Defining a great horse

The Indomitable DrugS · #1 10-26-2009, 03:13 PM

I'd be interested to know the most important common factors that people prefer when defining a great horse.

Rate the following factors as either... very important, important, not that important, or doesn't matter at all. And pick the 3-to-5 which you think are most important.

Ability as a 2yo
Ability as a 3yo
Ability as an older horse

Ability as a sprinter
Ability as a miler
Ability as a router

Ability as a dirt horse
Ability as a synthetic horse
Ability as a turf horse

Ability to win major races
Ability to beat good horses
Ability to run fast figures
Ability to win with dominance

Ability to stay sound and race often without big time gaps between starts
Ability to carry high weight or give weight away to good horses
Ability to have success as a stallion or broodmare
Ability to be consistant and not go in and out of top form

Ability to handle different surfaces
Ability to handle a wide range of distances
Ability to handle tough trips, bad rides, and unfavorable circumstances
Ability to ship and consistantly run near top form away from home circuit
Ability to have participated in a lot of major races

Ability of the trainer. (for instance ... would you downgrade a horse like Saint Liam because he was 2-for-8 with all failed stakes attempts before getting transferred from a solid trainer to a miracle worker? Or to a more extreme, Would you upgrade the early form of horses like Rachel Alexandra and Rock Hard Ten because they were trained by guys with dismal stats?)

Ability of the jockey.

Competence of the management. (would you upgrade a horse because he was placed in illogical spots? Or to a greater extreme, would you downgrade a horse because he was placed in clever and calculated spots?)

Visual likability. (would you upgrade or downgrade a horse based on flashiness? Flashy type of horses being like an Easy Goer or Arazi. Unflashy types being like a Skip Away .. who was often best when moved prematurely and would grind out steady wins with odd action)

SniperSB23 · #2 10-26-2009, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Ability to win major races
Ability to beat good horses
Ability to run fast figures
Ability to handle tough trips, bad rides, and unfavorable circumstances

These are the 4 that are most important to me.

The Indomitable DrugS · #3 10-26-2009, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Ability as a 2yo (not important)
Ability as a 3yo (important)
Ability as an older horse (important)

Ability as a sprinter (not important)
Ability as a miler (important)
Ability as a router (important)

Ability as a dirt horse (very important)
Ability as a synthetic horse (not important)
Ability as a turf horse (important)

Ability to win major races (important)
Ability to beat good horses (very important)
Ability to run fast figures (very important)
Ability to win with dominance (important)

Ability to stay sound and race often without big time gaps between starts ( important)
Ability to carry high weight or give weight away to good horses (not important)
Ability to have success as a stallion or broodmare (doesn't matter at all)
Ability to be consistant and not go in and out of top form (important)

Ability to handle different surfaces (not important)
Ability to handle a wide range of distances (not important)
Ability to handle tough trips, bad rides, and unfavorable circumstances (important)
Ability to ship and consistantly run near top form away from home circuit (important)
Ability to have participated in a lot of major races (not important)

Ability of the trainer. (important)
Ability of the jockey. (doesn't matter at all)

Competence of the management. (not important)

Visual likability. (not important)

Top 5:

1. Ability as a dirt horse
2. Ability to beat good horses
3. Ability to run fast figures
4. Ability to be consistant and hold form
5. Ability to handle tough trips, bad rides, and unfavorable circumstances

magic_idol · #4 10-26-2009, 03:26 PM

Ability as a sprinter
Ability as a miler
Ability as a router
Ability to win major races
Ability to win with dominance
Ability to handle different surfaces
Ability to handle a wide range of distances

For me a great horse really there are few must have the ability to dominate as a youngster & carry through it's carrier not all 2 year olds go on as some are breed to run early & the rest catch up,being able to handle various conditions are a must i reckon & i do have a weak spot for horses with the Ability to handle a wide range of distances as there are very few like that, I reckon we give the word champion to easily & although i get voted out in arguments about older legends like Phar Lap etc Ability to run fast figures is a must for me if a horse from the past dosnt run the times of current great horses how can it be claimed better ?

CSC · #5 10-26-2009, 03:56 PM

One thing I look for that isn't addressed enough in my opinion is a horse's ability to handle regular racing or the longevity in a career. I do believe sporadic or one off performances can disguise weaknesses, as we touched upon if Arazi had retired after the BC he might have gone down as one of the greats of all time, time and racing are a great indicator in exposing a horse's weaknesses.

