BarbaroWire

There's a riot in most years concerning HOTY now you want to compare horses on a generational basis. To each his own.

It is nearing impossible to compare two horses that ran decades apart. However, I look at it this way. The were both two of a kind in their era. I give prop's to Man O War for running with amount of weight and the shoes the used in the 20's. What I take away from him was the lack of competition. The amount of foal's in the 20's was far less. Thus, limiting the competition. Secretariat, I have him prop's for what he did in just 5 weeks. Winning the triple crown, smashing 4 record while accomplishing every thoroughbred owner dream. What I have to take away from him was his losses but those was partly due to human error. First race and the jockey didn't really understand him. DQ for splitting two horse that was blocking him. Losses in the three W's which could be explain due to, Abscess, Fever, Runny Stool and that is why I give him the edge in my books. But that is just an opinion that may or maybe not be right. BTW...I'm still to see a horse make a bold move like he did in the Preakness.

You didn't see Secretariat having another claimer put up against him to prevent a walkover.

IMO, greatness isn’t just about winning races. Just about every thoroughbred that has ever competed has lost at least once and some of the very best have lost multiple times. Greatness is not necessarily defined by running fast times either. Claimers set track records that allowance and top stakes horses can’t achieve, primarily because the claimer had every track and race advantage on a given day. Greatness is about rising to the occasion and beating the very best that are available. All the great ones do that at least once in their career. Greatness is also about defying adversity, winning at different distances, winning on tracks that are not necessarily a favorable surface, carrying and giving weight, throwing out fast splits when fast splits are needed, the ability to recover from trouble, etc. and etc. The great ones are great because they truly are great…..Man O’ War was truly great, IMO a top three in N/A all time. True the foal crops in the twenties were a lot less than in many subsequent years, but the fact that virtually everyone wanted to avoid him was a testament to his abilities. His 13F track record set when he won the Lawrence Realization at Belmont in 1920 still stands and this is a distance that is run every year at Belmont. When he ran that race he broke the existing Belmont track record by 7 seconds. It also broke the existing American record in place since 1909 by 4 seconds. The fact that the race itself was like a workout tells me that he probably could have lowered the time by several seconds if pushed……Someone on here made a very good point. Tracks were much different in those days than they are now. Their consistencies weren’t as specialized as today. They were harrowed differently. And there were other things like the weight of shoes and the frequencies of their races. In 1922 Exterminator raced in an 8.5F handicap and three days later ran the 9F Brooklyn Handicap against one of the great horses of those times, Grey Lag, and won each of those races carrying 135 lbs. Many times he raced 4 and 5 times in a month and always carrying high weights and facing the best competition of the times because that’s what they did back then…..Look at Discovery. He carried 143 lbs. and losing to a horse that carried an even 100 and then beat that same horse by ten lengths in their next start, the Whitney, when carrying just 5 lbs. more. There have been many great horses but the thing that means most to me is who they beat. Beating the best defines just how great you really are.

Actually Sullivan, DRF chart records for beaten lengths etc., back then were often inaccurate and sometimes estimated. One description is that he won the race by about an 1/8th of a mile. For those that are interested I read in an article that his fractions for the race were: 12.2/5, 23 2/5; 35 3/5, 47 4/5, 1.00 2/5, 1.13, 1.26, 1.38 2/5, 1.51, 2.03 3/5, 2.16 3/5, 2.28 4/5, 2.40 4/5.

Sullivan, when stating that MOW won by 100+, he was only running against one other horse.

I believe MOW broke eight track records during his career including in each of his last five starts. His 100 length victory in the Lawrence Realization was slightly controversial. The night before the race his lone opponent, Sea Mint, was scratched. The rules stated that if the race was a walkover then MOW would receive only half the purse which was actually around 16K with the added money. At the last moment, and completely within the rules, Ms. Jefferies, the niece of MOW’s owner Sam Riddle, entered her three year old colt Hoodwink and by doing this made MOW eligible to receive his full share of the purse if he won. MOW still showed how great he was as he beat the American Record for 13F by more than 4 seconds, running the race alone as if it was a workout.

Certain? You have no way of knowing that. Kelso was a great horse and should be ranked higher than he is on these ratings. But somehow, I just can't picture him kicking Secretariat's butt. Or Man O' Wars. I'd like to hear your reasoning on this.

sword, ever hear of Azeri? BC Juve.

Sullivan, where do you get 24 wins in 26 starts for Kelso? Oddly enough, someone else got lambasted on this site for making that same statement. Kelso's record was 63-39-12-2. Where do you get your info?

The Stampeders?

