Mellish & Hislop. I am not blind, thank you.

ILWAB, his time performance when winning the Hardwicke was actually better than most Group 1s I've rated. People will point to Duncan holding the form down, it caused me to repeatedly check everything was right at the time, but I had to conclude that Duncan ran out of his skin that day, it occasionally happens in races run at a fast pace, the rest of the field (no mugs, with many of them going on to run well afterwards) were blown away. He had also put up a better than class time performance when winning at Newbury. If Harbinger hadn't won the KG I would've had to go back and downgrade the Hardwicke win, but in view of the performance he went on to put up I believe it was justified. I've no doubts people will continue to crab it though. I just wonder how people who want absolute unequivocal proof about a performance go about their actual betting, they must be continually betting odds on shots.

It certainly was a good performance but lets face it Cape Blanco had just won a terrible Irish Derby only narrowly, the 2nd and 3rd never won a race again. Youmzain in anyones books was enigmatic and Daryakana only ran once more poorly. Workforce had just won the Derby in an unbelievable time so had every right to bounce after that.

I loved it but to put him the same as Dancing Brave and 1lb behind Mill Reef must stand as the most ludicrous Timeform rating of all time, and that is saying something.

ill take your word for it figgis

nice 12/1 shot all the same.

sorry that was your other bet. think he was 5/1 on the day was he? poor aul wf was never the same. not sure he loved ascot either.

Brigust, this is where you let down all your arguments imo, your inconsistent bias against certain horses/races. You point to horses like Cape Blanco etc to hold Harbinger's form down, but you conveniently ignore horses like Mersey, Iades finishing right up DB's arse.

Workforce did win the Arc afterwards but that was a different Workforce that day. Anyway Workforce isn't rated as highly as Excelebration yet he won the Derby in a lightening time and won the Arc.

When the guy at the Racing Post told me Timeform was a commercial organisation he must have mean't '£s' for points not 'lbs' for points.

Now Figgis you say you are a time man what about Workforce?

Ouch!! When I said Dancing Brave was the best race I had seen you pulled me up because I didn't do it on ratings I did it on visuals so I back tracked and said on ratings the '71 2000 Gns was the best I had seen. C'mon Fig be consistent.

ILWAB, yeah he was 4/1, but I thought Christmas had come early and lumped most of it on at 7/2.

nice. great when youre confident about one and theyre a huge price AND they then go on to win like youd hoped

That was below the belt Fig. Arguments? What arguments? I get asked a question and I answer it, I get asked another question and I answer that.I'm not arguing with anyone. And what bias against certain horses and races is that?

I said I loved Harbinger's win but you need to check the form to see just how good it was. It could have been the finest run ever seen. Had, for example Cape Blanco's opponents in the Irish Derby franked his form, Youmzain won the Arc and Daryakana won further races then no-one could question the form but they didn't and they do. You cannot blame me for that.

Brigust, it was a decent time performance by WF in the Derby, certainly better than average for the race, but nothing exceptional as far as time performances go.

I meant you arguments to back up your opinions.

* your

Brigust, so you wanted Youmzain to win the Arc to justify Harbinger's merit? You wanted him to beat an Arc winner showing its best form by 14 lengths? I said it was a great performance, I didn't say he had wings.

The only opinion I have is that I don't think Timeform are right in rating Frankel above Sea Bird 11. By using Brigadier Gerard as a yardstick who is rated 1lb below Sea Bird 11 I hope I make my point clear. I am not disputing Frankel is a great horse I am just pointing out why I think BG and Frankel, at this moment in time should at best be rated the same.

I bet you something, if you asked 100 trainers if next season they would rather train a Frankel or a Sea Bird 11 that all 100 would say the latter.  That is only my opinion of course, I'm not arguing with anyone.

Who is arguing now? It was a figure of speech, had the other runners somehow franked the form then these questions wouldn't be raised. Please don't shoot the messenger. They are only questions, not criticisms. When an organisation like Timeform make statements of fact I believe they should be beyond question otherwise they are guessing too much.

You didn't rate Workforce's Derby time when it was nearly a second faster than it has ever been run in before?

The time was helped by the conditions. As I said it was decent, but I have it 1lb lower than Authorized, who ran the best Derby time performance in recent years, imo of course

Think we all know that Timeforms ratings are about 5lb higher now than they were 10 years ago, it is the same over the jumps. I do still think that Frankel's performances deserve 144+ because we don't know how he will reaxt when pressed because he has not been troubled.

Odd that. I thought Authorized bounced as well.

You may be correct steamship because they want to be different from the RP and BHA ratings. But surely that is a bit crazy? Odd though that you think they are around 5lbs higher and that does seem to fit but not with Frankel. Odd.

I think it's fairly obvious WF bounced to some degree, only an absolute idiot could think he showed his Derby form in the KG, but I still don't see how that detracts from the form.

brigust1 05 Aug 12 17:48
And I am accused of being miopic ffs . And then when I put forward what Brigadier Gerard has achieved that Frankel hasn't and won't achieve and I'm accused of scraping the bottom of the barrel.

