Horse Antepost
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
01 Jun 10
19:52
Joined:
Date Joined:
04 Feb 07
Sometimes it takes the passing of time to appreciate greatness. This horse took on the best over ALL trips and hammered them, especially O'Brien's horses who pitifully followed him around trying to find an off day.
Breeders dream the horse must be producing some amazing animals in future over ALL trips.
Breeders dream the horse must be producing some amazing animals in future over ALL trips.
Show More
A-T,Yes I do agree with you on that,I too think he was outstanding and I'm not taking anything from him at all,she did as you say only meet the colts and older bunch once but when she did it was in the most devastating fashion of her victory coming from where she did.
I do think if he had been in the race the result would be the same as it was back in 08'.
I do think if he had been in the race the result would be the same as it was back in 08'.
I can understand where some of you guys are coming from and you probably don't go back too far with memories but to give you an idea of the strength of expectationand class of past champions here are a few pointers.
Nijinsky ran 13 times winning 11 from 6f to 14f. He won the triple crown easily and wa considered unfortunate in the Arc. In all but one of his races he was odds on and he was favourite for all of them. He had to be retired because he ran 6 times before the 200gns and 8 times as a three year old. Without doubt the St Leger took the edge off him but he was a great champion.
Mill Reef ran 14 times winning 16 and was favourite for 13 of those races. As a 2yo he won the Gimcrack by 10 lengths, Coventry by 6 lengths and Dewhurst by 4 lengths. He easily won the Derby, Eclipse and King George beating top class opposition where the phrase 'daylight was second' was widely used. He beat a brilliant unbeaten filly called Pistol Packer in the Arc and stayed in training as a 4yo but suffered a broken leg. If Brigadier Gerard had been another year he would have been an outstanding champion.
Brigadier Gerard won 17 from 18 from 5f to one and a half miles. Coming from behind or making all. On firm ground and heavy ground. He was odds on favourite 16 times. He beat champion 2 y old My Swallow and champion 3 yold Mill Reef in the 2000 gns and he beat 2 Arc winners during his career. He stayed in training as a 4 y old.
Sea The Stars won 8 from 9 races from 7f to one and a half miles. He was favourite only 5 times. He beat the same horses several times who will have to carry the flag for him this year. He was retired prematurely last year when he had every opportunity to make a claim for greatness.
Throughout their seasons Nijinsky, Mill Reef and Brigadier Gerard were recognised champions whereas STS claims grew over the year. It is a pity he never remained in training but I suspect the owner and trainer were too afraid unlike the owners of the above named horses.
Nijinsky ran 13 times winning 11 from 6f to 14f. He won the triple crown easily and wa considered unfortunate in the Arc. In all but one of his races he was odds on and he was favourite for all of them. He had to be retired because he ran 6 times before the 200gns and 8 times as a three year old. Without doubt the St Leger took the edge off him but he was a great champion.
Mill Reef ran 14 times winning 16 and was favourite for 13 of those races. As a 2yo he won the Gimcrack by 10 lengths, Coventry by 6 lengths and Dewhurst by 4 lengths. He easily won the Derby, Eclipse and King George beating top class opposition where the phrase 'daylight was second' was widely used. He beat a brilliant unbeaten filly called Pistol Packer in the Arc and stayed in training as a 4yo but suffered a broken leg. If Brigadier Gerard had been another year he would have been an outstanding champion.
Brigadier Gerard won 17 from 18 from 5f to one and a half miles. Coming from behind or making all. On firm ground and heavy ground. He was odds on favourite 16 times. He beat champion 2 y old My Swallow and champion 3 yold Mill Reef in the 2000 gns and he beat 2 Arc winners during his career. He stayed in training as a 4 y old.
Sea The Stars won 8 from 9 races from 7f to one and a half miles. He was favourite only 5 times. He beat the same horses several times who will have to carry the flag for him this year. He was retired prematurely last year when he had every opportunity to make a claim for greatness.
Throughout their seasons Nijinsky, Mill Reef and Brigadier Gerard were recognised champions whereas STS claims grew over the year. It is a pity he never remained in training but I suspect the owner and trainer were too afraid unlike the owners of the above named horses.
Apologies for the odd typing error. Mill Reef won 12 not 16.
I'm not knocking Mill Reef at all, I'm sure he was a great horse but there's a tendency to airbrush fine details out of races from years ago, whereas STS's record is put under the microscope. Brigadier Gerard thrashed Mill Reef 3 lengths in the Guineas, did My Swallow really train on? Was Linden Tree (who Mill Reef beat in the Derby) such a great opponent? In the King George he beat Ortis (admittedly very easily), an Italian Derby winner, maybe it was an exceptional year but generally Italian Derbys aren't all that special.
It is easy to pick holes in form Figgis. You can only beat what is put up against you. If I remember correctly STS beat Delegator and Ghan Amras. Delegator won once subsequently disqualified and Ghan Amras is still a maiden. Youmzain and Cavalryman haven't won anything since the Arc and last year Fame and Glory didn't cover himself in either fame or glory. RVW did win a couple of times but was murdered in the US. RVW won the Sussex Stakes and the QE11 but the form of both is not great.
Mill Reef never ducked anything his plan was laid out as the Gns, Derby, Eclipse, King George and Arc. In the Derby he beat Linden Tree and Irish Ball. LT refused to race in the Irish Derby won by Irish Ball.
Mill Reef never ducked anything his plan was laid out as the Gns, Derby, Eclipse, King George and Arc. In the Derby he beat Linden Tree and Irish Ball. LT refused to race in the Irish Derby won by Irish Ball.
brigust1 Joined: 07 Dec 01
Replies: 240 03 Jun 10 18:44
It is easy to pick holes in form Figgis
Which was my point, only you're picking holes in STS's form but glossing over the others.
Replies: 240 03 Jun 10 18:44
It is easy to pick holes in form Figgis
Which was my point, only you're picking holes in STS's form but glossing over the others.
When you read over this thread again,what seems to be obvious is some posters are blinded by those rose tinted spec's.The point I was making is NOT that STS was in anyway inferior to Zarkava overall,as A-T points out he was very well tested and travelled all over the place to gain his success,but that if they both met each other in the Arc'and regardless how many times they both ran or where,on that day at Longchamp the way they both ran,both facing similar quality fields, only one winner,the winner would be Zarkava
It's just an opinion though PD. Facts are the StS Arc win was demonstrably better then Zarkava's - faster time, Vision D'Etat further back - while Zarkava had a 100/1 German horse within a couple of lengths or so.
geoff m Joined: 23 Feb 03
Replies: 670 03 Jun 10 08:21
STS as Zil states on bare ratings you could never rate him as an all time great.
Sorry Geoff, not sure where you're coming from. He is the joint 8th highest rated horse in 70 years of Timeform ratings.