This debate is comical... Ill tune back in in 2015 to find out who is really #1 lol

karen.sweatman.9 - rumors often swirl about doping and extraordinary horses. Secretariat (and his stablemate Riva Ridge) also had rumors circulating around them and steroids. Anyone who would know the truth of any of the rumors surrounding MOW or Secretariat and drug use (trainers, grooms) is probably long since passed away. In the meantime, we can look at the records of these all time greats and simply marvel at what they accomplished (with or without chemical help).

Hoodwink was indeed a sacrifice to stop a walkover, he actually ran the previous day. Man O' War was so good none would face him in the Realization. Not Exterminator, Sir Barton, Upset, John P. Grier, Donnacona.

Man O' War probably would. He barely had any time between some of his races.

I used to evaluate humna gaitand there is NO ONE SINGLE combination of factors that makes for efficiency, only various ones. You have to take into consideration symmetry, muscle strength, coordination, neuromuscular reaction time (fat or slow twitch nerve fibers) etc etc. A short couple horse like Northern Dancer could have been just as biomechanically efficient as a larger horse, say a John Henry but IN DIFFERENT WAYS.

We need historian trainees, too. Or feed the existing historians yogurt and wheat grass.

That is why walkover is in quotes. I wonder how Swaps would've run had he not had the lightning fast freeways of California.

Cocoa! How are you, haven't chatted in a while. Limiting the competition?...Hmm... And Man O' War raced and won with an injury

Loran, my explanation is lacking why Kelso is the greatest American horse to run. #1 Kelso was healthy enough to win HOY 5 times. He stole the crown from champions such as Northern Dancer. #2, Kelso was competitive at any distance, highlights of this are his various JCGC's, Washington International win over Gun Bow in 2:23 4/5, and his Handicap Triple Crown win. #3, Kelso could carry ANY weight assigned to him and still remain a legitamate contender. #4, Kelso's 24 wins in his 26 starts (never finishing worse than 2nd ) came frequently. With a break of just 11 days Kelso beat Quadrangle, Gun Bow and set records. I believe that when Kelso was retired it was to spare the racing world. This monster could win on turf or dirt, at any track and got better and better every year. There is no doubt anywhere that Kelso was and is the greatest gelding to ever live and quite possibly the best horse to walk the earth. Give me Ribot, Phar Lap, Man O' War, The Minstrel, Secretariat and we'll have a go at Kelso. We'll run 6 races, one every week, 3 on turf and 3 on dirt. 6f, 8f, 9f, 12f, 14f, 16f. Let's see who wins?

You guys pay to much attention to those silly rankings, for the record Man o' War was a great horse but the records Secretariat set on dirt and turf against better fields of competition would not be touched.

No doubt Icy, comparing horses when shapes of tracks were different, the direction of how the races were ran and the level of competition just as today's athletes are better or getting better due to training, knowledge and everyones favorite.... drugs!

I think he means Arazi. Probably another recheck mistake.

*Honorable Mentions to my list include* Noor, Colin, War Admiral, the Chocolate soldier, Bobby, Stymie, Armed, Skip Away, Coaltown and Winning Colors.

I second that, Emer01!

@BarbaroWire, Another student of the sport, LOL. Before making the comment that Secretariat hasn't been beaten, did you not bother check and find out that his career record was 21-16-3-1? That's beaten a few times where I come from, LOL.

um, yea he was beaten. check your facts next time? And yea, he never set as many records as MOW, won by as much as easily as MOW, or had as much strength to beat a TC winner while under a hand ride. Yea, Secretariat was great, top 2. but DON'T say he should've been 1st when you don't even know your facts.

Don't be difficult with me, loran. I play dirty.

His "Almost walkover" i believe. he was with hoodwink. I can't say he raced against him beause that would be alie

loran, only one thing is certain: Kelso would've kicked both their butts.

Sulli, are you flippin kiddin me? At what distance, track, and WORLD are you talking about?

That is so true, the difference between modern tracks and modern technology makes it very difficult to compare horses of yesteryear to horses today. However, the one leveling factor could possibly be doping. Old timers say Man O' War was a "hop head". It could be factual, regulations were lax back then, but I refuse to accept it. Too many problems come with doping a horse the way they say MOW was drugged. He stayed sound, no health issues, lived to be 30, and the proof he was truly great was evident from his offspring. The proof was in the pudding. That doesn't mean that other horses back in the era weren't doped up to achieve "greatness". We'll never really know, but Man O' War was the real deal in my opinion.