One thing is for sure nothing, I repeat nothing Frankel has done so far Brigadier Gerard couldn't have done at least as easily. You can try all you like to pull him apart and find all of the obscure reasons you can to denegrate him but so far Frankel has not achieved what Brigadier Gerard achieved.
And Soft Pawn you are talking rubbish about Mill Reef and My Swallow. Timeform couldn't keep My Swallow on a high rating after his defeat by Faraway Son because Brigadier Gerard easily beat that horse in the Sussex Stakes so they had to down grade My Swallow. Nothing whatsoever to do with his Guineas defeat by Mill Reef. And how on earth do you know Mill Reef wouldn't have been a 140 miler? Are you suggesting Mill Reef couldn't have won the races Brigadier Gerard won? Because if you are you are certainly in a huge minority.

Then you go on to compare a race Frankel won as a 2 year old and an Irish Derby winner with the Mill Reef 2000 Guineas. Ffs Mill Reef won the Derby, Eclipse by 4 lengths, King George by 6 lengths, Arc by 3 lengths, Prix Ganay by 10 lengths and the Coronation Cup. Search though all of Frankels opponents when you have the time and tell me which one measures up to that.

Its not me who is miopic.

Well, where do we begin. Do I think Mill Reef couldn't have done what Brigadier Gerard done?
Thank you Brigust you answered that one yourself, because Faraway Son beat My Swallow 5L, something Mill Reef couldn't do, If he was then he'd have beat Brigadier Gerard 2L in the Guineas.

Ahh you say, Brigadier Gerard easily beat Faraway Son. So where does that put Mill Reef as a miler? Does beating a truely great middle horse by 3L over a mile, make that the greatest performance ever?

This is where your arguments fail Brigust, you're taking a horses highest TF rating and thinking that if BG beats that individual no matter the conditions, trip etc, to be plain fact.

The truth is Brigadier Gerard put up some fantastic performances, but he was beaten and on several occasions was run very very close by no more that decent G1 horses. Frankel is yet to be truly tested, admittedly he is yet to race beyond a mile, that will come, hopefully against tried and trusted G1 middle distance horses in the Juddmonte and Champion Stakes. Then perhaps we can drawn definitive conclusions as to the relative merits of BG and Frankel.

Cut a little slack SP. You are so driven in trying to prove Frankel is better than Brigadier Gerard when no-one can. It is an unknown. I don't know and you don't know. In fact by trying to bring down Brigadier Gerard you are actually also bringing down Frankel. If Brigadier Gerard wasn't so good then how good does that make Frankel? I am just telling you the form. I am not claiming one is better than the other. I have my views but I don't know and the formlines certainly don't tell you. So cut a little slack. Discuss the positive merits ffs. 

And try to remember I am only responding to what you are saying SP. I never brought up Treasure Beach, you did. I never brought up whether Mill Reef would be any good over a mile, you did. I am only responding to what you are claiming. Perhaps I should just leave you to your claims and statements? If Frankel is rated higher than BG that is up to the raters, not me. Whether I believe them or not is up to me just as if BG was rated higher than Frankel whether you believed them or not is up to you.
Any information I put is hopefully to answer any questions anyone has about the relative merits of BG and his successes and failures. I see that as a good thing not being miopic.If anyon can point out where I am being biased please show me.

About Mill Reef and Faraway Son. You obviously have no knowledge of the frm at the time but Mill Reef after winning the Derby dropped back in trip to 10f in the Eclipse and beat Caro. Caro had run against Faraway Son in their 2000 Gns and was beaten but won the race in the stewards room. So Caro and Faraway Son were just about the same horse. Except that over 10f Caro was better, Faraway Son only stayed a mile. Brigadier Gerard beat Faraway Son 5 lengths so I think it would be fair to say Mill Reef would have beaten Faraway Son by at least 4 lengths. After all you think Frankel will be just as good at 10f as a mile so I have every right to think Mill Reef would be just as good over a mile as 10 furlngs. In fact I have more proof than you because Mill Reef did win at 5 furlongs, 6 furlongs and 7 furlongs after all. As I said Mill Reef would have done exactly what Brigadier Gerard did I am certain of that. In fact had BG not been born Mill Reef would be the horse Frankel is being compared with only he would never be considered as good, at this moment in time. Without BG Mill Reef would have won the Guineas, Derby, Eclipse, King George, Arc, Ganay and Coronation Cup before injury intervened. That is something Frankel will never, ever do. 

When you try to employ direct comparisons in form such as My Swallow's defeat by Faraway Son you fail to take into consideration that My Swallow had just been beaten for the first time life after 8 consecutive victores in the toughest Guineas most people believe has ever been run. He was then beaten half a length in the July Cup so some believe he hadn't trained on and some believe he never got over his defeat in the Guineas. It happens.
And you brought up Treasure Beach, I didn't. You conveniently forget in that race Treasure Beach was beaten by Klammer a 108 rated horse. So as TB was a 120 rated horse how does that figure in the scheme of things? And look upon it in the same way you looked at Mill Reef and My Swallow, these thing happen.

And you can criticise and pick holes in Brigadier Gerard's form if you wish because you are obviously miopic about Frankel but only one organisation has Frankel on that rating and by popular consensus they are skewed to say the least. Even the BHA don't have him above Dancing Brave yet. 

Try to gain from the experience. At least when questioned about Frankel and Brigadier Gerard, if you ever are, you can answer those questions honestly and informed, I see nothing wrong with that.

I bet you something, if you asked 100 trainers if next season they would rather train a Frankel or a Sea Bird 11 that all 100 would say the latter.

All 100 ? On what basis ? I can't agree with that Brigust.

OK Andrew that is only my opinion what percentage do you think it would be?