Replies: 670 03 Jun 10 08:21
STS as Zil states on bare ratings you could never rate him as an all time great.
Sorry Geoff, not sure where you're coming from. He is the joint 8th highest rated horse in 70 years of Timeform ratings.
brigust1
It is easy to pick holes in form Figgis. You can only beat what is put up against you. If I remember correctly STS beat Delegator and Ghan Amras. Delegator won once subsequently disqualified and Ghan Amras is still a maiden. Youmzain and Cavalryman haven't won anything since the Arc and last year Fame and Glory didn't cover himself in either fame or glory. RVW did win a couple of times but was murdered in the US. RVW won the Sussex Stakes and the QE11 but the form of both is not great.
Mill Reef never ducked anything his plan was laid out as the Gns, Derby, Eclipse, King George and Arc. In the Derby he beat Linden Tree and Irish Ball. LT refused to race in the Irish Derby won by Irish Ball.
Bit of a contradictory post Brigust ?
I know we've had this conversation a few times on here but....
a few pointers ....
In the 2,000 Guineas you mention Gan Amhras and Delegator, both have dissapointed since. Not sure what has happened to GA at all, but looked a decent 2 yo and then fell apart after the Guineas. Delegator was trained specifically for the Guineas, won the Craven well and was 100 % ready for the Guineas unlike a few rivals, including STS, RVW and MCM, so it was always going to be tough for him later on. Plus he moved to Godolphin, which explains a lot.
You don't mention that Mastercraftsman was in the field either (rather conveniently). Next time out he murdered the Irish 2000 field and then won another group 1 at Ascot in the St James's Palace Stakes.
You say Fame and Glory didnt have a good season.
Well he did hack up in an Irish Derby ( Group 1 ). Poor field, but like you say you can only beat what is put in front of you.
Youmzain and Cavalryman haven't exactly set the Arc form alight. But Youmzain is hardly the most consistent and reliable yardstick is he? PLus, he loves Longchamp. Cavalryman joined Saeed, enough said.
Vision Dtat and Dar Re Mi were both miles behind and have both since won group 1's.
Rip Van WInkle won twice after meeting STS, both in group 1's.
He was murdered in the US, but you surely know that wasn't his running.
Twice Over was slammed in the Eclipse and since won a group 1 and got very close to Zenyatta in the US.
Conduit won two group 1's since being thrashed by STS in the Eclipse including the Breeders Cup Turf.
It's just the way you want to read the form.
It is easy to pick holes in form Figgis. You can only beat what is put up against you. If I remember correctly STS beat Delegator and Ghan Amras. Delegator won once subsequently disqualified and Ghan Amras is still a maiden. Youmzain and Cavalryman haven't won anything since the Arc and last year Fame and Glory didn't cover himself in either fame or glory. RVW did win a couple of times but was murdered in the US. RVW won the Sussex Stakes and the QE11 but the form of both is not great.
Mill Reef never ducked anything his plan was laid out as the Gns, Derby, Eclipse, King George and Arc. In the Derby he beat Linden Tree and Irish Ball. LT refused to race in the Irish Derby won by Irish Ball.
Bit of a contradictory post Brigust ?
I know we've had this conversation a few times on here but....
a few pointers ....
In the 2,000 Guineas you mention Gan Amhras and Delegator, both have dissapointed since. Not sure what has happened to GA at all, but looked a decent 2 yo and then fell apart after the Guineas. Delegator was trained specifically for the Guineas, won the Craven well and was 100 % ready for the Guineas unlike a few rivals, including STS, RVW and MCM, so it was always going to be tough for him later on. Plus he moved to Godolphin, which explains a lot.
You don't mention that Mastercraftsman was in the field either (rather conveniently). Next time out he murdered the Irish 2000 field and then won another group 1 at Ascot in the St James's Palace Stakes.
You say Fame and Glory didnt have a good season.
Well he did hack up in an Irish Derby ( Group 1 ). Poor field, but like you say you can only beat what is put in front of you.
Youmzain and Cavalryman haven't exactly set the Arc form alight. But Youmzain is hardly the most consistent and reliable yardstick is he? PLus, he loves Longchamp. Cavalryman joined Saeed, enough said.
Vision Dtat and Dar Re Mi were both miles behind and have both since won group 1's.
Rip Van WInkle won twice after meeting STS, both in group 1's.
He was murdered in the US, but you surely know that wasn't his running.
Twice Over was slammed in the Eclipse and since won a group 1 and got very close to Zenyatta in the US.
Conduit won two group 1's since being thrashed by STS in the Eclipse including the Breeders Cup Turf.
It's just the way you want to read the form.
TD_Gunner 03 Jun 10 19:12
it's impossible to make that conclusion Prima.
Of course it is TD,but thats what make's plenty to post with after all its only just someone's opinion as A-T points out,but if we use Youmzain as a yard stick with the race and take into account how both ran and coming from there positions I still say she would win.As for time's in races Lammtarra's Derby was a lot faster than many other Derby winners but plenty of people reckon he was only a good Derby winner not a great, lots also say he was only a poor one.
it's impossible to make that conclusion Prima.
Of course it is TD,but thats what make's plenty to post with after all its only just someone's opinion as A-T points out,but if we use Youmzain as a yard stick with the race and take into account how both ran and coming from there positions I still say she would win.As for time's in races Lammtarra's Derby was a lot faster than many other Derby winners but plenty of people reckon he was only a good Derby winner not a great, lots also say he was only a poor one.
of course Prima, would have been an awesome match race with their different styles of running.
Forgot to mention in the previous post that Paco Boy has hardly let down the Sussex Stakes form either.
Forgot to mention in the previous post that Paco Boy has hardly let down the Sussex Stakes form either.
Figgis what does it matter when I joined? What does it matter that I actually saw Nijinsky, Mill Reef and Brigadier Gerard in many races? In fact over 20. It doesn't matter.
I was just pointing out the following these horses had and the extent of their domination. They were talked about all of their careers whereas STS wasn't even mentioned until May 09 and then in undue haste he was rushed off to stud. He didn't even start favourite for almost half of his races.
I am not saying STS wasn't a very good horse and I am sure the 4 year olds representing him this year will put up a good show but he never had the feel of a champion.
Over the winter in the early 70's the talk was all about Nijinsky, Mill Reef, My Swallow and Brigadier Gerard. The flat season couldn't start soon enough.
I was just pointing out the following these horses had and the extent of their domination. They were talked about all of their careers whereas STS wasn't even mentioned until May 09 and then in undue haste he was rushed off to stud. He didn't even start favourite for almost half of his races.
I am not saying STS wasn't a very good horse and I am sure the 4 year olds representing him this year will put up a good show but he never had the feel of a champion.
Over the winter in the early 70's the talk was all about Nijinsky, Mill Reef, My Swallow and Brigadier Gerard. The flat season couldn't start soon enough.