The Indomitable DrugS · #6 10-26-2009, 04:24 PM

Arazi's Beyer for his BC Juvenile win was about the same as Jackson Bend's Beyer for his latest Calder win. For him to have gone down as a great horse if he retired at 2... the person defining what a great horse is would have to have these as his top four factors...

Ability as a 2yo
Visual likability
Ability to handle different surfaces
Ability to win with dominance

He would also have to have several factors on the list answered with doesn't matter at all.

Vindication never was beaten as a 2yo - and won the BC Juvenile with a slightly higher fig than Arazi ... he retired at 2 and he's been pretty much forgotten.

Danzig · #7 10-26-2009, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Top 5:

1. Ability as a dirt horse
2. Ability to beat good horses
3. Ability to run fast figures
4. Ability to be consistant and hold form
5. Ability to handle tough trips, bad rides, and unfavorable circumstances

those five....plus add in 'if people compare other horses to you in future, you were a great horse'.

randallscott35 · #8 10-26-2009, 05:19 PM

See Spectacular Bid. The whole freaking package.

RockHardTen1985 · #9 10-26-2009, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I'd be interested to know the most important common factors that people prefer when defining a great horse.

Rate the following factors as either... very important, important, not that important, or doesn't matter at all. And pick the 3-to-5 which you think are most important.

Ability as a 2yo
Ability as a 3yo
Ability as an older horse

Ability as a sprinter
Ability as a miler
Ability as a router

Ability as a dirt horse
Ability as a synthetic horse
Ability as a turf horse

Ability to win major races
Ability to beat good horses
Ability to run fast figures
Ability to win with dominance

Ability to stay sound and race often without big time gaps between starts
Ability to carry high weight or give weight away to good horses
Ability to have success as a stallion or broodmare
Ability to be consistant and not go in and out of top form

Ability to handle different surfaces
Ability to handle a wide range of distances
Ability to handle tough trips, bad rides, and unfavorable circumstances
Ability to ship and consistantly run near top form away from home circuit
Ability to have participated in a lot of major races

Ability of the trainer. (for instance ... would you downgrade a horse like Saint Liam because he was 2-for-8 with all failed stakes attempts before getting transferred from a solid trainer to a miracle worker? Or to a more extreme, Would you upgrade the early form of horses like Rachel Alexandra and Rock Hard Ten because they were trained by guys with dismal stats?)

Ability of the jockey.

Competence of the management. (would you upgrade a horse because he was placed in illogical spots? Or to a greater extreme, would you downgrade a horse because he was placed in clever and calculated spots?)

Visual likability. (would you upgrade or downgrade a horse based on flashiness? Flashy type of horses being like an Easy Goer or Arazi. Unflashy types being like a Skip Away .. who was often best when moved prematurely and would grind out steady wins with odd action)

I am going to make a list of the great horses I have saw. Not that I have read our herd about, but that I have actually watched. Im 24 now and have been following for about 10 years. Clearly I might miss someone....

Bernardini
Point Given
Mineshaft
Barbaro
Rachel Alexandra
Azeri
Sightseek
Zenyatta
Curlin
Street Sense
Medaglia D Oro
Candy Ride
Midnight Lute

The Indomitable DrugS · #10 10-26-2009, 06:17 PM

Who have the popular Internet horses been?

Basically all the Fox Hill Farm horses right?

The Indomitable DrugS · #11 10-26-2009, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

I am going to make a list of the great horses I have saw.

Bernardini - great - but for just about 5 months
Point Given - very good for almost a year - great for about 3 months
Mineshaft - great for about 6 or 7 months
Barbaro - great for about maybe one day against total bums
Rachel Alexandra - all-time great 3yo filly season
Azeri - Never quite great - but very good for a long time
Sightseek - 0-for-5 at Santa Anita.
Zenyatta -
Curlin - Great for 3 races - very good the rest of the time
Street Sense -
Medaglia D Oro - Great for a year and a half. I guess this decades Skip Away
Candy Ride - Great for 6 races
Midnight Lute - Freaky great for 3 races ... pretty blah the rest of his career

Sightseek and Street Sense ... but no Ghostzapper and Smarty Jones?

