Iron Fist is in this race. Before the return of Dortmund and with the retirement of AP still IMO Iron Fist is probably the fourth best three year old in the country after AP, Frosted and Keen Ice.(you could make an argument for Upstart being ahead though) This horse beat AP in that maiden race and made Frosted have to try in the PA Derby. This won't be as easy as I thought for Dortmund Iron Fist is better than anything he had to beat at the Big Bear by far.
This is a really solid argument. I didn't know that about the 73 Derby and it eases my concerns about his fourth place. I also didn't know about the allowance the day of the Belmont. However while that does change critiquing Forego for coming fourth in the Derby it doesn't downplay Sham's achievements. Sham still ran the Derby in sub 2.00 and even if Forego hadn't slammed into the rail it's unlikely he would have beat Sham but rather came in third. Also to me Sham's responsibility for making Secretariat run the 2.24 reigns supreme. You have increased my opinion of Forego and see the argument for putting him ahead of Sham clearly but in my opinion Sham was simply the better horse even with much less time to prove it.
It might not be the best decision for the fans but it's the better decision for the horse. Even though Dortmund might have won the Clark giving him a grade three field to beat up on will allow him to ease into what should be a grueling four year old campaign.
Yeh I agree. KI needs races to set up for him to win otherwise he usually can't catch the leaders at the end. Things didn't go so badly for him in the BCC he beat Tonalist and Frosted(which I didn't think he could do). There was nothing he could have done differently to catch AP and Effinex after they set that pace. Still looking forward to seeing how KI has improved on Clark day although at 9 even with that pace he probably won't win.
Those calling to change the TC series simply don't know racing history well. Horses were always allowed to run in one or two TC races without running the remainder. Sir Barton the first TC winner who started all this also won the series AND a race in between in 32 days which is less than todays 35 day TC series. Omaha, Whirlaway, Count Fleet and Citation all ran races in between the Preakness and Belmont and besides Omaha all of them won. Sorry to go off on a tangeagt It's just my blood boils at the thought of anyone changing the TC series because " it's unfair they have to run against fresh horses". The TC is the heart and soul of racing and AP's win this year hopefully ended all talk of changing it.
Also I think because of AP if there's a TC winner in the next few years the chances of seeing them run at 4 aren't dead. Remember Secretariat held the same position in the industry as AP did ending the TC drought and racing him beyond three was equally insane. However when SS and Affirmed won they ran at 4 and I'm not saying the next TC winners will run at 4 but it's not impossible as many suggest. Also I agree strongly that AP's three race post Belmont campaign had an impact as regardless if a future TC winner runs at 4 they will never be retired after the Belmont (save injury). If the Zayats had done this on the other hand it might have set a ugly precedent but if it happens now it will get an even more ugly reaction from the fans than it would have gotten if it had happened this year. After all many people this year understood if Zayat were to retire AP after the Belmont because of what a huge deal winning the TC was. In the future this will not be the case and owners will get shredded by the racing world if they made that choice. AP has pointed all future TC winners (again barring injury) to the BCC by default. For that the Zayats deserve our greatest thanks.
I understand your passion I do but you're just plain wrong on this. You're telling me to ignore a combined 100+ races that both horses ran in favor of just one? But focusing on that match race you got a lot wrong and some of what I'm saying might even be in your book. First off and most importantly Seabiscuit DID NOT get the lead because he was faster. Seabiscuit had a reputation for being a closer you clearly know a lot about the horse and know this he was not a pace setter and Kurtsinger didn't expect Woolf to grab the lead and no commentators at the time did. Seabiscuit gunning for the lead surprised Kurtsinger , forced War Admiral to play catch up and basically ended the race before it even started. If Kurtsinger had expected Seabiscuit to gun for the lead the race would have probably turned out very differently.
Winning at three and winning at four and above are not equal. Even if they were which they aren't War Admiral was far more dominant at three and four than Seabiscuit was as an older horse that's not an opinion that's a simple matter of wins and losses and lengths. War Admiral upon turning three went 18-2 and Seabiscuit and most horses in the GOAT discussion never had an equal stretch. War Admiral also did this against tougher competition and to be fair you could make the argument that his three year old rival Pompoon was a better horse than Seabiscuit. This argument isn't black and white it's very very close to being so. Besides the match race there is absolutely nothing to suggest War Admiral isn't a superior colt to Seabiscuit. One Head to head even in a non match race (which means much more by the way) doesn't really mean a horse is better. If a horse going 21-5 against the best competition at two, three and four being better than a horse that lost 50+ times in his development years isn't a fact it's hard to know what is. That's not insulting and unfair that's simply looking at the evidence provided. IMO besides Secretariat, Citation and CF NO ONE equals War Admirals numbers so that's not really a negative statement on Seabiscuit (though yes if you and others rate him in the top 20 I think he's very overrated) but rather a positive on War Admiral.
Imagine If a first crop AP wins the TC or even the Derby and Preakness?
Yeh I was on the Effinex bandwagon after the Suburban and I stated several times on here he was the best older horse but the Woodward and JCGC greatly eased that enthusiasm. The Woodward he had an excuse with the gate trouble but in the JCGC he had a decent enough trip and got beat fair and square by ...Wicked Strong. Then in the BCC he was back. The interesting thing is that Effinex was pointed at the Whitney (as Pebbles pointed out) and the Pacific Classic a month apart and didn't run in either race so maybe his conections knew he wasn't looking so good at that time. The Clark will clarify so much about this horse though it would have been better to see him face off against Dortmund.
I think at 9 Effinex should have no problem handling KI especially if the BCC is any indication of where these colts are at now. Even at 10 Effinex was still able to wire that entire field of closers true taking AP out of the mix changes that equation but so does this race being at 9 and not 10. Can't see KI beating Effinex (unless Effinex devolves again to his Woodward and JCGC form which after the BCC i'm willing to write off)at this distance and it'll probably be an Effinex, KI exacta. Shame Dortmund isn't running that would have changed a lot.
Copyright © 2010 -
other passionate horse racing fans!