- This topic has 125 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Re: Dr. Fager, this was a horse who excelled as a miler – his record of 1:32 1/5 for a mile on the dirt (under 134 lbs) has never been broken! – but he also set two track records at 10 furlongs. He won the Suburban over Damascus in a time of 1:59 3/5 and the New Hampshire Sweepstakes Handicap over In Reality in 1:59 4/5. He also won the Hawthorne Gold Cup Handicap at the distance. Twice he finished 2nd to Damascus at 10 furlongs in the Woodward and Brooklyn. And he was often asked to carry huge weights. So there is no doubt in my mind that he could have gotten 12 furlongs, but his trainer only ran him at his best distances. He was named Champion Handicap Horse, Champion Turf Horse, and Champion Sprinter
in the same year
, so he was no one trick pony!
If we are comparing him to Frankel, both were/are incredibly fast but the good doctor had tactical speed as well. And while he never ran in races like the Jockey Club Gold Cup, he found plenty of good competition like Damascus, Buckpasser, In Reality, Diplomat Way, Fort Marcy and Gamely. He showed his versatility by traveling all over the country, on various surfaces and track conditions, and carrying weight in true handicaps.
How can a horse run in the Prix Foy and the classics in the same season?
Are you just spouting undiluted bullsh*t or has it been refined?
Of course Chief Nit Picker, I meant the Prix Niel. It doesn’t really matter what races the horses run in, the form is the same whatever the races are called.
You are missing the point completely. No horse has ever won the Dante and Niel in their 3yo season, let alone with the margins of victory used in your puzzle. Trying to baffle people with meaningless numbers plucked from your imagination when your basic facts were incorrect rather renders your whole argument invalid.
How can a horse run in the Prix Foy and the classics in the same season?
Are you just spouting undiluted bullsh*t or has it been refined?
Of course Chief Nit Picker, I meant the Prix Niel. It doesn’t really matter what races the horses run in, the form is the same whatever the races are called.
You are missing the point completely. No horse has ever won the Dante and Niel in their 3yo season, let alone with the margins of victory used in your puzzle. Trying to baffle people with meaningless numbers plucked from your imagination when your basic facts were incorrect rather renders your whole argument invalid.
No EF, you are missing the point.
It didn’t matter what the Group 1’s were called, theform
would’ve been the same. Please take another look. I thought anyone could follow it, but I’m obviously wrong, aplologies. So will spell out the Whole Point of the post out:
Horse
A
beats horse
B
by
exactly
the same margin (in weight terms)
every
time they met.
Horse
C
beats horse
B
by a
little more
than horse
A
every
time
B
and
C
met. So there can’t be any mistaking the form (which horse is better than the other).
Horse
D
ran poorly in one race, on reappearance after injury, but other than that
pulverised A B and C
.
But because
D
is
only capable
of that sort of form at middle distances he is
disqualified
under TAPK’s rules of being an
ALL TIME GREAT
… However…
Because
A
won
Group 1’s over different distances
… Despite
on form
being
infinitely inferior to D
, and being clearly the
third best
horse on
form
– Horse
A
is (on TAPK’s criterea) an
ALL TIME GREAT
.
Value Is EverythingAlthough Frankel is obviously the most likely winner and deserves to be odds on, if I were having a bet it would be Excelebration at the price. It’s a shame only 7 will go to post; because
Excelebration would’ve (imo) been a good each way bet (even at 11/4) with 8 runners.
With now 6 runners and Excelebration on form loads in front of any other runner… I tried to take 3/1 each way and was refused (well, offered only a tenth of my bet). Can’t blame the bookmaker as I wouldn’t take the bet either.
Value Is EverythingNo EF, you are missing the point.
It didn’t matter what the Group 1’s were called, theform
would’ve been the same. Please take another look. I thought anyone could follow it, but I’m obviously wrong, aplologies. So will spell out the Whole Point of the post out:
Horse
A
beats horse
B
by
exactly
the same margin (in weight terms)
every
time they met.