John Oxx is hardly known for courting publicity so not surprising StS had a low profile as a 2 year old. Pretty weird argument to say that this plus the fact he didn't always start favourite somehow detract from his achievements.
Brigust, the date you joined just came up on the copy n paste, wasn't intentional. I agree with you about those horses having done much more than STS as far as 2yo careers are concerned. I'm not sure if it's as possible to achieve that in this era though. Everybody campaigned their horses that way at that time, so it was a level playing field. I think it's more difficult to keep an aggressively campaigned 2yo at the head of the pack when others are gearing their horses more towards its 3yo season. I also think that horses are harder trained these days, they have to be because the opposition is. Therefore I think it would be more problematic to keep them sound if they were campaigned like they used to be.
Courting publicity in the 70's? Are you real?
The hype surrounding everything that moves nowadays is ludicrous and way out of proportion.
Look, I read this thread and thought it might be interesting for you guys to read a little about past champions and how I see a comparison. I never knocked STS I just pointed out a few facts relevent to number of runs etc. Others came back at me stating form not the other way round. Don't be so defensive. If you are not interested then fine by me.
You may have seen these great horses or you may not so just continue as you were.
The hype surrounding everything that moves nowadays is ludicrous and way out of proportion.
Look, I read this thread and thought it might be interesting for you guys to read a little about past champions and how I see a comparison. I never knocked STS I just pointed out a few facts relevent to number of runs etc. Others came back at me stating form not the other way round. Don't be so defensive. If you are not interested then fine by me.
You may have seen these great horses or you may not so just continue as you were.
Zarkava , put Goldikova to the sword and better horse this than any STS beat ! Goldikova will beat RIP in queen anne .Saw her first in bousacc at 2 and she was brilliant ! In my opinion she would have beat STS
visionario, I completely agree with you,at last someone who can look back without those rose tinted glasses and view it more objectively and see the race in isolation rather than the total of their form.
Look it up Mr Toilet Mouth - no horse Goldikova beat least season won a Group 1 that year.
In any event, Goldikova smashed dual Gr1 winner and "best horse on the planet" Gladiatorus.
"Look it up" indeed. If you worked for me, you wouldn't last a week.
"Look it up" indeed. If you worked for me, you wouldn't last a week.
Credit where its due, kirk st. moritz certainly knows just the recipey to start a thread that almosts ends up in a row 
what next Kirk the merits of flower arranging 
Can't you at least resurrect the Steinbeck thread re titled Steinbeck St.James Palace Stakes Didn't He Do Well To Get 5th Will Run Well In Sussex Next Time! 
what next Kirk the merits of flower arranging Can't you at least resurrect the Steinbeck thread re titled Steinbeck St.James Palace Stakes Didn't He Do Well To Get 5th Will Run Well In Sussex Next Time!
brigust1 03 Jun 10 18:44
It is easy to pick holes in form Figgis. You can only beat what is put up against you. If I remember correctly STS beat Delegator and Ghan Amras. Delegator won once subsequently disqualified and Ghan Amras is still a maiden. Youmzain and Cavalryman haven't won anything since the Arc and last year Fame and Glory didn't cover himself in either fame or glory. RVW did win a couple of times but was murdered in the US. RVW won the Sussex Stakes and the QE11 but the form of both is not great.
Mill Reef never ducked anything his plan was laid out as the Gns, Derby, Eclipse, King George and Arc. In the Derby he beat Linden Tree and Irish Ball. LT refused to race in the Irish Derby won by Irish Ball.
Must say I did find this comment fairly amusing,
In those races RVW beat:
Ghanaati - dual group 1 winning filly previously who won both those races in fast times.
Paco Boy - 6 group races to his name before the Sussex and has since won 2 more, 3 of these being group 1s.
Forgotten Voice - the 2009 Hunt Cup winner wasn't as consistent afterwards, but he did get within half a length of the future Dubai World Cup winner
Lord Shanakill - a previous group 1 and group 2 winner, who ran very creditbly in this season's Lockinge.
Beacon Lodge - No world beater and had no chance in this race, but twice a group race winner nonetheless
Mias Boy and Malibu Bay no chance whatsoever in this race
Delegator - Craven winner, Guineas and St James Palace runner up and a DQ'd Celebration mile winner - pretty useful yardstick
Zacinto - fortunate group 2 winner previously and imo ran above himself here, done nowt since
Aqlaam - Group 1 and group 2 winning miler previously
All in all i'd say Rip Van Winkle beat some very good horses in these two races
It is easy to pick holes in form Figgis. You can only beat what is put up against you. If I remember correctly STS beat Delegator and Ghan Amras. Delegator won once subsequently disqualified and Ghan Amras is still a maiden. Youmzain and Cavalryman haven't won anything since the Arc and last year Fame and Glory didn't cover himself in either fame or glory. RVW did win a couple of times but was murdered in the US. RVW won the Sussex Stakes and the QE11 but the form of both is not great.
Mill Reef never ducked anything his plan was laid out as the Gns, Derby, Eclipse, King George and Arc. In the Derby he beat Linden Tree and Irish Ball. LT refused to race in the Irish Derby won by Irish Ball.
Must say I did find this comment fairly amusing,
In those races RVW beat:
Ghanaati - dual group 1 winning filly previously who won both those races in fast times.
Paco Boy - 6 group races to his name before the Sussex and has since won 2 more, 3 of these being group 1s.
Forgotten Voice - the 2009 Hunt Cup winner wasn't as consistent afterwards, but he did get within half a length of the future Dubai World Cup winner
Lord Shanakill - a previous group 1 and group 2 winner, who ran very creditbly in this season's Lockinge.
Beacon Lodge - No world beater and had no chance in this race, but twice a group race winner nonetheless
Mias Boy and Malibu Bay no chance whatsoever in this race
Delegator - Craven winner, Guineas and St James Palace runner up and a DQ'd Celebration mile winner - pretty useful yardstick
Zacinto - fortunate group 2 winner previously and imo ran above himself here, done nowt since
Aqlaam - Group 1 and group 2 winning miler previously
All in all i'd say Rip Van Winkle beat some very good horses in these two races
If Fame and Glory and RVW have good seasons no doubt the detractors will say it was another poor year.
Well yes and no, some of us remember the form of Fame, RVW and Mastercraftsman towards the end of the season = not great.
You can only beat whats put in front of you and for that you can't knock him. It always disappointed that he only ever ran when the conditions suited him and people can dress it up how they want but his owners bottled the Breeders Cup.
Unfortunately we now live in an age where protecting the horse has overtaken the lust for competition. Its not just STS, Zarkava didn't stick around to conquer as a a four year old. I think Montjeu was the last really good horse who wasn't farmed off at the end of his three year old campaign?
As for Mill Reef, great horse but still wouldn't have beaten Brigadier Gerard on anything other than a bog.
