Hey Bold, just wait for the write-up. Not trying to change your mind, but try for once to keep an open mind.

Where would Secretariat be on the list of all time greats w/out his Belmont? His Derby was tremendous, no doubt, and he showed his versatility on the grass at Woodbine. But 1 1/2 miles on the dirt is basically an irrelevant distance. The Belmont has historically had some very big victory margins, as some horses simply want no part of the distance. At 1 1/4 miles, Secretariat might've been favored over The Bid, but I think it wouldn't have been by much.

My mind is wide open ... and the record couldn't be clearer ...

... as a 2YO and 3YO Secretariat was far better than Spectacular Bid.

In 1980 ... as a 4YO ... Spectacular Bid had one of the most ... spectacular ... years any American race horse has ever had.

He was without question one of the ten best American race horses of the 20th century. The Blood-Horse panel put him at #10 ... I think that was too low ... he was definitely in the top 7 ... possibly in the top 5.

Actually the facts point out the SB definitely had the better two year old season.

SB...9 starts, 7 wins, 1 second, two new track records.

Secretariat...9 starts, 7 wins, 1 second, no new records.

Of course you leave out Secretariat's dq.....he was clearly best in the Champaign and while justified, the dq certainly makes a difference record-wise. Track records are nice, but hardly the true measure of a horse. Secretariat's Belmont...well, look at his time for 10 furlongs that day if you question the Belmont distance, not to mention folks who kept the watch on him state clearly that he broke the existing world record for 13 furlongs before he was finally able to be pulled up! At any distance, Secretariat's Belmont was the greatest single performance of the 20th century and probably in racing history!! I love the Bid but make no mistake, he was no Secretariat...only Kincsem can claim to breathe that rare air!

You're completely overlooking the actual record. Spectacular Bid's accomplishments as a 3YO were nowhere near those of Secretariat.

Secretariat smashed all three track records in winning the Triple Crown ... two of those track records still stand today ... 33 years later ... and the other is still a stakes record.

Secretariat also set the world record for 9f ... broke a track record for 12f on turf ... and equalled a track record for 8f in early April of his 3YO year.

Spectacular Bid's only track record as a 3YO came at an oddball distance at Delaware Park. And if winning the Belmont Stakes by a large margin were so easy ... how come Spectacular Bid couldn't do it?

Of course you are referring to his ACTUAL time in the Preakness, not the Official time still used despite proof that said OFFICIAL time was incorrect due to timer malfunction!

Nobody is saying winning the Belmont by a large margin was easy. Its more a matter of how relevant is the distance. We don't race at 12 furlongs on the dirt, other than maybe a few starter allowance races at small tracks. I wouldn't consider Jazil to be one of the top three 3YOs this year just because he won the Belmont.

What "oddball" distance was the Bid's record at when he was at Delaware? If its between 6f and 1 1/4 miles, I say its not an oddball distance.

Nobody is saying Secretariat wasn't great. Just maybe the gap between him and Spectacular Bid isn't as great as many believe.

I was just stating that the Bid had a better two year old season than Secretariat did. And Secretariat should have been dq that day in the Champagne. He didn't set any track records in his two year old season while SB did at 5 1/2 furlongs and 1 and 1/16 mile.

Besides if you play the using the logic of the most wins game, SB actually had a better three year old season than Secretariat did.

Spectacular Bid...12 starts, 10 wins

Secretariat...12 starts, 9 wins

While Spectacular Bid did a better two year old year than Secretariat did, I will concede that Secretariat had the better three year old year although SB also set several track records and won more races in the same number of starts.

Also, SB didn't win the only start at 12 furlongs that he ever had because he was sore. No horse can win over 12 furlongs if they had a safety pin stuck in their hoof the night before. Not even Secretariat.

Also BB, SB actually set a new track record in the Meadowlands Cup at the end of his three year old season too.

You're somewhat distorting the record ...

Spectacular Bid set one track record ... and equalled another .. as a 2YO.

Secretariat finished first in 8 of 9 starts at 2 ... and had one disqualification which was unrelated to his being the best horse in the race.

Their racing styles as 2YOS were completely different ... Spectacular Bid blazing along on the front ... Secretariat loping along at the rear.

Spectacular Bid was one of a handful of truly great race horses in America in the 20th century. Isn't that more than enough? Why go overboard and try to compare him to the two horses who completely rewrote the record books ... and set new standards for the ages ... Man O' War and Secretariat?

One of the greatest conspiricies ever, didn't the great Buddy Delp own a camera? If I was going to try to pull that one off, I'd have a photo...heck that was in the hayday of polaroids....

Right up there with the crap Jose Santos had a buzzer on Funny Cide.

Track records have lost all meaning to me after I saw Greater Good just set one at Churchill Downs.

In the 1970's ... 12f was considered as important ... or perhaps more important ... than 10f.

Both Secretariat and Spectacular Bid ran the distances which were carded ... and Secretariat ran them much better.

