- This topic has 753 replies, 126 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Best horses since 1977 before revision
141 Dancing Brave
140 Alleged, Frankel, Shergar
138 El Gran Senor
137 Generous, Peintre Celebre, Three Troikas
136 Sea The Stars, Suave Dancer, Troy
135 Blushing Groom, Cigar, Daylami, Harbinger, Ile De Bourbon, Montjeu, Reference Point, Slip Anchor, St Jovite, Teenoso, The MinstrelBest horses since 1977 after revision
140 Frankel
138 Dancing Brave
137 Peintre Celebre
136 Generous, Sea The Stars, Shergar
135 Cigar, Daylami, El Gran Senor, Harbinger, Montjeu, St Jovite, Suave Dancer
134 Alleged, Dubai Millennium, El Condor Pasa, Helissio, Pilsudski
133 Hawk Wing, Mark Of Esteem, Old Vic, Reference Point, Sakhee, ZilzalIf you isolate Frankel’s last win you would be hard pressed to claim he was the best ever on that evidence. He came there like a horse about to blow his field away but ended up winning in workmanlike fashion. Cirrus des Aigles is a damn good horse when it is soft but an all time great? No way.
Dancing Brave was the best horse I saw prior to Frankel and I think he was probably the better stayer of the two. Thinking about which horse you would place your life on to win in the Arc you would have to say The Brave but when you think about Dancing Brave cutting down the ultimately sprinting specialist Green Desert in the 2000 Guineas, there would be a mega question about whether he could have caught Frankel, who blitzed his field before tiring ever so slightly.
My gut feeling is that Frankel would have prevailed over a mile or shorter and Dancing Brave at 12f, with the match over 10f being the race of a lifetime. Frankel’s 11 length demolition of Excelebration was something to behold, as was Dancing Brave’s late arrival to swamp an immense field in the Arc. I’ll accept and cherish both without needing to establish one as being better than the other. This not being akin to Highlander, where "There can be only ONE"
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
When did they start including American horses in the ratings?
And why did poor Alleged move down 6 points?Because it is and always has been a flawed, biased system Miss Woodford.As mentioned before the mentality is to get a bit excited at their own doings ie,give out MBE’s to the whole cricket team for finally winning an ashes series.If your horse comes from outside Europe you are up against it to get a fair rating.
The retiring ( now retired !
) jockey club handicapper at the time was Major David Swannell – to give him his correct title – is on record as saying that of all the horses he had the privilege of handicapping during his tenure, Sea Bird was the one who stood out for him.Of Sea Bird, he said – " The best I have ever seen, and the best I am ever likely to see. "
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Great points by Steve and Ginge as usual.
I would beg to differ just slightly with you Ginge. Whilst I completely agree that Frankel was not at his best on the
very
soft ground he encountered at Ascot, he still produced two jaw dropping performances on good to soft. The Royal Lodge and Queen Anne were both run on good to soft and we know what happened there.
I think Ginge you are closer to the mark when you say he may have been going slightly over the top in each of his final races of each season.
In the Dewhurst (also run on G/S) he did everything wrong in the early part of the race but still came there swinging 2 out. However he looked to tire in the last 100 yards and I always thought that ROC was coming back to him a little bit at the end of that race.
In the QEII he was pretty good but it would not figure in his top 6 performances and I agree the Champion was workmanlike in the end though also heroic, gutsy and showed a side of him we hadn’t seen before.
I also think that he was never at his best first time out. Ginge you rightly say his debut was ok but didn’t have us all screaming from the rooftops. Henry told us he had done very little with him before that race. The Greenham was slightly underwhelming at the time (though of course we all underestimated Excelebration) and the Lockinge was brilliant given he was coming back from injury but he did step up considerably on his next outing.
I think it is no coincidence that his
truly
amazing performances came in the middle of each season (Royal Lodge, Guineas, Sussex, Queen Anne, Juddmonte).
As far as trip is concerned it is my belief that he would have got a mile and a half on decent ground on an easy course like York but would have struggled in worse conditions on stiffer tracks. Moreover I think any attempt on that longer trip during any one of seasons would have bottomed him and we would not have seen the best of him thereafter. It was always about what was best for the horse and a mile and a half was not best for the horse. Just my opinion.
Anyway the main point I want to make is that he achieved his joint best performance on softish ground so I would say he was equally adept on that as he was on quick ground. It was just the heavy stuff that slowed him down…….a touch.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Guy Harwood has described the decision to downgrade Dancing Brave by 3lbs as extraordinary and out of order.
Silly thread title as it is impossible to say which horse was the greatest of all time over any distance and the posts seem to have very little to do with the title.