You can only beat whats put in front of you and for that you can't knock him. It always disappointed that he only ever ran when the conditions suited him and people can dress it up how they want but his owners bottled the Breeders Cup.
Unfortunately we now live in an age where protecting the horse has overtaken the lust for competition. Its not just STS, Zarkava didn't stick around to conquer as a a four year old. I think Montjeu was the last really good horse who wasn't farmed off at the end of his three year old campaign?
As for Mill Reef, great horse but still wouldn't have beaten Brigadier Gerard on anything other than a bog.
trouble with Sea The Stars was that no-one actually knows how good he actually was. He was obviously brilliant but the rating of 140 ascribed by Timeform is just speculation, albeit, educated and informed speculation. He might have been the greatest as some would have, however he might have been "only" 137.
The top 2 rated horses - Sea Bird and Brigadier G had an advantage. Sea Bird's Arc was about the strongest ever run, with virtually every horse a group 1 winner, and an unbeaten French champion in opposition, yet he won 6 lengths despite drifting across the track. On any sensible assessment of form, this was a towering performance. He should at least have had a hard race against the class of horse he faced in the Arc but he just slaughtered them all.
Similarly the Brigadier tended to be riddent out in his races, and unlike Sea The Stars he was not inclined to stop after hitting the front, so he achieved consistent high ratings. He was, with the benefit of hindsight, unbeatable on good ground or faster over a mile, and his defeat of top class miler Sparkler is again a performance that almost defies belief. Of course his 3 length defeat of Mill Reef was not too shoddy either.
Sea The Stars never had the chance because of his style of running to show what he could really do. If he had had a real top notcher to beat he may well have shown himself in the similar class to the above 2, I think he might have been that good, but he certainly never proved that he was.
The top 2 rated horses - Sea Bird and Brigadier G had an advantage. Sea Bird's Arc was about the strongest ever run, with virtually every horse a group 1 winner, and an unbeaten French champion in opposition, yet he won 6 lengths despite drifting across the track. On any sensible assessment of form, this was a towering performance. He should at least have had a hard race against the class of horse he faced in the Arc but he just slaughtered them all.
Similarly the Brigadier tended to be riddent out in his races, and unlike Sea The Stars he was not inclined to stop after hitting the front, so he achieved consistent high ratings. He was, with the benefit of hindsight, unbeatable on good ground or faster over a mile, and his defeat of top class miler Sparkler is again a performance that almost defies belief. Of course his 3 length defeat of Mill Reef was not too shoddy either.
Sea The Stars never had the chance because of his style of running to show what he could really do. If he had had a real top notcher to beat he may well have shown himself in the similar class to the above 2, I think he might have been that good, but he certainly never proved that he was.
You can dress anything up to look 'great' but you will never know because the owners were not pepared to take that risk. They don't need the money and STS certainly never had a hard career, unlike Nijinsky. So you have to ask yourselves 'why'?
Some will say 'he had nothing left to prove' and others will say he still had 'everything to prove'. Everything emanating from the yard was that he still had a lot to come but was this just hype because they knew he would never race again?
In conclusion I, for one, am not prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt because even his owners were not prepared to do that.
Some will say 'he had nothing left to prove' and others will say he still had 'everything to prove'. Everything emanating from the yard was that he still had a lot to come but was this just hype because they knew he would never race again?
In conclusion I, for one, am not prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt because even his owners were not prepared to do that.
What was the excuse for retiring Nijinksy at 3 then? He certainly wasn't injured.
Nijinsky ran 6 times before the 2000gns and 6 times after. In his second season he ran in a prep race then the 2000gns, Derby, Irish Derby, King George and St Leger. He was beaten in the Arc, some say, and I am among them, Lester waited too long, then he ran again unexpectedly in the Champion Stakes where he was 2nd again. There was nothing else for him to prove and he had completed his career. Everything was thrown into his 2 year old and 3 year old seasons. Alo he was a USA bred who at the time were very precocious and would probably not have improved as a 4 year old.
It is impossible to describe the expectations and rewards he delivered in spades. From his first race, all through the winter and until his last he was a great, great horse and had the number of TV channels been around then the rewards for us as viewers would have been phenomenal.
It is impossible to describe the expectations and rewards he delivered in spades. From his first race, all through the winter and until his last he was a great, great horse and had the number of TV channels been around then the rewards for us as viewers would have been phenomenal.
Well said Brig, one of my bugbears is that Horses are meant to race, i would like to actually see breeding put off until a sire is five
There was "nothing else for him to prove" when he was retired at 3 after 2 defeats? Double standards.
I don't mind having a sensible conversation with you AT but then you start talking rubbish. You have your opinion and I have mine so I think I will leave it there thanks.
Fine just wondered why a horse unbeaten as a 3 year old winning a Group 1 every month from May to October beating all possible rivals has a lot to prove while Nijinsky didn't?
brigust1 Joined:04 Jun 10 10:48
Nijinsky ran 6 times before the 2000gns and 6 times after. In his second season he ran in a prep race then the 2000gns, Derby, Irish Derby, King George and St Leger. He was beaten in the Arc, some say, and I am among them, Lester waited too long, then he ran again unexpectedly in the Champion Stakes where he was 2nd again. There was nothing else for him to prove and he had completed his career
STS ran 6 times as a 3yo, all Group 1s, winning all 6 starts. He beat the best of his generation over 1m and 1m4f and the best of all generations over 1m2f (3 times) and 1m4f, compared with Nijinsky only beating older horses once. How exactly does this leave him with more to prove than Nijinsky?
Nijinsky ran 6 times before the 2000gns and 6 times after. In his second season he ran in a prep race then the 2000gns, Derby, Irish Derby, King George and St Leger. He was beaten in the Arc, some say, and I am among them, Lester waited too long, then he ran again unexpectedly in the Champion Stakes where he was 2nd again. There was nothing else for him to prove and he had completed his career
STS ran 6 times as a 3yo, all Group 1s, winning all 6 starts. He beat the best of his generation over 1m and 1m4f and the best of all generations over 1m2f (3 times) and 1m4f, compared with Nijinsky only beating older horses once. How exactly does this leave him with more to prove than Nijinsky?
Sea The Stars looks better by the race..........
1st Fame and Glory Coronation Cup
1st Fame and Glory Coronation Cup
What does that prove? Fame and Glory simply reversed the Arc form of the other horses.
So frustrating watching the race today, that's exactly how Fame and Glory should have been run in the Arc. Pacemakers(which were there), run with them, hit the front 2 out and outstay the other horses. He only has one race in the locked. Instead Murtagh decided to track STS again which meant he couldn't possibly win the race
So frustrating watching the race today, that's exactly how Fame and Glory should have been run in the Arc. Pacemakers(which were there), run with them, hit the front 2 out and outstay the other horses. He only has one race in the locked. Instead Murtagh decided to track STS again which meant he couldn't possibly win the race
What's your excuse for Sea The Stars letting him have first run in the Irish Champion Stakes?