It's all hypothetical anyway Brigust, but in my honest opinion, the majority vote would be for Frankel, although that wouldn't mean they necessarily thought he was the better horse.

It wasn't about which horse Andrew, it was a Frankel or a Sea Bird 11. Not the actual horse. Does that make a difference?

Difficult one to weigh-up the Caro & Faraway Son thing. You say they were about the same horse, which maybe they were in the the spring of 1970 when they raced in the French 2000, after that Caro was campaigned over longer trips and difficult to say what level they are at relative to each other over different trips.

Mill Reef beat Caro similar distance in the Arc as well, so that would seem fair by TF to rate Mill Reef low 140's. If as you say Faraway Son & Caro were about the same that would suggest Brigadier Gerard's TF figure of 144 would also seem fair, although at revised WFA terms you could credit the French horses as deserving slightly higher ratings, I haven't got their TF ratings to hand but think they were both around low 130's. All that being the case, as Brigadier Gerard beat Mill Reef easy 3L in Guineas difficult to say that Mill Reef was as good over a mile as over 10/12F.

Going into to the Royal Lodge Klammer had official rating 99, Treasure Beach 97 so in beating Treasure Beach 0.75L Klammer did exactly what the OR suggested. Treasure Beach has obviously improved with experience and distance. Unfortunatly Klammer has only raced once since, winning the Horris Hill next time out. He may well have turned out into a an even better horse himself but for injury. That Royal Lodge turned out a better race that it seemed at the time with TB winning Irish Derby, Klammer winning G3 next time and even Slim Shady has really found his niche in America winning a G2 contest there.

Caro was rated 133 and Faraway Son rated 130.

From Timeform Racehorse '71.

Caro.
Until he was slammed by Mill Reef in the Eclipse Stakes, Caro was widely regarded a the best horse in Europe at around a mile and a quarter. Certainly those who saw him win the Prix d'Harcourt, the Prix Ganay and Prix Dollar on his first three outings in 1971 were greatly impressed by the style of his victories. That there could be a horse in the world as much as four lengths superior at a mile and a quarter seemed inconcievable at the time.

Faraway Son.
In five top class races from the end of June to the end of October Faraway Son was beaten only once - by Brigadier Gerard in the Sussex stakes at Goodwood. In fact, over distances that suited him, Faraway Son suffered only two defeats all season, the other being at the hands of Dictus (Brigadier Gerard beat him 8 lengths in the Queen Elizabeth 11 Stakes) who beat him by a short neck in the Prix d'Every at Maisons Laffitte in March when both horses were having their first race of the season.

Mill Reef.
Mill Reef's career as a three year old fulfilled all that had been presaged by the best of his performances of the previous season. In winning the 1970 Gimcrack Mill Reef had returned by far the most impressive display by a two year old all that year; he was never off the bridle, pulled his way to the front inside the last two furlongs and strode home ten lengths clear in a manner that had to be seen to be believed. This on top of the eight length win on the bit in the Coventry Stakes suggested that an exceptional horse had arrived on the scene.
Except for losing the 2000 Guineas to Brigadier Gerard, Mill Reef went through the second season unbeaten. In the four races after the Guineas Mill Reef never appeared in any danger of defeat. Without doubt the record not merely of a good horse but a brilliant one.
If Mill Reef was such an exceptional horse how did he ever come to be beaten as a three year old?

Our answer would be that 1971 was a very unusual year in England; there were two brilliant horse trained in the country at the same time. Whether Mill Reef's best performances equalled the best of Brigadier Gerard's is a moot point, for it is extremely difficult to set a true value on Brigadier Gerard's wide margin wins from top class horses.

brigust1
06 Aug 12 08:46

Cut a little slack SP. You are so driven in trying to prove Frankel is better than Brigadier Gerard when no-one can. It is an unknown. I don't know and you don't know.


brigust1 05 Aug 12 17:48

One thing is for sure nothing, I repeat nothing Frankel has done so far Brigadier Gerard couldn't have done at least as easily.





Warning: debating with brigust1 could seriously affect your mental health.

He knows the Brigs form inside out i'll give him that

Treasure beach was beat by frankel at 2 tho, and over a mile. if frankel could beat the derby Irish winner over the derby trip, then i'd be impressed. isnt that how we measure the ability? u dont use races over a mile at 2 when talking about beating derby winners imo.

It's getting to the point now where you have to question Brig's sanity.

How long can he keep up this remorseless and blinkered defence of the indefensible?

not that im not already impressed by Frankels achievements

i think both sides are as good/bad as each other. hes passionate about his horse racing. good to see some intelligent debate on the form for once! neither will ever be proved right but isnt this part the fun bit?these mythical races, breaking down form and ratings, this is what the forum should be all about, not abuse!

I know but FFS its driving him insane now.

you can't have it both ways - you can't argue that BG's form is so utterly conclusive that it brooks no argument and then rubbish all Frankel's form.

Thread will lead to mental problems IMO

Hip, do you not think BG would have won the races Frankel won? That's all I said after all. Considering there is supposed to be nothing between Frankel and Brigadier Gerard on the ratings with Frankel, according to Timeform, rated better then the achievements of Brigadier Gerard only enhance any thoughts you have about Frankel. They are not detrimental at all.

And for anyone to suggest I have mental problems because I am passionate about a racehorses achievements when they then read some of the posts they have made over the last week or so should look in a mirror. This is a horse racing forum where racehorses, past and present can be discussed. I make no apologies for that.