Horse
C
beats horse
B
by a
little more
than horse
A
every
time
B
and
C
met. So there can’t be any mistaking the form (which horse is better than the other).
Horse
D
ran poorly in one race, on reappearance after injury, but other than that
pulverised A B and C
.
But because
D
is
only capable
of that sort of form at middle distances he is
disqualified
under TAPK’s rules of being an
ALL TIME GREAT
… However…
Because
A
won
Group 1’s over different distances
… Despite
on form
being
infinitely inferior to D
, and being clearly the
third best
horse on
form
– Horse
A
is (on TAPK’s criterea) an
ALL TIME GREAT
.
Nay nay and thrice nay.
Horses A, B, C and D are but figments of your imagination. Your whole argument has no foundations in reality. Trying to wrap it up in wondrous algebraic formulae that does not adhere to the principles of mathematics does not given it any credence.
Racehorses are living flesh, to wonder at their prowess takes a greater appreciation of the natural world than merely putting figures down on paper. Identifying greatness comes from observation, if you cannot see greatness in the instance of its conception but rely on someone else to tell you then you have my deepest sympathy.
I reckon Frankel should step up to 10f no problem. At Goodwood he bearly got going, had plenty left, looked like he could of done another lap.
As for
Canford Cliffs average…………..
Won 3 different races at Royal Ascot 3 years in a row. 5 Group 1’s. The horse who’s sire had never produced a group 1 winner.
If he’s average what that make the rest of um…….
Go tell Richard Hughes and Mr Hannon the horse is average.
Blackbeard to conquer the World
I’d be amazed if anything finishes within 4 lengths of him.
I was there"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
I reckon Frankel should step up to 10f no problem. At Goodwood he bearly got going, had plenty left, looked like he could of done another lap.
As for
Canford Cliffs average…………..
Won 3 different races at Royal Ascot 3 years in a row. 5 Group 1’s. The horse who’s sire had never produced a group 1 winner.
If he’s average what that make the rest of um…….
Go tell Richard Hughes and Mr Hannon the horse is average.
Who on earth said Canford Cliffs was average? There’s one in every village Nathan and they are best ignored.
When something like Frankel appears on the scene which is like once in every 50 years everything looks average and people latch on to it.
I seem to remember some people hailing Goldikova as the best filly/mare they had ever seen yet Canford Cliffs beat her like she was a mere pacemaker. Hughsie had so much horse under him he could have passed her at will anytime he liked.
There’s every chance without Frankel around Excelebration would be on 9 consecutive wins by now and this thread would be full of punters telling us how he is the best miler of all time
Frankel is without doubt one of the greatest racehorses of all time and form on paper can’t tell that story only your eyes can.
Anyone who can’t see that or denies it is either a wind up merchant named TAPK or one of their eyes has gone shopping and the other one is coming back with the change.
Bravo HGM. I love it – after Frankel wins his knockers normally crawl back into the wood only to emerge again before his next race.
He looked incredible today and is going to be an even better horse this year. I have said it before – he is 100 years ahead of his time in terms of his physique and it is almost unfair on his rivals. They really have no chance. Let’s enjoy him while we can.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Haha, so much for the self-awarded title of ante-post king!
Seabird you are like a little Terrier with its teeth in my ankle! I am ‘The Ante-Post King’ because the majority of my wagers are at inflated Ante-Post prices that year on year return a profit! Now you are obviously well named too as you keep sh*tting on my head.I have no interest in US racing as the yankee dollar doesn’t know the price of
Mince
and it certainly doesn’t put food on my table! You are obviously an authority on US Racing,good for you but I get more pleasure watching ‘Calgary Bay’ rolling in dirt than an American horse running on it,each to their own!
Haha, so much for the self-awarded title of ante-post king!
Seabird you are like a little Terrier with its teeth in my ankle! I am ‘The Ante-Post King’ because the majority of my wagers are at inflated Ante-Post prices that year on year return a profit! Now you are obviously well named too as you keep sh*tting on my head.I have no interest in US racing as the yankee dollar doesn’t know the price of
Mince
and it certainly doesn’t put food on my table! You are obviously an authority on US Racing,good for you but I get more pleasure watching ‘Calgary Bay’ rolling in dirt than an American horse running on it,each to their own!
