Whose was/is the best?

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by sham

I have done the work. Years of work. I too have a list and I have posted it on other forums...along with an explanation as to my grading criteria. Until you do that, your list cannot be taken seriously. Your list may be perfectly fine by your criteria. After all, who can prove you wrong about the relative quality of horses that will never meet on the track.

Who the hell are you to say my list can't be taken seriously? I've made well over 40,000 posts on the ESPN Board over the past 8-9 years and took a large amount of time to list all 100 horses ALONG WITH A DETAILED EVALUATION of each including racing record, awards won, dosage and breeding extracts...all this tied together to explain my evaluation of every horse! I posted this twice...took 4 posts each time due to ESPN limits. In addition, I have repeatedly spoken at great length about my grading philosophy and techniques and now you come along and insult all these efforts without ever seeing them.....because I don't care to go through it all again?? Well buddy, post your list and let folks have a go at it. Been there, done that...it's my list and I stand behind it...think what you want but don't tell me all my work "cannot be taken seriously"

[sham]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Who the hell are you to say my list can't be taken seriously? I've made well over 40,000 posts on the ESPN Board over the past 8-9 years and took a large amount of time to list all 100 horses ALONG WITH A DETAILED EVALUATION of each including racing record, awards won, dosage and breeding extracts...all this tied together to explain my evaluation of every horse! I posted this twice...took 4 posts each time due to ESPN limits. In addition, I have repeatedly spoken at great length about my grading philosophy and techniques and now you come along and insult all these efforts without ever seeing them.....because I don't care to go through it all again?? Well buddy, post your list and let folks have a go at it. Been there, done that...it's my list and I stand behind it...think what you want but don't tell me all my work "cannot be taken seriously"

I was not trying to be adversarial with you. That was not the point of my post. If you have done all this, then why not just suggest a place where I can read it? How am I supposed to know what you've done in the past? I am interested in your grading criteria because I am always looking for ways to improve my own. My query was aimed at seeing if you had ideas I had not considered, not intended to attack your work. Chill out! Sorry I asked.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by sham

I was not trying to be adversarial with you. That was not the point of my post. If you have done all this, then why not just suggest a place where I can read it? How am I supposed to know what you've done in the past? I am interested in your grading criteria because I am always looking for ways to improve my own. My query was aimed at seeing if you had ideas I had not considered, not intended to attack your work. Chill out! Sorry I asked.

and, as expected, the obligatory condescending post telling me to "chill out"...god, folks are so predictable! I made the posts over at ESPN, probably been 2-3 years since the last one...I know some folks said they copied the info but I doubt ESPN still has it on file, they changed their entire format since then. One parting note as this is the last time I will address this...if you don't wish to be seen as adversarial, don't post in a challenging manner.

[sham]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

and, as expected, the obligatory condescending post telling me to "chill out"...god, folks are so predictable! I made the posts over at ESPN, probably been 2-3 years since the last one...I know some folks said they copied the info but I doubt ESPN still has it on file, they changed their entire format since then. One parting note as this is the last time I will address this...if you don't wish to be seen as adversarial, don't post in a challenging manner.

Very well then. Your response indicates that you have much to hide, and I suspect your methods would hold up poorly under knowledgeable scrutiny.

Originally Posted by sham

Very well then. Your response indicates that you have much to hide, and I suspect your methods would hold up poorly under knowledgeable scrutiny.

There is no "method" involved.

Somer is having his own fun time ... making very subjective judgments about horses he knows and likes.

It's literally impossible to compare Flying Childers ... a horse who raced 3 times on turf against a total of four opponents in England 300 years ago and 80 years before the breed was even defined ... to Forego ... a horse who raced 59 times on dirt in America 30 years ago against hundreds of opponents.

Let him have his fun ... we're all entitled to a hobby ... and there's nothing here to take so seriously.

[blackthroatedwind]

Was Flying Childers the one who liked to graze when the race was starting? That one's my personal favorite.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Was Flying Childers the one who liked to graze when the race was starting? That one's my personal favorite.

No ... I believe that was Kincsem ... you know the way those Hungarian mares are ... don't you?