I do not think BG would have won Frankel's Guineas as far as Frankel did , I do not think BG would have beaten Zoffany after that Queally **** up and I do not think BG would have done to Canford Cliffs what Frankel did.

These are only my opinions I cannot prove them and I will not be trying.

I don't think you have mental problems I just think you'd be bloody awful company for dinner as you are incapable of empathising or understanding any views that do not support your own.

that is I suppose a form of madness.

Brigust you are without doubt, relentless. you take all comers on and completely wear them down
The whole debate, while in parts interesting, is futile, can you not just enjoy frankel, as you
no doubt enjoyed the Brigadier. Have you seen a movie called Equus, Starring Richard Burton, I really
think you would enjoy it.

I HOPE THE FCUK FRANKEL NEVER GETS BEAT

I started this thread Hip & Motley if you don't want to read it you don't have to. I'm not stopping you running your business Hip and this is only one thread in thousands and, can you believe it, it's about champion racehorses. I have been on this forum for over 10 years and in all of that time I have never discussed either Frankel or Brigadier gerard. I think it is apt to discuss it now because Frankel only has a couple of races to run. I would go on the other threads but many of them are just mindless and idiotic. So I enjoy horseracing and form, you may think that is insane well, as you say, that is your opinion and you are welcome to it.

Just adding the occasional post brig, as are others too, to add some balance and to
show, other opinions are available. I admire your passion for racing, long may it continue.
Do watch that film if you can, it's all about passion, passion for a horse, not sure you will
like the ending though. Ta

Any positive, non insulting comments are welcome Motley.
And Hip, you probably won't be reading this because you will be reading the really interesting threads on this forum but to think BG couldn't have beaten 113 rated Dubawi Gold by 6 lengths with a 115 rated horse half a length in third is just silly. BG won his Guineas beating a 140 rated horse and a 135 rated horse with a 123 rated horse 9 lengths back in fourth. In fact on ratings, and that is all we have to go by, the 4th horse in BG's Guineas would have beaten Dubawi Gold by 4 lengths and finished only 2 lengths behind Frankel. The clues are there.

I did Equus for English A level.


The film is ok but read the play.

Same bloke what wrote Amadeua.

*Amadeus

Brig, that's thinly veiled now, vile insulting comments, don't go there. We have sorted that out.

HipPriest • August 8, 2012 10:29 AM BST
I do not think BG would have won Frankel's Guineas as far as Frankel did , I do not think BG would have beaten Zoffany after that Queally **** up and I do not think BG would have done to Canford Cliffs what Frankel did.


Very good Priest.......that's made my day.....

Nothing thinly veiled anywhere Motley. That was a genuine comment, made honestly.

Opinions Farrier - as I said in my rider which you didn't seem able to cut and paste.

You should try having some - its very liberating.

BG was without doubt one of the greats, but I think that in time Frankel will be considered to be the better horse, even though it's obviously difficult comparing horses of differing generations. My first visit to a racecourse was to back Jacinth in the 1000 gns (finished 2nd)and I have seen MANY of the greats since (although not BG). Most of us remember the distant past with fondness (the good old days etc) but often a nostalgia trip is clouded by looking at the situation with rose tinted glasses. It's possible that Brigust is the same as far as BG is concerned, but I do not wish to offend him and of course he is entitled to his opinion that I respect.

Out of curiosity, I checked times of all the races that BG and Frankel ran in as 3 and 4 year olds (I don't think they ran in the same 2 yr old races). Whilst times are never conclusive for several reasons, the following table makes interesting reading in that of all the races they both ran in, Frankel comes out best in ALL of them, although I think we should forget the SJP as far as BG is concerned as it was heavy that day.

2000 GUINEAS

FRANKEL                                        1.37.30
BRIGADIER GERARD                               1.39.20

           

ST JAMES PALACE

FRANKEL                                        1.39.24
BRIGADIER GERARD                               1.46.94



SUSSEX

FRANKEL                                        1.37.47 and 1.37.56
BRIGADIER GERARD                               1.41.11


QE 11

FRANKEL                                        1.39.45
BRIGADIER GERARD                               1.41.39 and 1.39.96



LOCKINGE

FRANKEL                                        1.38.14
BRIGADIER GERARD                               1.41.44

You are indeed correct about the SJP Andrew it was on heavy ground.

The Guineas was run on good ground, was BG's first run of the season and of course he wasn't in control of the pace.
The Sussex was run on soft ground, after 2 days of rain the meeting was in doubt but the sun shone on Sussex day.
The QE11 of 2012 if I remember correctly was run on the straight course.
And the Lockinge was BG's (as it was Frankel's) first run of the season. Frankel did have a racecourse gallop and BG's whole 4 year old year was planned around a meeting with Mill Reef in the Eclipse so he wasn't fully wound up. He still gave 22lbs and a 2 and a half length beating to the second horse who had already won two Guineas trials by 6 lengths and 5 lengths. Plus he ran again 9 days later over 10 furlongs at Sandown and he carried 5lb more than Frankel.

I hope that answers your questions.

Of coure your opinion is welcome Andrew whether or not I agree with you makes no odds. I simply put down the facts so that anyone reading this thread can form their own opinions.

Brigust - he wan't offering opinions.