My opinion is Frankel along with Brigadier Gerard are the best milers I’ve ever seen race.
Guy Harwood has described the decision to downgrade Dancing Brave by 3lbs as extraordinary and out of order.
And I sympathise with him and others. It is a most unsatisfactory way of arriving at the correct figures and the BHA should be embarrassed for cocking it up in the first place.
However with respect to Mr Harwood et al they are not seeing the whole picture. The BHA are not suddenly saying that Dancing Brave was not as good as they originally thought, just that the system that was in place to arrive at the figures was flawed (or at least not the same as the one they use today). It is a bit like converting old decimal currency to new. If Frankel had been rated according to the old system he would still have been rated a few pounds higher than DB. That would have been the more acceptable way of doing things but would have meant them going back to a system they believe is inaccurate.
The BHA/WTR had three options yesterday:
1) Change the figures of the 70’s and 80’s horses to reflect what they would have been given had they run today.
2) Change the figures of the present day horses to reflect what they would have been given had they run in the 70’s and 80’s.
3) Do nothing and just accept that there is an anomaly in the figures and that the official best horse since 1977 is not actually the one they believe is the correct one.
Clearly they would never pick number 2 so it was 1 or 3. I think they made the right call but understand how people can be upset by the perceived slight on great horses like DB.
What IS clear is that they have not explained themselves very well. What exactly HAS changed in their system? Why did it take til now to change it? (looks suspiciously like it is because of Frankel). Why have some horses been dropped more than others? (I agree with Miss Woodford about poor old Alleged).
I said months ago that I was clueless as to how the BHA figures can differ so greatly from RPR and Timeform and I am still just as clueless now.
All in all I think we now have the ratings that THEY believe to be correct. To use another sporting analogy, Frankel was perviously the WBA and IBF heavyweight champ – he is now undisputed.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
By the way what do you make of this statement from the RP?
In October it was revealed the 141 allotted to Dancing Brave for his brilliant Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe success in 1986 was in part awarded as a present for retiring handicapper David Swannell
Bizarre
Does this mean that had Mr Swannell not been retiring Dancing Brave would have been rated x pounds lower? 
Phil Smith said today that this was incorrect. Swannel retired in 1981 and the horse in question was Shergar.
Okay, so it’s poor old Shergar that had a couple of unjustified pounds added then?
Am I being dim here and reading into this something that’s nothing, as neither the RP nor anyone on here seems at all concerned that what appears to be the awarding of an arbitrary ‘high’ rating just to please a retiring grandee is surely a very questionable act, at best
On a literal reading and to my nose there’s a whiff, nay stink, of corruption
Guy Harwood has described the decision to downgrade Dancing Brave by 3lbs as extraordinary and out of order.
And I sympathise with him and others. It is a most unsatisfactory way of arriving at the correct figures and the BHA should be embarrassed for cocking it up in the first place.
However with respect to Mr Harwood et al they are not seeing the whole picture.
The BHA are not suddenly saying that Dancing Brave was not as good as they originally thought, just that the system that was in place to arrive at figures was flawed (or at least not the same as the one they use today)
. It is a bit like converting old decimal currency to new. If Frankel had been rated according to the old system he would still have been rated a few pounds higher than DB. That would have been the more acceptable way of doing things but would have meant them going back to a system they believe is inaccurate.
The BHA/WTR had three options yesterday:
1) Change the figures of the 70’s and 80’s horses to reflect what they would have been given had they run today.
2) Change the figures of the present day horses to reflect what they would have been given had they run in the 70’s and 80’s.
3) Do nothing and just accept that there is an anomaly in the figures and that the official best horse since 1977 is not actually the one they believe in the correct one.
Clearly they would never pick number 2 so it was 1 or 3. I think they made the right call but understand how people can be upset by the perceived slight on great horses like DB.
What IS clear is that they have not explained themselves very well. What exactly HAS changed in their system? Why did it take til now to change it? (looks suspiciously like it is because of Frankel). Why have some horses been dropped more than others? (I agree with Miss Woodford about poor old Alleged).
I said months ago that I was clueless as to how the BHA figures can differ so greatly from RPR and Timeform and I am still just as clueless now.
All in all I think we now have the ratings that THEY believe to be correct. If you like Frankel was perviously the WBA and IBF heavyweight champ – he is now undisputed.
BIB, the fact is they have said Dancing Brave was not as good as his original rating 26 years after the event and there is absolutley no doubt in my mind this was done by today’s handicappers to put Frankel at the top of the pile.
I agree with you about the differences in the various ratings and after this fiasco you can really take them with a pinch of salt.
Silly thread title as it is impossible to say which horse was the greatest of all time over any distance and the posts seem to have very little to do with the title.