"Goldikova didn't beat a single Group 1 winner last season"
I hope you've checked your facts since you wrote that. Beat Aqlaam 6 lengths at Deauville who then won Gr. 1 Prix du Moulin.
I hope you've checked your facts since you wrote that. Beat Aqlaam 6 lengths at Deauville who then won Gr. 1 Prix du Moulin.
She beat both French guineas winners elusive wave and silver frost.
ben10 03 Jun 10 13:05
Yep, perhaps the first winner of the modern triple crown.
Whatever that is!.....Can't help it with all the comments on this thread about Nijinsky with some thinking STS still had some to prove, some who don't, one thing stands out a mile is that he (Nijinsky) still sets the benchmark of greatness,all of us acknowledge that, so what is it that sets him apart from STS? For me it's obvious his win at Doncaster and then completing the REAL triple Crown,when we speak about STS isn't it a great shame he was never given the chance to truly become one of those great historic horses one like Nijinsky.
Yep, perhaps the first winner of the modern triple crown.
Whatever that is!.....Can't help it with all the comments on this thread about Nijinsky with some thinking STS still had some to prove, some who don't, one thing stands out a mile is that he (Nijinsky) still sets the benchmark of greatness,all of us acknowledge that, so what is it that sets him apart from STS? For me it's obvious his win at Doncaster and then completing the REAL triple Crown,when we speak about STS isn't it a great shame he was never given the chance to truly become one of those great historic horses one like Nijinsky.
Prima Donna 05 Jun 10 07:54
one thing stands out a mile is that he (Nijinsky) still sets the benchmark of greatness,all of us acknowledge that
As he only won one Group 1 race over a mile, the Guineas, so never faced older horses over the trip, how can you be sure of that?
one thing stands out a mile is that he (Nijinsky) still sets the benchmark of greatness,all of us acknowledge that
As he only won one Group 1 race over a mile, the Guineas, so never faced older horses over the trip, how can you be sure of that?
I hope AT and Figgis watched the BBC1 'Nijinsky' on the Derby item. That is why some of us 'oldies' hold him in such high regard.
I never said I don't hold him in high regard, Brigust, I was too young at the time but I'm sure he was one of the greats. It's just that people are scrutinising every aspect of STS career and every horse he beat, they don't do the same when they talk of great horses from the past.
Can I assure you Figgis I never picked holes in the STS form in my first post. Subsequent posts were as a response to criticism from others.
Can I also add I am not simply defending past 'greats' out of a sense of nostalgia. I was in my 20's when Nijinsky and the others raced and I saw Sir Ivor as well so any opinion I have is based on first hand experience. You had a glimpse today of Nijinsky I remember but it was only a glimpse, at the time it was a full time experience, wonderful.
Can I also add I am not simply defending past 'greats' out of a sense of nostalgia. I was in my 20's when Nijinsky and the others raced and I saw Sir Ivor as well so any opinion I have is based on first hand experience. You had a glimpse today of Nijinsky I remember but it was only a glimpse, at the time it was a full time experience, wonderful.
Figgis 05 Jun 10 10:37
Prima Donna 05 Jun 10 07:54
one thing stands out a mile is that he (Nijinsky) still sets the benchmark of greatness,all of us acknowledge that
As he only won one Group 1 race over a mile, the Guineas, so never faced older horses over the trip, how can you be sure of that?
ben10 05 Jun 10 12:23
Wondered if anyone would pick up on that [Grin]
These comments would both have to go down in betfair history as being two of the most ridiculous ever
Prima Donna 05 Jun 10 07:54
one thing stands out a mile is that he (Nijinsky) still sets the benchmark of greatness,all of us acknowledge that
As he only won one Group 1 race over a mile, the Guineas, so never faced older horses over the trip, how can you be sure of that?
ben10 05 Jun 10 12:23
Wondered if anyone would pick up on that [Grin]
These comments would both have to go down in betfair history as being two of the most ridiculous ever
As usual Prima Donna, you provide no substance to back up your arguments about any horses from the past, it is just assumed by you that "(Nijinsky) still sets the benchmark of greatness,all of us acknowledge that". While at the same time you choose to put STS achievements under the microscope.
Figgis,I'n not aware I have put STS under any microscope with his achievements,if you really do think its just me who acknowledges that indeed Nijinsky does set the benchmark for TB breeding because he was the most perfect specimen combined with his outstanding race record,being the last winner of the TC does set him apart for all the others we have seen for such a long time as the last winner before him was back in 1935.It does take a very special horse who does this.We use this as the benchmark as it is so hard to do,FYI Nijinsky is still regarded as the pinnacle of perfection within the industry,but that is not to take anything away from STS as imo he could of easily won the TC then if he had he may of been held in the same regard as Nijinsky,but as it is Nijinsky still wears the crown.
ben10 what post were you replying to me with?
ben10 what post were you replying to me with?
Prima Donna, in the present era, do you really think if STS had gone on to beat Mastery (remember him?) in the St Leger he would've been held in higher regard than by facing the best Europe had to offer in the Arc and beating them with ease?
Figgis yes I do remember Mastery,that is a good point about the present era,but yes I do think had he won the TC he would of only enhanced his reputation of greatness,I also think he could of won the St.Leger in a hack canter taking nothing out of him,then he still could of gone to Longchamp,his temperament we were always told was second to none so I can't see why not,after all that's what separates truly great horses from just very very good ones,as a breeder his win at Doncaster would not of cost him one single mare that I am sure of.
ben10 Joined: 06 Sep 07
Replies: 1671 03 Jun 10 13:05
Yep, perhaps the first winner of the modern triple crown.
Prima Donna Joined: 29 Apr 09
Replies: 1627 05 Jun 10 07:54
Whatever that is!.....Can't help it with all the comments on this thread about Nijinsky with some thinking STS still had some to prove, some who don't, one thing stands out a mile is that he (Nijinsky) still sets the benchmark of greatness,all of us acknowledge that, so what is it that sets him apart from STS? For me it's obvious his win at Doncaster and then completing the REAL triple Crown,when we speak about STS isn't it a great shame he was never given the chance to truly become one of those great historic horses one like Nijinsky.
ben10 Joined: 06 Sep 07
Replies: 1671 05 Jun 10 12:23
Wondered if anyone would pick up on that [Grin]
Replies: 1671 03 Jun 10 13:05
Yep, perhaps the first winner of the modern triple crown.