He was , quite politely , offering a series of facts whih to this reader tend to suggest that by any emprical measure Frankel is the superior beast of the two over a mile.

I know you find this difficult to deal with but to my mind times are a far more reliable yardstik (for all their flaws) than the futile task of comparing form lines that are 40 years apart.

Your response is sniffily dismossive and just makes you look even more blinkered.

Andrew times can be deceptive because courses have changed over the years and possibly timing has as well. When the distances of a couple of BG's races were checked officially they showed that in the Goodwood Mile BG actually won by 14 lengths and not 10, the QE11 of 1971 was won by 10 lengths not the 8 he was given and in the B&H at York when BG was beaten the 3rd and 4th horses were beaten 17 lengths not the 10 given. But they are just points in a puzzle.

About racecourses though things have changed with drainage etc, and even at Newmarket the now cut the grass during the meetings that is something they never used to do. It is all so much more scientific now. The new course at Ascot has been graded and the grasses sown are designed to intertwine, progress they call it.

I think you should read his post again Hip and try to have an open mind will you. None of the facts I posted are anything other than facts if you have something material to add please do so but you keep criticising me and this thread yet for some reason you keep coming onto it adding nothing at all.

Brigust using your analysis you must accept your statement that Mill Reef was as good over a mile as he was over 10/12F is in fact erroneous.

You say, based on their run in the French 2000 that Caro and Faraway Son were roughly the same horse, fair enough statement if you accept that they maintained the same level of form or improved at similar rate from 3 to 4. You say that only real difference between the two is that Faraway Son was only a miler but Caro could stay middle distances, so I guess we can infer from this that Caro never improved for a step up to 10+F but was able to maintain his level of form.

If you accept they were the same then Brigadier Gerard 5L win over Faraway Son over a mile is a few lbs better that Mill Reefs 4L win over Caro which is perhaps reflected in BG 144 and Mill Reef 141. This being so one would expect Brigdier Gerard to be only about 1L better over a mile than Mill Reef. The flaw in your statement is that BG easily beat MR by 3L when they met, also I think it's probably fair to say Brigadier Gerard having seasonal debut probably showed improved form over a mile later in his career and so probably never ran to 144 then. This at the most optimistic rating puts the race fit Mill Reef at mid 130's over a mile, probably less, in fact somewhere in the Canford Cliffs/Excelebration area over mile.

That still makes Mill Reef a terrific miler probably a multiple G1 winner over a mile, but clearly using you opinion that Faraway Son and Caro are about the same disproves your theory that Mill Reef was as good over a mile than over 10/12F.

Even if you take into account the changes Brigust mentions those are big time differences.

SP do you think Frankel would win over 6f, 10f and possibly 12f? The rest of your statement is total nonsense you are better than that. You suggest Mill Reef would be low 130's over a mile that is too ridiculous to even discuss when you consider Mill Reef ran 8 times over a mile and less and only 6 times over further. Two of which were over 10f.

If you want to be pedantic why don't we take Brigadier Gerard out of the 2000Gns and make Mill Reef the winner by tree quarters of a length. That alone, with My Swallow rated 135 makes him a 137 rated horse. And if you look at the 4th horse who was 6 lengths behind mill Reef was rated 123. So Mill Reef beat a 123 rated horse by 6 lengths in the 1971 2000 Gns. Frankel beat a 113 rated horse 6 lengths in the 2011 20000 Gns. You work it out.

The 1971 2000 Guineas WITHOUT Brigadier Gerard.

1st. Mill Reef
2nd. My Swallow rated 135.
3rd. Minsky   rated 123.

Distances 3/4 length and 5 lengths.

2011 2000 Gns.
1st. Frankel.
2nd. Dubawi Gold rated 113.
3rd. Native Khan rated 115.

Distances  6 lengths and 1/2 length. 

If you calculate using My Swallow:
My Swallow rated 22lb higher than Dubawi Gold using Timeform ratings/calculations of 2.73 per length means:

Mill Reef would have beaten Frankel by 2+ lengths.

If you calculate using Minsky:

Misnky rated 10lb higher than Dubawi Gold means Mill Reef would have beaten Frankel by 3 lengths. 

And of course Brigadier Gerard finished 3 lengths in front of Mill Reef. You work it out.

I thought My Swallow's rating was reduced to 132 as a 3yo?

It was Figgis because he was beaten twice more after the 2000 Gns. Once when 2nd to Faraway Son in France and the other when 2nd in the July Cup. Minsky never ran again so his rating stood and through Minsky he ran to 136. If you want to use My Swallows final rating that is OK just knock a length off. But I think the 2000 Gns was his best race of 1971, only my opinion of course.

if we just go by times sts wouldve smashed frankel in his guineas.

sts also clocked a faster guineas, eclipse and arc than dancing brave.

he also holds the course record in the juddmonte and the eclipse.

hes the greatest i tell you!

Times are too confusing on turf, I'm sure they have a place but as yet I don't know what that is.

For example at Royal Ascot two races over the same corse and distance within 40 mins of each other produced a result that cannot be relied upon.
Dandy Boy beat Waffle in the Wokingham. Neither has even won or been placed in a Listed race. Yet they finished with a time faster than the Queens Jubilee where Black Caviar beat Moonlight Cloud a whisker and they have won multiple Group 1's between them. Add to that both the Wokingham horses carried more weight than the two Jubilee horses. It would take a huge imagination to think either Dandy Boy or Waffle would beat either Black Caviar or Moonlight Cloud. Therein lies the problem.