My opinion is Frankel along with Brigadier Gerard are the best milers I’ve ever seen race.
Nothing Silly about the thread title at all…..I think we’d all have to agree
Frankel
was the ‘Greatest Miler of all time’ to suggest he’s the ‘Greatest Racehorse of all time’ would in my opinion and those Traditionalists among us require him to have at least contested a recognised Group 1 race over 11/2m,had he won the Arc even I would have happily recognised that he truly was the greatest. Its common knowledge in Racing circles that Sir Henry alone never thought that a horse blessed with so much pace over a mile would truly get a 11/2m,had connections kept him in training as a 5yo he would have contested this years King George as not only did ‘Frankel’ surprise those of us who had the ‘pleasure’!
of watching him,he surpeised those closest to him with the way he changed from a headstrong youngster to a laid back young man,had he been given the opportunity to race on I have no doubt this Freak would have improved further and he would have got a 11/2m…..On good ground at least.What caught connections out more than anything was the ease in which he won the Juddmonte,had he won that race in May he would have been trained for a King George and Arc so in that respect having had his season all mapped out before he even turned up at Newbury,stepping him up to the ‘Holy grail’ of a 11/2m was never really in his reportoire! Bloody Shame as we can only speculate to just how Great he could have been! 
Sorry Brig but they have not said he was not as good – just that their system for arriving at his rating was wrong or different to the one they use now.
But yes – pinch of salt.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Phil Smith and Dominic Double-Barrelled explain their reasoning for the "recalibration" on a video on the RP website. Worth a peek.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
What is strange about TAPK’s words is he states Frankel didn’t stay in the Champion, yet believes he should’ve run in the Arc.
Ginge in an ideal world
Frankel
would never have had to run in that Ground at Ascot on Champions Day and what went on behind the scenes to ensure he did turn up wasn’t your everyday bit of ‘cajoling’! The horse did the business and for the majority of the race he looked magnificent,he and Tom in perfect harmony.The start caused an anxious moment or 2 and so did the finish if everyone was perfectly honest however the job got done! Those looking for a flaw in the horse saw enough to suggest that the race took its toll,hardly surprising for a Group 1 ran on what was horrible gluey ground by all accounts,the official going was Soft but a day earlier it had been Heavy,it was drying ground but it was at the stage where you dont really want to race on it and thats why Jockeys decribe it as Gluey.’Frankel’ at his best floats across Good ground and he positively flys across Firmer,I believe on such ground he would have got the 11/2m but on ground like Ascots that October day he would not have.I have explained several times why I wanted to see him run in the Arc,one of which was to once and for all confirm himself as the ‘Greatest of all time’.If Sir Henry knew then what he knows now ‘Frankel’ would have been trained with a 11/2m programme,had he been beaten in the King George then won the Juddmonte and the Champion stakes would he still be rated as ‘The Greatest of all time’? No and would
Dancing Brave
be dropped a ridiculous 3lb for one who did win it? No again………Fortune favours the Brave but it was certainly on ‘Frankels’ side too.only just though!
Its not Rocket Science,the BHB know ‘Frankel’ never ran to a mark of 140 in the Champion stakes but because of his superstar status its good for the old Racing PR to promote him to a Modern day colossus a bit like they do with everything thats getting old hat eh Mac? So what do they do,well there’s only one thing they can do and thats drop
Dancing Brave
,the Greatest horse ever imo to a mark that will give ‘Frankel’ the modern day title…..Simple really…….A bit like those who came out with the idea in the first place!It only took the Muppets 26 yrs to do it like!!
Mind you it did take 27yrs for C4 to realise John McCririck wasn’t rated as highly as he thought too!!Its not Rocket Science,the BHB know ‘Frankel’ never ran to a mark of 140 in the Champion stakes but because of his superstar status its good for the old Racing PR to promote him to a Modern day colossus a bit like they do with everything thats getting old hat eh Mac? So what do they do,well there’s only one thing they can do and thats drop
Dancing Brave
,the Greatest horse ever imo to a mark that will give ‘Frankel’ the modern day title…..Simple really…….A bit like those who came out with the idea in the first place!It only took the Muppets 26 yrs to do it like!!
Mind you it did take 27yrs for C4 to realise John McCririck wasn’t rated as highly as he thought too!!What’s the Champion got to do with his rating? Dancing Brave never ran to his mark in his last race either. That is irrelevant.
You are always entitled to your opinion about who was the best Gord but that is not the question here. The BHA/WTR like RPR and Timeform had Frankel down as
their
best well before yesterday but their ratings system was not able to reflect that.
Never mind – perhaps your Dawn Approach will come along and trump the lot.
PS why do you always put Frankel in commas?
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.