…So I take it you won’t be watching the Preakness this evening?
Haha, so much for the self-awarded title of ante-post king!
Seabird you are like a little Terrier with its teeth in my ankle! I am ‘The Ante-Post King’ because the majority of my wagers are at inflated Ante-Post prices that year on year return a profit! Now you are obviously well named too as you keep sh*tting on my head.I have no interest in US racing as the yankee dollar doesn’t know the price of
Mince
and it certainly doesn’t put food on my table! You are obviously an authority on US Racing,good for you but I get more pleasure watching ‘Calgary Bay’ rolling in dirt than an American horse running on it,each to their own!
Well, if you have no interest in US racing then just restrain from commenting about it, instead of spouting shite like Dr Fager is not a US all-time great and that a horse has to win the Triple Crown to be regarded as such. Simple. And, no, I’m not an authority on US racing, but I don’t need to be one to be aware of Dr Fager’s greatness. The fact is, contrary to your criteria, Dr Fager is very much a US all-time great and he didn’t need to win on 12 furlongs to be considered as such. End of.
How anyone can laugh out at Dr Fager’s credentials a tremendous champion and then admit not to having a clue about US racing is beyond me!
End of.
How anyone can laugh out at Dr Fager’s credentials a tremendous champion and then admit not to having a clue about US racing is beyond me!
I would have let it drop at the ‘End Of’ Seabird but where do I say I haven’t a clue about US Racing? I said I have No Interest! dont misquote me Smart A*S, I have no interest in Algebra equations but I certainly have more than a clue in solving them!
YourDr Fagar
I’m afraid falls into the nearly category of all time Greats as he fails to get the crucial 11/2m trip,he would ‘probably’ have beaten
Pebbles
over 11/4m on dirt purely because she never ran on it but had he come over here to contest an ‘Eclipse’ or a ‘Champion stakes’ she would have laughed at him.Over a 11/2m on his home turf ‘Dr Fagar’ Would have failed miserably against ‘Pebbles’ so dont give me All time Great,he won more bloody handicaps than he did Grade 1’s! End Of!
Nay nay and thrice nay.
Horses A, B, C and D are but figments of your imagination. Your whole argument has no foundations in reality. Trying to wrap it up in wondrous algebraic formulae that does not adhere to the principles of mathematics does not given it any credence.
Racehorses are living flesh, to wonder at their prowess takes a greater appreciation of the natural world than merely putting figures down on paper. Identifying greatness comes from observation, if you cannot see greatness in the instance of its conception but rely on someone else to tell you then you have my deepest sympathy.
Ouch!
What have I ever done to you EF?
You seem to have taken over from Reet as my stalker.My post was an example of what
might
happen in
reality
. Of how winning Group 1’s at varying distances does not neccessarily prove
greatness
. And to only be effective at one distance does
not disqualify
a horse from being an "
all time great
".
And my exampledoes
"adhere to the principles of
mathematics
", if it didn’t you’d tell me why.
Not that I have to apply mathematics to identify an all time great horse. Mathematics just (usually) help to explain why I think another person’s definition of an "all time great" is (imo) wrong. Not that I did a
great performance
in explaining in this instance.
Neither do I need someone else to identify "greatness" for me. But it does help to use what other respected people think whan discussing this and other subjects.
I certainly didn’t need anyone else’s opinion to identify a great performance yesterday. And neither did TAPK or Jonibake who were with me at Newbury. It’s good to talk to others who know their subject, even if we don’t agree all the time.
Value Is EverythingFar be it from me to explain the perversity of having "might" and "reality" in the same sentence. You would have been far better to have used real examples of horses that actually ran. As I am sure you know all mathematics relies on proof, you made your example fit your theory without having any proof to back it up.
It was a good bluff though
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.