RacingPost reports 'Dini done after BC...

[Thunder Gulch]

If true, this is terribly disappointing. Forget all of the talk about how great he may be, without racing again, Bernie comes up short of any all - time lists.

[King Glorious]

While it would be disappointing, I don't think it has any effect on how good or great Bernardini is as a horse. If u think he's great now, why would he need another 15-20 races to prove it? Sometimes, careers are cut short but the brilliance is still evident. In racing, think Landaluce or Ruffian. In basketball, there was Len Bias. Football had Gayle Sayers. When greatness is there, it's there whether u get to see it for five races or 50. I'm not saying whether u have to believe that Bernardini is an all-time great but what I am saying is that if he did what he's been doing for another 20 races and u would proclaim him great at that point, then the talent is there now for u to call him great because if it wasn't already there now, he wouldn't be able to do it in the future. It's my feeling that more races would only confirm further to the non-believers what the believers already know.

YAWN. So who do you like in the Belmont 4th race if it comes off the turf?

[philcski]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

While it would be disappointing, I don't think it has any effect on how good or great Bernardini is as a horse. If u think he's great now, why would he need another 15-20 races to prove it? Sometimes, careers are cut short but the brilliance is still evident. In racing, think Landaluce or Ruffian. In basketball, there was Len Bias. Football had Gayle Sayers. When greatness is there, it's there whether u get to see it for five races or 50. I'm not saying whether u have to believe that Bernardini is an all-time great but what I am saying is that if he did what he's been doing for another 20 races and u would proclaim him great at that point, then the talent is there now for u to call him great because if it wasn't already there now, he wouldn't be able to do it in the future. It's my feeling that more races would only confirm further to the non-believers what the believers already know.

KG these examples you give were all injury (or in Bias' case, drug) related. Bernardini will be retired sound as a bell after EIGHT career starts. At what point do careers get so short that there's no emotional attachments?

I don't doubt his greatness. I've seen it live in person 4 times now. But barring injury, i want to see at least an ATTEMPT at a 4yo career.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by philcski

KG these examples you give were all injury (or in Bias' case, drug) related. Bernardini will be retired sound as a bell after EIGHT career starts. At what point do careers get so short that there's no emotional attachments?

I don't doubt his greatness. I've seen it live in person 4 times now. But barring injury, i want to see at least an ATTEMPT at a 4yo career.

I agree. I want to see it too but not to PROVE his greatness but to just enjoy it over and over. I'm already of the opinion that he's one of the greatest talents that I've ever seen. The only thing I was pointing out was that it doesn't take a prolonged career in order to show brilliance. When it's there, it's usually there from the start. Those examples I gave were to say that it can be there after six races as easily as it can be there after 26. Doesn't take away from the disappointment of not getting to see it longer though. But I don't think a horse's greatness is determined by decisions that an owner makes about where to race him and for how long. Those decisions have nothing to do with his actual ability.

[Gander]

Discreet Cat would get dusted by Bernardini. If Wanderin Boy was running against the same horses Discreet Cat has been beating up on, he too would look like a monster. Gimmee a break. A horse that runs 4 times a year shouldnt even be talked about until he runs in a race with meaning.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Gander

Discreet Cat would get dusted by Bernardini. If Wanderin Boy was running against the same horses Discreet Cat has been beating up on, he too would look like a monster. Gimmee a break. A horse that runs 4 times a year shouldnt even be talked about until he runs in a race with meaning.

And how is that different than the types of fields Bernardini has been facing? LMAO

And why run Discreet Cat in the DWC instead of Bernardini? Makes no sense to me... especially if the Sheik's don't care about the $$.

[Betsy]

If this is true, I can't tell you how disappointed I am. So much for the Sheikh being a sportsman. What, he can't wait one more year for Bernardini's foals? His connections seem to be having such a good time watching their homebred run - I don't understand this rush to the breeding shed when it's clear they don't need the money. Clearly now, even for the Sheikh, it's about establishing Darley/Jonabell as a top stud farm. I don't have a problem with that per se, but he can no longer claim to be a sportsman. I expect Bernardini to win the Classic, but this is a punch in the gut and a real blow to the sport.

I don't think there are any sportsmen left in this game - what a shame. This colt had so much more to give. I'm going to have a difficult time enjoying the run up to the BC now.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Cardus

It's fairly simple to me: Shake Mo wants Bernardini to be his foundation dirt sire. Why not? He has the breeding top and bottom.

Since he wants to win the Derby and do it his way, what better way than to win it with his sire? And an A.P. Indy is more likely to produce a classic winner than a Forestry, no?

Everything I have heard regarding Sheik Mo is that he is a "sporting man"... a sporting man doesn't take his supposed best horse out of training to put him in the breeding shed for no apparent reason... JMO.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Gander

Discreet Cat would get dusted by Bernardini. If Wanderin Boy was running against the same horses Discreet Cat has been beating up on, he too would look like a monster. Gimmee a break. A horse that runs 4 times a year shouldnt even be talked about until he runs in a race with meaning.

I'd be careful about that one. I'm as big a Bernardini fan as anyone, but DC may end up being better.. Seriously.

[sham]

We could pool our money and hire someone to slip in and castrate the horse.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I agree. I want to see it too but not to PROVE his greatness but to just enjoy it over and over. I'm already of the opinion that he's one of the greatest talents that I've ever seen. The only thing I was pointing out was that it doesn't take a prolonged career in order to show brilliance. When it's there, it's usually there from the start. Those examples I gave were to say that it can be there after six races as easily as it can be there after 26. Doesn't take away from the disappointment of not getting to see it longer though. But I don't think a horse's greatness is determined by decisions that an owner makes about where to race him and for how long. Those decisions have nothing to do with his actual ability.