So how you can compare races of different years, let alone on the same day, defies belief.

indeed.

HipPriest • August 8, 2012 1:01 PM BST
Opinions Farrier - as I said in my rider which you didn't seem able to cut and paste.

You should try having some - its very liberating.




Wearing womens underwear is said to be very liberating Priest......and can also make you look just as silly.....

Out of curiosity, I checked times of all the races that BG and Frankel ran in as 3 and 4 year olds (I don't think they ran in the same 2 yr old races). Whilst times are never conclusive for several reasons, the following table makes interesting reading in that of all the races they both ran in, Frankel comes out best in ALL of them,

Get a grip guys

Andrew I think you will find there are only TWO races from your list where times could be comparable the 2000 gns and the Lockinge.

The other races were either on vastly different going or on a different course.

Both of the races above were first time out for the season for Brigadier Gerard and it is public knowledge Frankel is a free running horse.

In the 2000 Gns it was Brigadier Gerard's first run of the season and Frankel had already had a race in th Greenham.

In the Lockinge it was also Brigadier Gerard's first run of the season and Frankel had a public racecourse gallop.

If you think that is in any way conclusive then I suggest to look at the ratings I have posted above.

If you think that is in any way conclusive

Brigust, this is the 3rd time I have stated Whilst times are never conclusive for several reasons,

I would say vastly different going only applies to the SJP (as I have already stated).

Yes, Frankel had a public gallop prior to the Lockinge, not surprising considering he had been carrying an injury !

Do you seriously think that BG would not be fully wound up for a classic race and also later for the Lockinge with an unbeaten record to protect ?

We will have another chance to compare times of the same race in less than 2 weeks

Yes I do think he wasn't fully wound up in the Lockinge as stated at the time. And he ran again 9 days later. His whole schedule and demeanor is different to Frankel. And when you consider times at York of course you will know they have carried out extensive drainage works and re-cambering of th bend into the home straight. Lets just see how Frankels times compare with others horses this decade, so far he is well behind I think.

Frankel's times in the last decade:

2000 Gns  7 have been faster.
SJP Stakes  5 have been faster.
Sussex Stakes  4 have been faster.
Queen Anne Stakes 3 have been faster.
Lockinge 5 have been faster.

As I said earlier going by time is an inexact science and cannot prove anything.

SP do you think Frankel would win over 6f, 10f and possibly 12f? The rest of your statement is total nonsense you are better than that. You suggest Mill Reef would be low 130's over a mile that is too ridiculous to even discuss when you consider Mill Reef ran 8 times over a mile and less and only 6 times over further. Two of which were over 10f.

If you want to be pedantic why don't we take Brigadier Gerard out of the 2000Gns and make Mill Reef the winner by tree quarters of a length. That alone, with My Swallow rated 135 makes him a 137 rated horse. And if you look at the 4th horse who was 6 lengths behind mill Reef was rated 123. So Mill Reef beat a 123 rated horse by 6 lengths in the 1971 2000 Gns. Frankel beat a 113 rated horse 6 lengths in the 2011 20000 Gns. You work it out.

The 1971 2000 Guineas WITHOUT Brigadier Gerard.

1st. Mill Reef
2nd. My Swallow rated 135.
3rd. Minsky   rated 123.

Distances 3/4 length and 5 lengths.

2011 2000 Gns.
1st. Frankel.
2nd. Dubawi Gold rated 113.
3rd. Native Khan rated 115.

Distances  6 lengths and 1/2 length.

If you calculate using My Swallow:
My Swallow rated 22lb higher than Dubawi Gold using Timeform ratings/calculations of 2.73 per length means:

Mill Reef would have beaten Frankel by 2+ lengths.

If you calculate using Minsky:

Misnky rated 10lb higher than Dubawi Gold means Mill Reef would have beaten Frankel by 3 lengths.

And of course Brigadier Gerard finished 3 lengths in front of Mill Reef. You work it out.


Again Brigust you analysis is erroneous and skewed to suit what argument you want to make. The point I've highlighted was in your opinion Mill Reef was as good a miler as he was at 10/12F. I think your methodology of taking a horses highest ever rating and then applying it to the needs of your arguments no matter what the race is wrong.

For the purpose of consistency though I'll use your methodology to support my theory that Mill Reef was a significantly better horse over the longer trips. I'll use the 1971 2000 Guineas to prove my point.

First of all at the end of the 1971 season Timeform had Brigadier Gerard 141 and Mill Reef 141 and My Swallow 132. So looking on that bare evidence if we assume that the winner put up his beat or equal best performance on his first start of the season against two race fit opponents, which would be questionable,  then using your lbs per length metric My Swallow comes out at 132 his end of season TF rating. Looking at My Swallow's following two runs you would have to have some element of doubt whether he was in fact capable running up to 132. He was drubbed by Faraway Son in Prix la Port Maillot (maybe excuse after hard Guineas run), then ran much better when narrowly beaten in July Cup by Realm (not find his TF figure, from memory think it was high 120's).

On the evidence of the 1971 2000 Guineas we can surely at best attribute a TF figure for Mill reef over a mile of 134. If you think he was 141 over a mile then you think Brigadier Gerard ran to 149 which while I wouldn't put that beyond the realms of possibility it would seem unlikely at that stage of his career. If however you believe that to be the case, then you go into the realms of Fantasy Island to think of My Swallow at 139.

