager and Kelso. Even though I never saw any of them run live, I\'ve seen enough film and PPs of their opponents etc... to be sure of their greatness.
fkach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Michael,
>
> One of the problems with going back as far as
> Swaps is that few if any of us actually saw those
> horses run or are very familiar with the
> competition and quality of the impressive final
> times they might have put up.
>
> I have no doubt that Swaps was a great horse, but
> the only person I ever met that actually saw most
> of the old time greats swore up and down that
> Count Fleet would have destroyed all of them.
just an educated guess fk, as all this is. look at those numbers though - 130 lbs, 1:58 3/5 .... some of the Cal tracks were super fast back then, so again, it\'s all just speculation. makes for great conversation though.
I hear ya.
By the way, you left off Slew. Please tell me that was an accident. ;-)
12. Seattle Slew
Wow, you rate Bernardini, Invasor, Ghostzapper,and Alydar over Seattle Slew even though Slew beat Affirmed. That should make for at least some lively conversation. Have a nice night. ;-)
They were all over the place, it was out of control. The usual suspects, there is no need to embarrass some writers anymore than they already have done themselves by mentioning them by name.
Thats not my style.
Hey Michael D that list of yours doesn\'t include Seattle Slew, Man O\'War or Mineshaft who on TG numbers was faster than all of them.
I guess you just don\'t \"Trust the Numbers\".......
Anyway I could actually see GZ and Bernardini being, \"Eased, Vanned Off\" in that bunch and Invasor receiving the proverbial, \"Failed to Menace\".........
I think Exceller beat Affirmed AND Slew at 1-1/2 miles in the 78 JCGC.
fkach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wow, you rate Bernardini, Invasor, Ghostzapper,and
> Alydar over Seattle Slew even though Slew beat
> Affirmed. That should make for at least some
> lively conversation. Have a nice night. ;-)
re Slew - 1:49.3 Wood, 2:02.1 Derby, 2:29.3 Belmont, then buried when they went 1:58 out west. his next route was a loss in 1:48 at the Meadowlands. the 1:45.4 win over Affirmed was brilliant, and you have the fast Flamingo and Stuyvesant Handicap wins.
reasonable people could disagree. most would have him higher. I could be wrong.
Coach:
To me OB\'s most impressive accomplishment was winning GR 1s on 3 different
continents.
>I think Exceller beat Affirmed AND Slew at 1-1/2 miles in the 78 JCGC.<
Yea, but everyone on the planet knows that Slew was miles the best that day.
Silver,
Been kinda busy lately, but thought I should respond in some fashion. I think the line of demarcation for Thoroughbred greatness continues to decrease as we expect less and less from our runners and seek out quicker financial returns. therefore the standards of yesteryear no longer can apply as no one today tries for immortality except those horse that show up like Cigar or Skip Away John Henry. I am not a cheerleader for Invasor but merely accepting the facts that he did all he was asked for at the highest level they offer today.
As for the honor to on the committee, I am honored to not only be nominated but will accept. Let me know when the next meeting is scheduled.
NC Tony
>I am not a cheerleader for Invasor
And I am not his number one basher. He really was a good horse. And yes he did everything he was asked and in races like the Donn and Whitney he even did a little more.
However the more fragile breed or greed for stud dollars creating early retirements should not lower the bar for determining greatness. Horses like Kelso, Forego and now Lava Man do not have one of those alternatives. They remind me of that line from the Movie 3, \"All I wanna do is race\". In several respects these horses have received near Immortality status simply because they had no where else to go and were very very good at what they did.
Glad to hear you have generously accepted your spot on the Greatness Committee. Mall was removed and replaced by the Honorable Bobphilo. Mall was deemed to be in bed with too many Lexington Breeders (not literally) and hence would be voting all of their horses as Great to generate a higher valuation hence a bigger Commission for himself.
The first meeting is Opening Weekend at Saratoga at Siros. See you there and who knows, maybe the next Great One...........
\"...Forego and now Lava Man...\" ?#!*?!
Lava Man was a great claim.
The Committee might have to meet at Desperate Annies instead of Siro\'s
I\'m late chiming in on this but my thoughts are simply this: Candy Stripes has sired some friggin\' MONSTERS...I would bet that Candy Ride ran faster than Invasor on thorograph sheets even though he ran only once or twice in the states. I just remember him running by Medaglia d\'Oro like he was stnading still in the Pacific Classic...
Esteemed committee members:
May I suggest you create three categories - Great, Potentially Great, and Singular Great Performances. Lately there have been many in the latter two categories.
Great - the usual seventies-era icons, John Henry, maybe Cigar and Skippy.
Potentially Great - the sparsely run dominating horses, premature retirees, eg. Smarty Jones, Afleet Alex, G-zapper, Invasor, Point Given, Tiznow, B-dini, Mineshaft. It would be interesting to speculate which of the potentially great would have become legendary had they been allowed/lasted to race for three full campaigns.
Singular Great Performances - Bellamy Road\'s Wood, Pleasant Home\'s BC Distaff. Keeneland dirt performances cannot qualify.
Since the other Committee members have not yet accepted their nominations I currently have to speak for the full committee. Your proposal is seconded and accepted henceforth with the reservation that the Committee will determine which horses to place in the respective categories.
Bellamy Road will not be entered in the \"Singularly Great Performances\" Category upon the following basis:
1. The Wood Track on that anomalous day was as fast as Aqueduct has been in a human generation.
2. Other horses on the card ran incredibly fast races.
3. In the Wood itself the field was overextended to try and make the Kentucky Derby field and they all ran poor/off efforts, with the exception of Bellamy Road.
4. The best horse in that field \"Scrappy T\" had his saddle slip with five furlongs to go which cost him innumerable lengths.
In Conclusion that Wood was an optical illusion as was born out by subsequent race results.
Rags to Riches Belmont will similarly be judged upon what occurs in the future.
CtC, Hall of Greatness Committee
slewzapper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Esteemed committee members:
>
> May I suggest you create three categories - Great,
> Potentially Great, and Singular Great
> Performances. Lately there have been many in the
> latter two categories.
>
> Great - the usual seventies-era icons, John Henry,
> maybe Cigar and Skippy.
>
> Potentially Great - the sparsely run dominating
> horses, premature retirees, eg. Smarty Jones,
> Afleet Alex, G-zapper, Invasor, Point Given,
> Tiznow, B-dini, Mineshaft. It would be interesting
> to speculate which of the potentially great would
> have become legendary had they been allowed/lasted
> to race for three full campaigns.
>
> Singular Great Performances - Bellamy Road\'s Wood,
> Pleasant Home\'s BC Distaff. Keeneland dirt
> performances cannot qualify.