Ferrisjso26

Same good to see you too!

Tapits progeny have shown no such limitation over the years. EQ barely won but he had to run down HM to win wasn't necessarily showing distance limitation.

Crazy few years. EQ for Derby!

I hope so.

RIP:(

Well one race his saddle slipped in the JCGC and he couldn't be rated, not that it would have mattered necessarily. The Marlboro was sub 1.46 and Affirmed was three. It wouldn't be reasonable to expect Affirmed or almost any horse to win that race. That was Slew's best race and Affirmed was at a disadvantage as it was.

I think they are in a cluster with AP but I have usually had Affirmed at the top of the list. A the older is supposed to beat the three and Slew ran the second best 9 in racing history and B the second race his saddle slipped and he had no chance got tired early. Horse could get 12 better than Bid, and to me that matters in the all time great discussion. Bid versus Affirmed as olders at 10 would have been something else but I think Affirmed's the better horse and his ability to hold off Alydar at 12 makes me think he'd do it to these guys too tbh.

That isn't what determines greatness. Most those horses ran longer, ran at two(something Justify skipped that used to be more important than running at three), and did incredible times. A lot didn't go unbeaten but they weren't far off either and given how much more they ran that's more impressive.

There's just too many horses that are objectively better and even if one believes in him that way he just didn't have time to show it. History is going to rate this horse worse not better, horses don't get more popular with time at best the MOW's and Secretariat's maintain their status, they get rated worse as time passes. Revisionism is biased in the opposite direction. Think the bloodhorse list is stupid for a lot of reasons but look where they had Omaha the previous weakest TC winner in 1999. Like 60 or 70, well now(assuming that's accurate) we add another fifth of a century to that conversation and getting a place like that is only more difficult. Also think Omaha is better than Justify or at least showed more, he had landmark times and he lost his HOTY because the older was an all time great who not only beat him but broke a world record. Justify got HOTY but he would have lost to an ATG older like Discovery too especially if Discovery beat him.

He isn't. It's not close either just too many horses who are objectively better. I know where you're coming from, I remember when I was younger and wasn't aware of just how many great horses they've been I said Big Brown was in the top 30. I'm just sure you can name at least 60 or 70 horses you think are better off the top of your head with enough time. There's just not enough there. Think Omaha is a good meter, but Omaha had one or two blazing times and while he lost more he also ran 22 times. But yeah he's in the hall and I guess he should be. Far from the least deserving horse in the hall.