Therefore Mill Reef's 141 was attributed because of his performances in races like the Eclipse, King George and Arc. On the available evidence Mill Reef was not as good over a mile as at 10/12F. As I stated on a earlier post probably an above average G1 miler of the Excelebration ilk, certainly not in the Brigadier Gerard and Frankel class and would almost certainly have got outgunned over a mile by the likes of Kris, Irish River, Miesque etc.

Using ratings of horses further back like Minsky becomes a bit dodgy. Applying the Minsky principle to Frankel's Guineas. I haven't got access to their TF figures, I'll use official ratings instead which are generally 6/7lb lower than TF and apply your 2.73lb per length. Frankel beat 4th placed Slim Shadey OR 101 by 17.5L, which coverts to a whopping 149 for Frankel using the higher TF scale this would be somwhere in the mid 150's.

brigust1
Date Joined: 07 Dec 01 Add contact | Send message When: 08 Aug 12 20:06 Joined: Date Joined: 07 Dec 01 | Topic/replies: 4,145 | Blogger: brigust1's blog
Andrew times can be deceptive because courses have changed over the years and possibly timing has as well. When the distances of a couple of BG's races were checked officially they showed that in the Goodwood Mile BG actually won by 14 lengths and not 10, the QE11 of 1971 was won by 10 lengths not the 8 he was given and in the B&H at York when BG was beaten the 3rd and 4th horses were beaten 17 lengths not the 10 given. But they are just points in a puzzle.

About racecourses though things have changed with drainage etc, and even at Newmarket the now cut the grass during the meetings that is something they never used to do. It is all so much more scientific now. The new course at Ascot has been graded and the grasses sown are designed to intertwine, progress they call it.

I think you should read his post again Hip and try to have an open mind will you. None of the facts I posted are anything other than facts if you have something material to add please do so but you keep criticising me and this thread yet for some reason you keep coming onto it adding nothing at all.


Brigust I am not criticising you and it it comes across that way i apologise. I fundamentally disagree with your approach - churning out the same form lines in different ways does not overcome my fundamental point - that there is no conclusive answer and if there is one the way to find it is not through the beaten horses. One horse is better than the other or they are/were exactly the same in ability. Our opinions differ but I am trying to explain to you that I accept my view is an opinion. You do not accept that your view is an opinion - you are trying to create an argument based on emprical fact - a fallacy if you will.

Nothing personal but your method sucks because it fails to recognise that this is an intractible problem.

I happen to think I have added a little bit to this thread its just that none of it is what you want to read. Can you address my point that a horse can be the best ever if it only races against platers or will you ignore that for the 4th time?

ttt

Soft Pawn will you please stop saying I am making an erroneous and skewed arguments because I am not. I am simply responding to the skewed and sad interpretation you apply to Brigadier Gerard's races. Every time you come on here you find some wierd and exagerated excuse to criticise this great horse and every time I produce facts to disprove your sad theories you say my argument is erroneous and skewed. Why don't you just come out and say Brigadier Gerard wasn't deserving of his rating. Or that the horses he beat were overated? At least you would be being honest with yourself and everyone else instead of hiding behind your wierd views. All of which I have answered honestly and openly. And then when I answer your silly riposte you have a go at me ffs.

You down grade Steel Pulse and I refer your to Treasure Beach. You downgrade Mill Reef ffs. Now it's My Swallow. And you are including horses like Slim Shady yet completely overlooking the fact that the 113 rated (108 OR)Dubawi Gold beat slim Shady by 12 lengths. And you think Slim Shady ran to form meaning Dubawi Gold ran to 140. Get a life please. Anyone who does that is obviously unable to read the form book. Why don't you try to be positive ffs.

And then you have the timerity to say Excelebration and Canford Cliffs are not only the equal of one another but the equal of Mill Reef. Pull yourself together man. Your interpretaion of form is far too wierd to start with let alone answer.

Why don't you just look at the positives in life instead of knocking every great horse who ran? 

And Hip I am not churning out form lines. Why don't you have a go at the people who are knocking every little thing they can just to try to prove the unknown about Frankel? And your comment about horses beating platers being rated the best horse ever then I don't agree. They can be rated highly I suppose but until they beat something of note then 'no' they cannot. It's a bit like saying Frank Bruno could be rated the best boxer ever because he easily beat all of his opponens until he met Mike Tyson and therfore depriving him of being rated the best ever. No I don't agree with that? But again it's far too hypothetical a question and will not happen.

I suppose the only possible answer to Priest question would be yes...a horse that beats platers could be the greatest ever.

Although it could never be considered the greatest..........this is Frankel's problem.

Soft Pawn I have pointed out several occasions where, according to Timeform's own rating system, Brigadier Gerard performed to a higher rating than Frankel. I am not saying he deserves to be rated higher but neither am I saying Frankel should be rated higher.

In the 2000 Gns, you keep rubbishing it, it is not inconcievable Mill Reef, My Swallow and Minsky ran to their ratings with the 122 rated Good Bond 12 lengths adrift. With Minsky on 123 beaten 5 lengths by My Swallow it would give My Swallow a rating of 136. Considering after two more races where he finished 2nd and was then retired and eventually rated 132 is not beyond the bounds of reality that they dropped him 4lbs. Similarly Mill Reef beat My Swallow by three quarters of length he therefore ran to a mark of 138. Considering he ended his 3 year old career on 141, running to 138 in the 2000 Guineas is certainly not outside the bounds of reality.