Prima Donna Joined: 29 Apr 09
Replies: 1627 05 Jun 10 07:54
Whatever that is!.....Can't help it with all the comments on this thread about Nijinsky with some thinking STS still had some to prove, some who don't, one thing stands out a mile is that he (Nijinsky) still sets the benchmark of greatness,all of us acknowledge that, so what is it that sets him apart from STS? For me it's obvious his win at Doncaster and then completing the REAL triple Crown,when we speak about STS isn't it a great shame he was never given the chance to truly become one of those great historic horses one like Nijinsky.
ben10 Joined: 06 Sep 07
Replies: 1671 05 Jun 10 12:23
Wondered if anyone would pick up on that [Grin]
Figgis 05 Jun 10 10:37
Prima Donna 05 Jun 10 07:54
one thing stands out a mile is that he (Nijinsky) still sets the benchmark of greatness,all of us acknowledge that
As he only won one Group 1 race over a mile, the Guineas, so never faced older horses over the trip, how can you be sure of that?
ben10 05 Jun 10 12:23
Wondered if anyone would pick up on that [Grin]
Sorry ben10 I thought you were agreeing with the point that figgis was implying because Nijinsky did not meet older milers that somehow detracted from him being a true champ'
think as la merde or what
Prima Donna 05 Jun 10 07:54
one thing stands out a mile is that he (Nijinsky) still sets the benchmark of greatness,all of us acknowledge that
As he only won one Group 1 race over a mile, the Guineas, so never faced older horses over the trip, how can you be sure of that?
ben10 05 Jun 10 12:23
Wondered if anyone would pick up on that [Grin]
Sorry ben10 I thought you were agreeing with the point that figgis was implying because Nijinsky did not meet older milers that somehow detracted from him being a true champ'
think as la merde or what
Prima Donna, I wasn't implying that Nijinsky wasn't a true champ, I believe he was. I was just showing that some people rigorously pick holes in horses records in the modern era but don't apply the same tests about runners from years ago that they're comparing them with.
Yeah figgis I know some do,but if you get time look up Nijinskys form and then compare that to last years CHAMPION,you may then agree with what sets them apart.
PD, I still believe that Nijinsky only has the advantage over STS as far as 2yo careers, no contest, Nijinsky proved much more, but STS achieved more as a 3yo, imo.
I would not say StS was greater than Nijinsky (the Triple Crown is a very special achievement) but Vincent O'Brien's horse lost his two last races while StS was an unbeaten 3 year old.
What makes StS so amazing is that he went through the year without a rest mopping up Group 1 races and ended it by winning the biggest race of all. I can't recall the last 3 year old classic winner to claim the Arc that hadn't had a 2-3 month rest mid-summer.
What makes StS so amazing is that he went through the year without a rest mopping up Group 1 races and ended it by winning the biggest race of all. I can't recall the last 3 year old classic winner to claim the Arc that hadn't had a 2-3 month rest mid-summer.
Listen,I understand its good we have different opinions and I respect your view,I think STS was outstanding too but I think they missed a trick not going for the TC we often hear things like why don't they keep him in training or prematurely gone to stud,what a shame with the chance so small of ever having one so good for a tilt at the TC to duck it.Do you understand
Much harder to win the guineas/derby/arc than guineas/derby/st leger.
I'm pretty sure Oxx knows the time of day and has advisors in regards breeding fees etc.
STS would have probably have been 4-1 to win the STS, but connections didn't feel they needed to go that route.
I'm sure they were well aware of the old triple crown, so why do you think they went for the arc?
It's more prestigious?
The guineas/derby/arc is a tougher triple crown to win imo.
The Leger is a group 2 race at best nowadays.
Just because 3 races get given the tag of 'triple crown' doesn't mean it is set in stone.
Times change.
I'm pretty sure Oxx knows the time of day and has advisors in regards breeding fees etc.
STS would have probably have been 4-1 to win the STS, but connections didn't feel they needed to go that route.
I'm sure they were well aware of the old triple crown, so why do you think they went for the arc?
It's more prestigious?
The guineas/derby/arc is a tougher triple crown to win imo.
The Leger is a group 2 race at best nowadays.
Just because 3 races get given the tag of 'triple crown' doesn't mean it is set in stone.
Times change.
Brodie Joined: 20 Oct 08
Replies: 6093 06 Jun 10 14:07
I'm pretty sure Oxx knows the time of day and has advisors in regards breeding fees etc.
If STS had won the Triple Crown his stud fee would certainly not be negatively affected. He would be no less a stallion prospect because of winning the St Leger and Arc than just the Arc. I would also be fairly certain that if he had *only* won the TC and not the Arc he would still be the price he is now.
The level that he was going to enter stud is almost getting above solely commercial operations. He has massive appeal to owner breeders and with top level YEARLING breeders. Foal breeders that are in to stud fees at 80k are rare, as that is a massive amount for the normal pinhooker. Therefore the fact that he wasn't a super-fast early 2yo and had won over further than 12f was never going to affect him.
Replies: 6093 06 Jun 10 14:07
I'm pretty sure Oxx knows the time of day and has advisors in regards breeding fees etc.
If STS had won the Triple Crown his stud fee would certainly not be negatively affected. He would be no less a stallion prospect because of winning the St Leger and Arc than just the Arc. I would also be fairly certain that if he had *only* won the TC and not the Arc he would still be the price he is now.
The level that he was going to enter stud is almost getting above solely commercial operations. He has massive appeal to owner breeders and with top level YEARLING breeders. Foal breeders that are in to stud fees at 80k are rare, as that is a massive amount for the normal pinhooker. Therefore the fact that he wasn't a super-fast early 2yo and had won over further than 12f was never going to affect him.
So why did Oxx opt to go for the tougher race?
Apparently the accepted triple crown elevates a horse to greatness and STS would be regarded as being on a par with Nijinsky.
Why did he take the much harder option of the Arc, for apparently no extra prestige/money?
I reckon nowadays as I said the TC is the guineas/derby/arc.
Why do you think he avoided the St Leger?
Apparently the accepted triple crown elevates a horse to greatness and STS would be regarded as being on a par with Nijinsky.
Why did he take the much harder option of the Arc, for apparently no extra prestige/money?
I reckon nowadays as I said the TC is the guineas/derby/arc.
Why do you think he avoided the St Leger?
blimey I've made 6,000 replies? Jeez, thought I pretty much kept myself to myself!
Brodie 06 Jun 10 14:35
So why did Oxx opt to go for the tougher race?
Why do you think he avoided the St Leger?
Brodie,Cast your mind back and remember Nijinsky went for the tougher race himself, before also running in the Arc'and in those days the St.Leger was a much harder race to win,I feel the reason STS did not run at Doncaster was not that his connections felt he may not stay the trip,more to do with now breeders want faster sorts and he was not a outstanding 2'old (unlike Nijinsky) they thought he may look like a staying plod coming from a stamina laden family,my point was to say that horses of this class come along only occasionally and a shame he was not given the chance to become a historic great,people often criticize connections of top horses for retiring them at 3 due to commercial pressure at racings cost imo STS and his connections are just of guilty of this choosing the more commercial stallion market route above a campaign that would show him to be almost equal to still the one that sets the benchmark.