8.5f is an oddball distance ... there were no graded stakes races for 3YOS&UP at that distance in the 1970's ... hence track records at that distance could only have been set in ungraded stakes or allowance races ... or by 2YOS.

Does that answer your concerns?

I think it is really hard to compare horses from era to era. The game has changed so much it isnt funny. But it is always good to know the history of the sport. I really think there are too many stakes races, too much important but on a Grade I win and too much importance but in the BC Races. Breeding for speed is the one thing that has made this sport so mundane in the past years. I love how you get a 14 horse field in the Smile Handicap worth $500k and you get a 6 horse field for the Stephen Foster for $750k.

Spectacular Bid also raced at 12f in the 1979 Jockey Club Gold Cup ... another race which he lost. There were no reports of wandering safety pins that day.

In 1979 the Meadowlands was a brand new track ... and new track records were set virtually every night. The 10f record set by Spectacular Bid was at a distance which had only been run once before in the track's history. That's another "oddball" circumstance.

Spectacular Bid equalled the track record for 5.5f ... check it out.

Buddy Delp was/is a great trainer.

He did a spectacular job with Spectacular Bid. He did a great job training one of the best race horses anyone has ever seen ... but he only looks foolish with that nonsensical safety pin story.

Very good observation.

That was purely about that particular decision...please understand I wasn't knocking him as a person or a trainer.

Well, you said he only set one track record in his three year old year and were mistaken so I pointed it out.

He lost in 1979 against the great Affirmed who was an amazing horse and also a four year old at the time. So Spectacular Bid was a three year old racing one of racing's greatest at a time when Affirmed was unbeatable. He won six grade Is that year and never lost again after the jockey switch from Cauthen to Laffit. Spectacular Bid was gallant in defeat in the Jocky Club Gold Cup.

And Affirmed got beat as a 3 year old by Seattle Slew....see why this just runs people in circles? Where's that leave them?

You're correct ... I overlooked it because I've always discounted it.

All true ...

... and that only reinforces my point about comparing what Spectacular Bid did as a 4YO ... to what Secretariat did as a 3YO ... which is what another poster is prepared to do ... and then use it to make incorrect inferences.

This is exactly right. It is basically impossible to compare the two horses' overall careers because the Bid ran at 4 and Big Red did not. They are both so great that any comparison of their 2 and 3 year old campaigns ends up splitting hairs to some degree (as this thread demonstrates) but I am in 100%agreement with Bold Brooklynite on this one.
In my opinion, along with the points that BB has already made, is the fact that in the three biggest races in the sport, Big Red's performance was better than the Bid's in all three, and Sec was running against Sham who was, in my opinion, better than ANY of the 3yo that the Bid competed against.
Don't get me wrong the Bid was one of the all time bests. I would definitely have him in the top 5 horses of the last 50 years, but he was simply not better than Big Red.
If you want to compare a horse favorably to Secretariat based on their 2yo and 3yo campaigns you would have better luck with Citation than with the Bid.

I agree, Citation should never be left out of any discussion of top horses, while I rank him 4th, it was pretty much a coin flip between him and Ribot (#3) for me.

If ... God forbid ... there were no Secretariat ...

... Sham wins the Kentucky Derby by eight lengths ... breaking or equaling the track record ... then wins the Preakness by eight lengths ... again breaking or equaling the track record ... and then wins the Belmont Stakes by 18 lengths ... breaking or equaling a third track record ...

... becoming the first Triple Crown winner in 25 years ... and hailed by all as the superhorse of the century.

Poor Sham .. what a bad year he chose to be born.

Are we rewriting history here, Sham finished last in the Belmont. How would he win by 18.? LOL

I agree totally with BB here...come now Randy, you trip handicap don't you?? Sham was by far the best mere horse in the race, only the god of all horses was better! Sham had run two excellent races, the Derby with a mouthful of blood throughout only to watch Secretariat grow smaller and smaller in front of him, Sham's connections made the only choice they could, they decided to take the race to Big Red in the Belmont. They would send Sham and play "catch me if you can"...unfortunately, the Great Horse decided he felt like showing speed that day, you can't run the first 6 furlongs in 1:09.4 and possibly finish a 12 furlong race!! Unless you are Secretariat of course! Sham ran out of gas, or maybe Secretariat finally simply broke his heart midway on the backstretch and struggled home last...who wouldn't?? Without Secretariat in the race, Sham would have opened up a huge lead while running non-suicidal fractions and had plenty left to the line...this was a great horse in his own right! He simply had the worst timing in thoroughbred history!! I think enough of him to rank him #39...most any other year, he wins the TC!

Well now we are REALLY speculating, but I think it is fairly reasonable to argue that Sham would have won the Belmont if Big Red had not been there.
Sham would not have been running balls out for the first 6f in a desperate attempt to keep up with Secretariat, and therefore would not have been completely fried at the end of the race. Of course this is IMPOSSIBLE to know for sure, but I think BB's claim that Sham would have won the Belmont is not necessarily wrong just because Sham finished 4th.
The fact remains that he was better than any 3yo that the Bid faced in '79.