Sullivan, are you kidding me? You still think he won 24 of 26? Try checking Equibase or the National Racing Hall of Fame. Or are those the sites that you think led you astray? Unbelievable.

also he is not unbeaten

The truth is, all thiings being equal, Man o' War would beat Secretariat. His so-called "walkover" was not against a cheap claimer. No other owners wanted to be humiliated by Man o' War. He had a 28-foot stride (where Sec's was 23), and he had tremendous power. Not only did he win against everything they put against him (barring the single loss due to a false start and jockey error where he still only lost by a head) he was never pushed to run all out. This is commonly agreed upon in newspaper articles that describe the races of the time. Put the original Big Red up against Sec, and MoW will win every time. Don't get me wrong. Secretariat was an amazing horse. A true champioin. He just is not the freak that MoW was.

How many records DID he break? I heard somewhere around 8? Do you know?

Stride lenght is NOT the be all end all of equine biomechanics as little horses like Northern Dancer can attest. LOCOMOTION is not based upon a single attribute and a MIT docotrate (George Pratt in the great video A Magical Way of Going) measured various parameters of his biomecanics and stated: "you put all the data from Secretariat into a biomechanic computer and smoke comes out the back. He just should not be!"

The GREAT Kelso had only one horse who could compare, his name? Ribot. Kelso won from 5f to 16f, ran 12f in a sub 2:24 time, defeated the best he could find and then some... He was magical. Man O' War was great, sure, and Secretariat had a lot of great performances, but there is NO doubt in my mind Kelso was the best and then some. My American list? Kelso, Man O' War, Secretariat, Citation, Native Dancer, Seattle Slew, Count Fleet, Spectacular Bid, Tom Fool, Dr. Fager, Swaps, Buckpasser (with 4 healthy hooves, who knows!?!), Damascus, Exterminator, Affirmed, Forego, Round Table, Cougar II, John Henry, Northern Dancer,Ack Ack, Cigar, Alysheba, Ruffian, Alydar, Easy Goer, Whirlaway, Zenyatta, Sunday Silence, Seabicuit, Ghostzapper, Alsab, Gallorette, Nashua, Omaha, War Admiral, Commentator. I've planned this list for years.

And me, lol. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1IMyZRmu8Q

I know. That's why he is #2, he carried weight and still beat the other colts and fillies silly. Horses stopped wanting to face him after his MSW.

**footy

Sullivan...Asked yourself how he won by 100 lengths. The other horse was a sacrifice to prevent a walk over...

I believe about 8. He holds no more world records but the track record and stakes record for the Lawrence Realization (his "walkover"), which is tied with Kelso's.

Man O' War raced when he was sick. The difference is he won.

*He also broke a track record in the Realization

Sullivan please leave the history lessons for those who are competent and knowlegeable enough to teach like Lazmanick and Buckpasser. Some of us actually saw Kelso in the flesh so at the very least, your horribly misguided enthusiasm was spent on a great horse.

Man O' War won by 100+. He was beaten only by fault.

Sully, Man O' War carried 130lbs + as a TWO YEAR OLD

do we really want to start this again.........

It's very hard to compare two horses from different times. I consider them the top two of all time. Which one was better? I have no idea. They were both great. And BarbaroWire, you didn't even get the lengths right.

THe Man O' War vs Secretariat is always fun. Secretariat may be the fastest, at least on a good day he had the ability to outrun any horse. That being said, he wasn't the greatest thoroughbred of all time. That award goes to Man O' War. WHY? Because Man O' War wasn't just a tremendous race horse, he layed the foundation for American racing with his bloodline. Secretariat had a huge heart, so he had a physical advantage, a gift from God. He lost 3 races, 3 too many, all considered. Everyone who loves the sport, loves Secretariat, but he is not the king in my book.

I gotta chuckle out of this thread...'BarbaroWire', they went easy on you....Climb down slowly off the soap box, and back away very slowly....There are some serious horse players and racing afficienados @ this site. Consider yourself lucky. :)

haha Cig16, we did indeed. You should see some other comment threads on Man O' War being better than Secretariat and vice versa

He actually lost 5, karen.

I enjoy rechecking my facts, unfortunetly my rechecking led me astray rather than keeping me on the correct, original answer.

I'm 65 and I'm a dope. Sure it's possible.

and lovin' tenderness and macaroons

"100 length", it was too far to actually calculate. Saying more than 100 or about 100 is more accurate.

IF the Man O'War of 1920 raced the Secretariat of 1973, he latter would have it all over the former in nutrition, shoes training etc. You cannot compare them straight up.

Sullivan, you said it nowhere? Better go back & reread your posts.

Just saying, fotty

I do NOT think he won 24 of 26, loran. I said that NOWHERE. Having myself watched him lose in Maryland, finishing fourth, I was very surprised when I checked HRN and found 24 of 26. I decided I was remembering some other horse.