So why did Oxx opt to go for the tougher race?
Why do you think he avoided the St Leger?
Brodie,Cast your mind back and remember Nijinsky went for the tougher race himself, before also running in the Arc'and in those days the St.Leger was a much harder race to win,I feel the reason STS did not run at Doncaster was not that his connections felt he may not stay the trip,more to do with now breeders want faster sorts and he was not a outstanding 2'old (unlike Nijinsky) they thought he may look like a staying plod coming from a stamina laden family,my point was to say that horses of this class come along only occasionally and a shame he was not given the chance to become a historic great,people often criticize connections of top horses for retiring them at 3 due to commercial pressure at racings cost imo STS and his connections are just of guilty of this choosing the more commercial stallion market route above a campaign that would show him to be almost equal to still the one that sets the benchmark.
the reason he did not go for the triple crown is simple.
no one gives a flying fukk about the triple crown these days .
hope this helps.
no one gives a flying fukk about the triple crown these days .
hope this helps.
This is where we disagree. The St Leger adds nothing to the c.v like the Arc does. The Arc has taken its place in prestige.
STS won what is regarded as the better race nowadays and Nijinsky got beat in the arc but the St Leger was regarded as the most prestigious back then.
I don't think people are blinded by the tag of the triple crown as the be all an end all anymore.
The name of a race is not important if it is hiding horses in it that are not Group 1 standard.
We are all grown ups and hopefully don't get blinded by hype and try to compare form, and STS beating that Arc field silly instead of dawdling passed some plodders places him, to me, as a special horse.
We won't agree and I do understand the need for tradition to add gloss to this sport, but to say STS would be elevated to greatness easier if he'd won a lower standard 3rd race, just seems nonsensical to me.
Anyway, nice chatting, be a long time until we see another one like NJ/STS!
Be lucky
STS won what is regarded as the better race nowadays and Nijinsky got beat in the arc but the St Leger was regarded as the most prestigious back then.
I don't think people are blinded by the tag of the triple crown as the be all an end all anymore.
The name of a race is not important if it is hiding horses in it that are not Group 1 standard.
We are all grown ups and hopefully don't get blinded by hype and try to compare form, and STS beating that Arc field silly instead of dawdling passed some plodders places him, to me, as a special horse.
We won't agree and I do understand the need for tradition to add gloss to this sport, but to say STS would be elevated to greatness easier if he'd won a lower standard 3rd race, just seems nonsensical to me.
Anyway, nice chatting, be a long time until we see another one like NJ/STS!
Be lucky
lol, perhaps you put it better and more succinctly than me preacher!
the race i would love to have seen was sts v zarkava
i was present at both arcs and it would have been hard to seperate them.
i was present at both arcs and it would have been hard to seperate them.
When we now see just what a great mare Goldikova is winning 9 GR1s,perhaps that just shows how brilliant Zarkava was, as try as she did she could not get near her,perhaps people might think that if STS and Zarkava met in the Arc'and if you look at the form, with the ease Goldikova beat Rip Van Winkle,you could say she would beat him as I do.
You honestly think that was Rip Van Winkle's true running?
Dream Eater, Zacinto and Dalghar also beat Rip Van Winkle that day, would any of those get near to Sea The Stars?
Have a rewatch of the Sussex Prima fella.
Paco Boy was beaten convincingly by RVW in that race.
Paco Boy was beaten convincingly by RVW in that race.
No I don't think that was Rip's true running,but it was Goldikova's and my point is that great as she is, she could not live with Zarkava,and I don't think STS could live with her either.Rip Van Winkle and Paco Boy are good but not in that class.
She only beat Paco a neck.
They are BOTH top class and there is not a lot between them.
They are BOTH top class and there is not a lot between them.
They are BOTH top class and there is not a lot between them.
Yes they are but they are NOT in the same class as STS or Zarkava.
Paco Boy has improved a lot from last year and has gone on,perhaps Goldikova has held her form from last year.
Yes they are but they are NOT in the same class as STS or Zarkava.
Paco Boy has improved a lot from last year and has gone on,perhaps Goldikova has held her form from last year.
Well I think Paco Boy and Goldikova performing so well at the moment just shows that STS and Zarkava are all time greats, despite what a lot on here think.
Exactly. The whole Zarkava/STS debates annoys me somewhat. We know they're both great, nobody can doubt that
I couldn't actually give a toss if one could/would have beaten the other tbh
I couldn't actually give a toss if one could/would have beaten the other tbh
I totally agree TD, and think we have been lucky to see them both,some seem to think we ONLY had one great horse from the past couple of years,its easy to forget Zarkava with STS last year,lots on these forums think Goldikova is the next great horse since STS,but for my money Zarkava would beat both of them,she as you know beat Goldikova each time she met her both in the GNS and the French oaks, and each time very easily..
I don't know what Goldikova winning group 1s around the world has to do with Zarkava seeing as she ran all her races on the one track. Zarkava's early retirement is everything that is wrong with flat racing.
Zarkarva great filly but never raced away from Paris and only faced colts once. Not in the same league as Sea the Stars.
Sea The Stars
may have been the greatest - but unlikely.
proven form is better for Mill Reef, Brigadier Gerard and Sea Bird.
may have been the greatest - but unlikely.
proven form is better for Mill Reef, Brigadier Gerard and Sea Bird.
STS is hard to rate from the purist point of view because he always idled in front.
Its fun to speculate and hopefully it will always be done, and if i will play Devils advocate, i could say that Youzmain devalues all the form.............
Its fun to speculate and hopefully it will always be done, and if i will play Devils advocate, i could say that Youzmain devalues all the form.............
Did STS ever do a 9.5 second furlong? No, oh well, it seems Aidan's currently training a horse named SSB who can defeat cheetahs and breaks the land speed record every time he works at Ballydoyle. So I'm declaring SSB the greatest horse ever.
So I'm declaring SSB the greatest horse ever.
A_T 23 Jun 10 22:03
. Not in the same league as Sea the Stars.
O M G
. Not in the same league as Sea the Stars.
O M G
Don't get me wrong, Zarkava is one of my favourite horses. However, the decision to retire her left a sense of emptiness with regards to her achievements. I don't want to spark a national hunt versus flat racing debate, because i like both forms. However, at least jump enthusiasts get to see their favourite horse for more than 12 months, which strikes up a greater enthusiasm and admiration towards the horse from a punter. It's accepted that horses get stronger at 4, yet many of them retire at 3. The only thing i know about Zarkava is that she was the Queen Elizabeth of Longchamp, and Youmzain was Prince Philip.
It's accepted that horses get stronger at 4, yet many of them retire at 3.
That's a good point G'83,I suppose in the end it always come's down to money.