Somer--I like your list. And everyone can find this and that with the list. Out of curiosity, why do you have Ruffian but not Personal Ensign or Lady's Secret?

not so somer. the geldings connections were invited to what turned out to be a match race between sir barton and man o war. was originally to be a 'threesome'. i've read about this before, and posted info regarding this topic and the fact that mow has suffered an unwarranted black eye...

If you have a little patience ... I'll explain it to you.

What actually happened: Pancho Martin was/is one of the greatest trainers ever ... a deserving Hall Of Famer. He knew exactly what he had in Sham ... a really super race horse. The first time the two horses met ... in the Wood Memorial ... Sham finished ahead of Secretariat in a very weird race won by Secretariat's second-tier stablemate Angle Light. Pancho knew Sham hadn't run anywhere near his best that day ... and when Sham trained brilliantly for the Kentucky Derby ... Pancho knew that he had a horse who would run faster than any horse had ever run in that race before. And he was right ... Sham ran faster than any horse had ever run in the Kentucky Derrby prior to 1973 ... finishing eight lengths ahead of Our Native and Forego ... but Secretariat ran even faster ... defeating Sham by 2.5 lengths. Stunned ... Pancho ran Sham back in the Preakness ... and the exact same thing happened. Sham beat Our Native by eight lengths and broke or equalled the existing track record ... but still finished 2.5 lengths behind Secretariat. Pancho was even more stunned ... how could this super horse ... whom he had trained to perfection ... run faster than any horse had ever run a Derby or Preakness before ... and still lose by open lengths? For the Belmont Stakes ... Pancho instructed Laffit Pincay to throw all caution to the wind ... just gun Sham straight from the gate and go as fast and far as he could. Pincay gunned Sham ... and they ran an unheard-of 1:09.4 for the first 6f of the 12f Belmont ... a suicidal pace which no horse could possibly withstand. No horse except one. Sham showed his "humanity" ... and tired badly coming around the turn ... but the other horse ... who had gone nose-to-nose with him at the suicidal pace ... just kept going and going and going ... until he was almost completely out of sight.

Now ... let's try to figure out what might have happened in the Belmont Stakes ... if there were no Secretariat to get Pancho so frustrated. (Stay with this because there are some calculations involved.)

What might have happened: The Kentucky Derby and Preakness results were amazingly identical ... in both races Secretariat defeated Sham by 2.5 lengths and Sham defeated Our Native by 8 lengths ... and the final time broke the previous track record by 3/5 of a second ... with Sham either slightly beating or equaling the previous track record. Our Native wasn't in the Belmont ... but My Gallant was. Our Native and My Gallant were practically clones ... they finished along side each other three times in their careers. So it's pretty safe to use My Gallant as a proxy for Our Native. So ... in both the Derby and Preakness ... Secretariat defeated Sham by 2.5 lengths and Our Native by 10.5 lengths. Thus Sham was 24% of the distance between Secretariat and Our Native (2.5 divided by 10.5) in both races. In the Belmont Stakes ... My Gallant finished 31 lengths behind Secretariat. If Sham had run his normal race ... he would theoretically have been 24% of that behind where Secretariat would have been ... or 7.5 lengths (24% of 31). However ... becaue the Belmont is 2f longer than the Derby or Preakness ... and Secretariat had the most stamina of any horse who ever lived ... I believe the margin would have been 5 to 6 lengths greater than just 7.5 lengths ... which would put Sham about 13 lengths behind where Secretariat would have been ... and 18 lengths ahead of My Gallant. This also works out well from a time standpoint ... because if Sham finished 13 lengths slower than Secretariat ... he would have shaded or equalled the previous track record ... just as he had in both the Derby and Preakness.

So ... Sham wins the Derby by 8 ... the Preakness by 8 ... and the Belmont by 13 ... possibly breaking ... but definitely equaling ... all three track records.

Superhorse? I think yes.

What a wonderful attempt to rewrite history.
YES! REWRITE HISTORY!!!

Sham was that, a SHAM.
Same as you Bold Fraud.
Nice try!

BB - About Arkle
 

I meant I was impressed with the horse...not you:p

OK, enough of the petty name-calling! I know you have issues with BB and I could give a s-hit but don't call a great horse names just to show your petty nature!! Sham was a great horse with terrible timing...he wins the TC most years, including at least 2/3 of those years it was actually won...lay off the horse!!!

Well, consider this then:
http://www.thoroughbredchampions.com...terminator.htm

I've read more detailed discussions elsewhere but this is a good summation!

To me, the greatest mares of all time are :
1. Kincsem (co-1)
2. Ruffian (16)
3. Personal Ensign (25)
4. Lady's Secret (41)
5. Miss Woodford (54)
6. Imp (55)
7. Fashion (64)
8. Firenze (68)
9. Pretty Polly (69)
10. Regret (77)
11. Miesque (82)
12. Busher (92)
13. Pan Zareta (95)
14. Ruthless (98)
These at least are the ones I included in my top 100 (noted position).