RockHardTen1985 · #12 10-26-2009, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Sightseek and Street Sense ... but no Ghostzapper and Smarty Jones?

They were both great... I told you I would forget. I can give another list of about 10-20 who have had MULTIPLE great moments, but I would not call great.
Street Sense broke the Juvy-Derby Jynx... Also added the Jim Dandy and Travers to it... Second in the Preakness and Second to a great form Hard Spun in the Turfway race. I think he was great.

I

The Indomitable DrugS · #13 10-26-2009, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

Street Sense broke the Juvy-Derby Jynx... Also added the Jim Dandy and Travers to it... Second in the Preakness and Second to a great form Hard Spun in the Turfway race. I think he was great.

Street Sense won extremely low rated runnings of the Jim Dandy and Travers in close races over the immortal duo of Grasshopper and CP West.

He basically pulled off a Mine That Bird twice ... and was otherwise nothing speical.

RockHardTen1985 · #14 10-26-2009, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Street Sense won extremely low rated runnings of the Jim Dandy and Travers in close races over the immortal duo of Grasshopper and CP West.

He basically pulled off a Mine That Bird twice ... and was otherwise nothing speical.

So the Juvy-Derby does not define Greatness?

NTamm1215 · #15 10-26-2009, 06:53 PM

Street Sense was so not great.

NT

The Indomitable DrugS · #16 10-26-2009, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

So the Juvy-Derby does not define Greatness?

Giacomo beat the last out BC Juvie winner in the Hollywood Futurity - and finished a quickly diminishing 2nd beaten a length to that years 2yo champion.

Remembering Giacomo as a 2yo ... I think he would have beaten Wilko had he run in the Juvie.

To answer your question .. hell no!

Sightseek · #17 10-26-2009, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Sightseek and Street Sense ... but no Ghostzapper and Smarty Jones?

I don't like you.

Dunbar · #18 10-26-2009, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I'd be interested to know the most important common factors that people prefer when defining a great horse.

Rate the following factors as either... very important, important, not that important, or doesn't matter at all. And pick the 3-to-5 which you think are most important.

Ability as a 2yo
Ability as a 3yo
Ability as an older horse

Ability as a sprinter
Ability as a miler
Ability as a router

Ability as a dirt horse
Ability as a synthetic horse
Ability as a turf horse

Ability to win major races **
Ability to beat good horses ***
Ability to run fast figures **
Ability to win with dominance *

Ability to stay sound and race often without big time gaps between starts ***
Ability to carry high weight or give weight away to good horses *
Ability to have success as a stallion or broodmare
Ability to be consistant and not go in and out of top form ***

Ability to handle different surfaces *
Ability to handle a wide range of distances ***
Ability to handle tough trips, bad rides, and unfavorable circumstances ***
Ability to ship and consistantly run near top form away from home circuit **
Ability to have participated in a lot of major races **

Ability of the trainer. (for instance ... would you downgrade a horse like Saint Liam because he was 2-for-8 with all failed stakes attempts before getting transferred from a solid trainer to a miracle worker? Or to a more extreme, Would you upgrade the early form of horses like Rachel Alexandra and Rock Hard Ten because they were trained by guys with dismal stats?)

Ability of the jockey.

Competence of the management. (would you upgrade a horse because he was placed in illogical spots? Or to a greater extreme, would you downgrade a horse because he was placed in clever and calculated spots?)

Visual likability. (would you upgrade or downgrade a horse based on flashiness? Flashy type of horses being like an Easy Goer or Arazi. Unflashy types being like a Skip Away .. who was often best when moved prematurely and would grind out steady wins with odd action)

I put "*"'s by my choices. Toughness and consistency are often undervalued, IMO. I consider Cigar great. On Ghostzapper's best day, he would almost certainly have beaten Cigar by open lengths. But which horse would have won a best-of-11 series over the course of a year? I'd probably bet on Cigar.

--Dunbar

NTamm1215 · #19 10-26-2009, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sammy

i love him but once again he was a horse retired too early. i would have liked to see him and hard spun go another year.

I have a feeling Street Sense would be held in even lower esteem if he had been back as a 4YO. I thought his last four races were pretty forgettable.

NT

The Indomitable DrugS · #20 10-26-2009, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sightseek

I don't like you.

Sightseek is the best horse ever! better?