The way Zarkava beat Goldikova and then how Goldikova has gone on to prove herself as top class,imo only underlines just how good Zarkava really was,we will never know if she would beat STS thats a unanswerable question,they were both fantastic runners but imo on that day in Paris I don't think STS would catch her she was totally brilliant with a electrifying turn of foot,I'm not so sure STS could match her's!
That's a good point G'83,I suppose in the end it always come's down to money.
The way Zarkava beat Goldikova and then how Goldikova has gone on to prove herself as top class,imo only underlines just how good Zarkava really was,we will never know if she would beat STS thats a unanswerable question,they were both fantastic runners but imo on that day in Paris I don't think STS would catch her she was totally brilliant with a electrifying turn of foot,I'm not so sure STS could match her's!
Watch Sarafina follow Zarkavas footsteps this year and land vermeille , then arc
and like Zarkava never race anywhere more than a 15 minute drive from her stable door.
an argument nobody can really win.
Dancing Brave was better,though!
Dancing Brave was better,though!
I really enjoyed reading this thread.
The only thing I would like to contribute is that in the '60s, '70s and early '80s the measure of greatness for a UK/Irish horse was the guineas, derby and KG and if you didn't have a miler then it was derby, Irish derby and KG.
Stallion syndication was driven by these races and the arc was certainly nowhere near as attractive from a valuation perspective.
The current elongated flat season has significantly devalued the KG over the last twenty years which is quite sad. It's hard to remember unless you are of a certain age that the KG was the championship race of Europe and that's why those who witnessed Nijinsky's victory(for example)will never forget it. Nijinsky's subsequent defeat in the Arc was unfortunate but certainly far less significant than if it happened today because Nijinsky had already achieved his greatness.
Back then there were certainly far fewer great horses kept in training beyond three and far fewer hyped up group one races and the stud valuations were driven on the basis that a champion two year old who was also a champion three year old was the most marketable breeding option. Certainly the prestige of the middle park and dewhurst was far greater in those days as was ending the year as champion two year old. There was no breeders cup and to all intents and purposes the season ended at the Ledger meeting in September with only the Newmarket meet with the crowning of the champion two year old to look forward to before the winter set in. Being champion two year old and winning the guineas and derby back then was certainly considered more prestigious than winning multiple group one races in a single season.
The Arc has always been a great race but, given that it was not uncommon for a champion three year old to race several times at two, the Arc came very late in the second season and was rarely a target for the very best from UK and Ireland and, as previously mentioned, winning it didn't hit the spot with the US stallion syndicators of that time.
Sure there were a quite a few who attempted to win the arc but winning was certainly not as prestigious then as it is now. The Paris climate in October was different back then and it was most likely to be a bog at Longchamp which certainly didn't suit most of the US breds instead favouring the late blossoming French three year old fillies of the time.
Let's not forget that Alledged easily won back to back arcs in the late '70s against very good fields (and only lost one race in his career when outstayed by Dunfermline in the Ledger) and yet he doesn't even get a mention in any of the threads about the great horses of the last fifty years on this forum. If Alledged won back to back arcs today he would certainly be more highly thought of given the changing fashions of racing.
I can't easily say whether STS would have beaten Zarkava or whether Nijinsky was better than both or either but I am reasonably certain Sea Bird would have beaten them all but that's just my opinion.
All I can say is that all the horses mentioned in this thread accomplished great things in their time and I think it is easy to forget just how much good luck plays in each of their stories. Many of the greats needed the word firm or in some cases soft in the going description for them to excel and I have no doubt that a bit more or less rain in certain races on certain days (particularly the last few arcs) would have significantly changed our opinion of their greatness.
The only thing I would like to contribute is that in the '60s, '70s and early '80s the measure of greatness for a UK/Irish horse was the guineas, derby and KG and if you didn't have a miler then it was derby, Irish derby and KG.
Stallion syndication was driven by these races and the arc was certainly nowhere near as attractive from a valuation perspective.
The current elongated flat season has significantly devalued the KG over the last twenty years which is quite sad. It's hard to remember unless you are of a certain age that the KG was the championship race of Europe and that's why those who witnessed Nijinsky's victory(for example)will never forget it. Nijinsky's subsequent defeat in the Arc was unfortunate but certainly far less significant than if it happened today because Nijinsky had already achieved his greatness.
Back then there were certainly far fewer great horses kept in training beyond three and far fewer hyped up group one races and the stud valuations were driven on the basis that a champion two year old who was also a champion three year old was the most marketable breeding option. Certainly the prestige of the middle park and dewhurst was far greater in those days as was ending the year as champion two year old. There was no breeders cup and to all intents and purposes the season ended at the Ledger meeting in September with only the Newmarket meet with the crowning of the champion two year old to look forward to before the winter set in. Being champion two year old and winning the guineas and derby back then was certainly considered more prestigious than winning multiple group one races in a single season.
The Arc has always been a great race but, given that it was not uncommon for a champion three year old to race several times at two, the Arc came very late in the second season and was rarely a target for the very best from UK and Ireland and, as previously mentioned, winning it didn't hit the spot with the US stallion syndicators of that time.
Sure there were a quite a few who attempted to win the arc but winning was certainly not as prestigious then as it is now. The Paris climate in October was different back then and it was most likely to be a bog at Longchamp which certainly didn't suit most of the US breds instead favouring the late blossoming French three year old fillies of the time.
Let's not forget that Alledged easily won back to back arcs in the late '70s against very good fields (and only lost one race in his career when outstayed by Dunfermline in the Ledger) and yet he doesn't even get a mention in any of the threads about the great horses of the last fifty years on this forum. If Alledged won back to back arcs today he would certainly be more highly thought of given the changing fashions of racing.
I can't easily say whether STS would have beaten Zarkava or whether Nijinsky was better than both or either but I am reasonably certain Sea Bird would have beaten them all but that's just my opinion.
All I can say is that all the horses mentioned in this thread accomplished great things in their time and I think it is easy to forget just how much good luck plays in each of their stories. Many of the greats needed the word firm or in some cases soft in the going description for them to excel and I have no doubt that a bit more or less rain in certain races on certain days (particularly the last few arcs) would have significantly changed our opinion of their greatness.
A_T 26 Jun 10 17:28
and like Zarkava never race anywhere more than a 15 minute drive from her stable door.
That does not detract anything from her performance in the Arc',she didn't just beat her field she destroyed it,coming from her position after missing the break........only a very special horse with a blistering turn of foot of the highest quality could do that, the unbeaten Zarkava did it.
and like Zarkava never race anywhere more than a 15 minute drive from her stable door.
That does not detract anything from her performance in the Arc',she didn't just beat her field she destroyed it,coming from her position after missing the break........only a very special horse with a blistering turn of foot of the highest quality could do that, the unbeaten Zarkava did it.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539