I agree with that. It's just that IMO, if he doesn't win the BCC, who has he faced all season long? I'm sure that some people will look at his last race as the telling race of his career. He really hasn't had much competition this whole time (although it's not his fault.)

Originally Posted by King Glorious

While it would be disappointing, I don't think it has any effect on how good or great Bernardini is as a horse. If u think he's great now, why would he need another 15-20 races to prove it? Sometimes, careers are cut short but the brilliance is still evident. In racing, think Landaluce or Ruffian. In basketball, there was Len Bias. Football had Gayle Sayers. When greatness is there, it's there whether u get to see it for five races or 50. I'm not saying whether u have to believe that Bernardini is an all-time great but what I am saying is that if he did what he's been doing for another 20 races and u would proclaim him great at that point, then the talent is there now for u to call him great because if it wasn't already there now, he wouldn't be able to do it in the future. It's my feeling that more races would only confirm further to the non-believers what the believers already know.

Your concept of "greatness" is a bit more ethereal than mine.

I believe greatness is a function of proven performance ... not of speculation on what might have been. Coulda/shoulda/woulda doesn't count.

As I said in my previous post ... all we can say about Bernardini ... and Lammtarra ... is that they had great 3YO campaigns.

They only faced the best horses available in one random year. The really, really great ones did a lot more ... they beat the best ones around in multiple years ... a much more difficult achievement.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

Your concept of "greatness" is a bit more ethereal than mine.

I believe greatness is a function of proven performance ... not of speculation on what might have been. Coulda/shoulda/woulda doesn't count.

As I said in my previous post ... all we can say about Bernardini ... and Lammtarra ... is that they had great 3YO campaigns.

They only faced the best horses available in one random year. The really, really great ones did a lot more ... they beat the best ones around in multiple years ... a much more difficult achievement.

I agree 100% with this post. Thank you for putting it into words that I couldn't...

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

Your concept of "greatness" is a bit more ethereal than mine.

I believe greatness is a function of proven performance ... not of speculation on what might have been. Coulda/shoulda/woulda doesn't count.

As I said in my previous post ... all we can say about Bernardini ... and Lammtarra ... is that they had great 3YO campaigns.

They only faced the best horses available in one random year. The really, really great ones did a lot more ... they beat the best ones around in multiple years ... a much more difficult achievement.

I can appreciate this sentiment. To an extent, I agree with u. I would call Bernardini one of the all-time greats.......but wouldn't put him in the Hall of Fame. To me, that is a place that should be reserved for those that combined accomplishments with ability and with durability. I think in order to be a hall of famer, u have to have been a champion in more than one year. But simply on ability, I think that can be seen and judged much earlier. That's not to say that I would put a horse up there after just breaking his maiden or winning some nw2x allowance but if u've demonstrated clearly that u are at the top of the game, even if it's only for one year, that's enough for me. Also, even though he might only be beating the best of this year, if he were to win the Classic, he'd be beating some of the best of multiple years. Lava Man was clearly one of the best of last year and some of the 3yo's that he's beaten this year will be among the best in coming years.

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I can appreciate this sentiment. To an extent, I agree with u. I would call Bernardini one of the all-time greats.......but wouldn't put him in the Hall of Fame. To me, that is a place that should be reserved for those that combined accomplishments with ability and with durability. I think in order to be a hall of famer, u have to have been a champion in more than one year. But simply on ability, I think that can be seen and judged much earlier. That's not to say that I would put a horse up there after just breaking his maiden or winning some nw2x allowance but if u've demonstrated clearly that u are at the top of the game, even if it's only for one year, that's enough for me. Also, even though he might only be beating the best of this year, if he were to win the Classic, he'd be beating some of the best of multiple years. Lava Man was clearly one of the best of last year and some of the 3yo's that he's beaten this year will be among the best in coming years.

To me it's the reverse ...

... Hall Of Fame has a lower threshhold than "great."

It's the hall of "fame" after all ... not the hall of "greatness."

[JJP]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

While it would be disappointing, I don't think it has any effect on how good or great Bernardini is as a horse. If u think he's great now, why would he need another 15-20 races to prove it? Sometimes, careers are cut short but the brilliance is still evident. In racing, think Landaluce or Ruffian. In basketball, there was Len Bias. Football had Gayle Sayers. When greatness is there, it's there whether u get to see it for five races or 50. I'm not saying whether u have to believe that Bernardini is an all-time great but what I am saying is that if he did what he's been doing for another 20 races and u would proclaim him great at that point, then the talent is there now for u to call him great because if it wasn't already there now, he wouldn't be able to do it in the future. It's my feeling that more races would only confirm further to the non-believers what the believers already know.

I don't think we can attach the word "brilliance" or "greatness" to Len Bias or any other top of the line college player who never plays a game in the pros. There's been too many so-called "great" college players who were anything but when they tried the next level. We'll never know if Bias would've been great, or a bust.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by JJP

I don't think we can attach the word "brilliance" or "greatness" to Len Bias or any other top of the line college player who never plays a game in the pros. There's been too many so-called "great" college players who were anything but when they tried the next level. We'll never know if Bias would've been great, or a bust.

Perhaps that's true. But I've heard it from some people who's authority I greatly respect that he was the real deal.

[Downthestretch55]

S2s,
I kinda understand what you're saying.
Seems to me that some folks have much more of a problem with the owners than the horse.
Maybe they're unable to make the distinction.

btw...I also hate disguised racism.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

S2s,
I kinda understand what you're saying.
Seems to me that some folks have much more of a problem with the owners than the horse.
Maybe they're unable to make the distinction.

btw...I also hate disguised racism.

You want to call me a racist too????????

Then say it to me.

The internet really makes people brave........and stupid apparently.