Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gander
You could never label Big Brown great, but you can use the word great with Curlin? How exactly?
People bash the horses Big Brown has beaten this year, but what about the horses Curlin has beaten? That was the worst field ever in the Dubai World Cup (I dont even think thats arguable). He beat Well Armed and Asiatic Boy. And lets look at who he beat in the Foster...Barcola (couldnt even run a competitive race against Evening Attire), Einstein (nice turf horse but not top class on dirt).
Curlin hasnt been impressive in every race either. He got whipped by Any Given Saturday last summer and that horse wasnt that good. He wasnt impressive in his turf race. He got a perfect trip in the Belmont and still lost to a filly. I wouldnt call any of those races impressive.
By today's standards, I guess I'd call him great. But so is Big Brown too. Whats the barometer anyways? We no longer have real horses like Skip Away and Cigar. So I guess we use Curlin and Big Brown to define greatness?!
|
i don't consider either of them great, by any means. to lower standards to meet the reality of horse racing these days would be wrong, which is why i take the stand i do.
the last couple of years we've had decent horses- i thought last years crop was a deep one-but i don't know that any of those horses, curlin included, really hold a candle to horses we've had the pleasure of watching over the years. contentious doesn't mean spectacular.