Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 107 comments are related to the topic:
today showed how superior Kauto is to Denman

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 3 of 3  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 107
By:
flyingbolt
When: 22 Apr 10 00:42
Err you started the thread.
By:
YORKYPETE.
When: 22 Apr 10 00:42
ERR WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING??
By:
flyingbolt
When: 22 Apr 10 00:48
It has to do with the fact that you are comparing a great horse of today with greats from the past and when anyone disagrees with you your response is "Move with the times".

A poor argument.

Goodnight.
By:
YORKYPETE.
When: 22 Apr 10 00:51
ooh I say! and I will say that todays animals/athletes must be superior to those of the past simply because of modern science...try looking at the times (thats mins/secs) hth
goodnight
By:
YORKYPETE.
When: 22 Apr 10 00:53
looks like old flyingbolt has nodded off :)
By:
tobermory
When: 22 Apr 10 00:57
Irrelevant point , just means modern science is better than 60s science.

It is about talent only .
By:
YORKYPETE.
When: 22 Apr 10 00:58
define "talent"
By:
flyingbolt
When: 22 Apr 10 01:02
So you think someone who can run a mile in 3m 56 secs today and is ranked 354th in the world is a better athlete than Roger Bannister or John Landy ?
By:
tobermory
When: 22 Apr 10 01:04
Natural Abilty imo

So if you had a Time Machine and got a 3YO Arkle back from the early 60s and trained him with the methods there are today , you'd think he would improve his times .

Or if Denman etc were sent back to the 60s when they'd just started out!

Because horses running faster times today doesn't mean they are better horses , just better trained horses due to more knowledge about diet ,interval methods, swimming or whatever they do with them .
By:
YORKYPETE.
When: 22 Apr 10 01:05
well I know who I would back in a race....the one with the fastest time and therefore the better athlete.....simple really...hth
By:
flyingbolt
When: 22 Apr 10 01:07
I hope you don't bet on Athletics. You'd do your brains.
By:
YORKYPETE.
When: 22 Apr 10 01:07
thank you tobe for just endorsing what I was saying (not sure if you wanted to prove that Im right but hey ho :) )
By:
YORKYPETE.
When: 22 Apr 10 01:09
flyingbolt 22 Apr 01:07


I hope you don't bet on Athletics. You'd do your brains.

care to elaborate? I find that those with the fastest times eg Usain Bolt/Tyson Gay usually win :)
By:
zilzal1
When: 22 Apr 10 01:09
Listen, its a fact that, Desert Orchid fans, brilliant though he was, never thought he was comparable with Arkle, its probably the people who are desperate to have the"Best" in their era who will do so.

And btw, versatility, toughness and abiltiy to come back for more regardless of going ,trip or too many races etc, Dessie will be a notch above these two
By:
flyingbolt
When: 22 Apr 10 01:10
I find that those with the fastest times don't always win.
By:
YORKYPETE.
When: 22 Apr 10 01:11
ok so Tyson Gay often beats Usain Bolt....you win :)
By:
flyingbolt
When: 22 Apr 10 01:12
Are they the only two athletes you are familiar with ?
By:
tobermory
When: 22 Apr 10 01:13
well you know i wasn't endorsing you ;)

If Denman,Arkle,Kauto had been able to run against each other they would have to have run in the same era , so they would all have had similar training schedules , none of the mwould have been any fitter , and it would come down to abilty only.
By:
YORKYPETE.
When: 22 Apr 10 01:14
Oh dear now you are clearly struggling....ok so Michael Johnson would beat Jesse Owens dth?
By:
tobermory
When: 22 Apr 10 01:16
same with Owens/Johnson

Johnson's talent was backed by 60 years worth of advances in training routines , particulary weight training, and footwear, clothing for running, advantages he wouldn't have had if he'd been born the same year as Owens , so who knows who would have won.
By:
YORKYPETE.
When: 22 Apr 10 01:17
now tobe you are simply stating the obvious
By:
flyingbolt
When: 22 Apr 10 01:23
Usain Bolt is so far in front of his contemporaries he probably is the greatest ever sprinter.

Michael Johnson was likewise miles in front of anyone else in his era. I can't speak for Jesse Owens. Never saw him compete.

What I am saying is that the man with the fastest time does not always win.

Now that is a FACT.

BTW 45 years on Arkle still holds the 3M track record at Sandown.
By:
Viagra Man
When: 22 Apr 10 01:59
Fastest times mean nothing. Look at what horses hold the track record at some courses and they are mere handicappers. It's just that on that particular day the race was ran in such a way on quick ground to produce a very quick time. By no way does this mean that it is the best horse.
By:
Usaidit
When: 22 Apr 10 02:38
horses are bred to accentuate specific attributes,so by default the good all rounder will disappear over time
By:
David Fishwick Minibus Sales
When: 22 Apr 10 02:43
Senna better than Button imo

himself.
By:
Viagra Man
When: 22 Apr 10 02:44
I think Senna was the best ever.
By:
el gato
When: 22 Apr 10 09:50
YORKYPETE. 21 Apr 23:12


Kauto`s versatlity is unique....Arkle would not have won a Tingle Creek, fact



Given that the tingle creek was first run in the 1970s it would have been uniquely difficult for him to do so
By:
neill d
When: 22 Apr 10 11:03
Versatility is key
Page 3 of 3  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com