I have always and consistently contested the rating Timeform has given to Brigadier Gerard and have produced several races showing they have, in fact, not rated BG the same way as they have rated Frankel. And the reason for this, I believe, is because they did not want to rate a horse higher than Sea Bird 11 and by giving Sea Bird 11 a rating of only 145, it should have been much higher and in the low 150's, they had tied their hand behind their backs. In fact I have sent my calculations to Timeform for them to explain to me why they have done this and here they get their calculations from. 

Sea Bird 11
The reason I think Sea Bird 11 was rated wrongly by Timeform from the very beginning was because in his Arc de Triomphe he beat 137 rated, hitherto unbeaten, Reliance by 6 lengths in a canter with the 130 rated Diatome a further 5 lengths in third. Reliance was confirming form with Diatome. Through Reliance he should be rated 151 and through Diatome he should have been rated 154. When you consider Sea Bird 11 beat a 130 rated horse 11 lengths into third and compare it with supposedly Frankel's greatest success where, in the Queen Anne he beat 115 rated Side Glance the same 11 lengths into third shows quite clearly how Timeform have completely lost the plot.

Brigust, you really have no conception of how to apply rating, your misguided and utterly blinkered view is bewildering beyond belief.

First of all I haven't said that Canford Cliffs or Excelebration are superior to Mill Reef, rather I've submitted evidence that on all available imformation that he could only be considered on a par with those colts over a mile.

As for the 1971 2000 Guineas, yes it is beyond the possiblity that they all ran to their TF ratings as explained previously. You are now going beyond rediculous including Good Bond in your calculataions.

To prove how rediculous going further back to beaten horses is, Pathfork a dual G1 winner(and incidently the 1st horse home that was not held up off the pace according the the RP) had an official rating of 120
going into the Guineas, he was beaten 26L, that would mean Frankel ran to an OR of 191 or in TF terms nearly 200!!

You're interpretations seem to take that every horse runs to their highest ever rating every time and you take that as matter of fact, therefore do you take as matter of fact that Frankel should rated as near 200 on a line through a dual G1 winner. No, I thought not, but thats the nonsense you constantly regurgitate.

Admit defeat Brigust, Answer this question. On all know evidence was Mill Reef as good over a mile as over 10/12F. I don't want any spiel what he did or didn't do, on the evidence presented before you was Mill Reef a 141 TF rated miler? Your credidibility depends on your answer.

I think your latest post Soft Pawn shows just what kind of argumentative and deluded individual you are. You bring up horses like Slim Shadey as a guide and I respond with Good Bond simply to show how ridiculous you are becoming and you attack me for bringing up Good Bond. Get a life you silly man.
The above utterance, and that is giving it more credit than it deserves, shows particularly just how you have no concept of horse racing or ratings. You dive about here and there to find any diverse reason you can to belittle Brigadier Gerard while at the very same time you what a good horse he was.
Every post I make is a response to one or other ridiculous claim you make so I will not continue with this one sided silly attack by you. If you cannot accept that Brigadier Gerard deserves to be rated at least the same as Frankel that is your problem, you live with it.

Soft pawn you don't seem like a bad lad but you keep coming up with some absolute beauties.....

To suggest that Canford or Excelebration were on a par with Mill Reef over any trip is lunacy.....i don't think you realise

just how quick he was as a two year old.....to win a coventry by six lengths and a grimcrack by ten!.........what has

Excelebration done to be mentioned in the same sentence?........Canford at least could be considered an above average miler
but thats all.
Forget about TF ratings,they are just meaningless ramblings from an outdated tipping service, there is just no way to compare

Frankel to the Brigadier and that is no fault of Frankels btw.

Brigust, you are shying away from my question. You said that Mill Reef was as good over a mile than over 10/12F. I have provided evidence that this is not so. Both horses were rated 141 by TF at the end of their 3 year-old careers, yet Brigadier Gerard beat him 3L easily over a mile. It was Brigadier Gerard's seasonal debut, so although possible he showed his best that day it was probable that he improved later.

My Swallow was rated 132 at the end of 1971, this is by virtue of how close he was to BG on Guineas day, his other form through 1971 was way below 132.

So we have on all available evidence that at best Mill Reef was somewhere in the mid TF 130's probably lower, and the likely thing is that BG improved later so probably didn't run to 141 on that occasion and My Swallow never ran close to 132 in his other starts in 1971.

Please Brigust, accept you're wrong, I've provided the evidence based on all available information that 141 rated Mill Reef coudn't be the same horse as 141 rated Brigadier Gerard over a mile.

As for you topfarrier, I don't think as TF as empirical evidence, but they are a very well respected organization that have been rating horses for over 60yrs and it is Brigust that keeps quoting their ratings.

Topfarrier you say that Canford Cliffs and Excelebration aren't fit to be mentioned in the same breath as Mill Reef, you are falling into the same mistake as Brigust. I'm not saying that they are better that Mill Reef, just that at best over a mile Mill Reef was on all available avidence about on a par with those two colts.

Again Brigust, I ask you to justify your statement Mill Reef was as good a miler than at 10/12F.

Brigust, I implore you to deal with the available evidence, please do not ignore my question, was Mill Reef as good over a mile as over 10/12F.

mill reefs gimcrack was outrageous, nothing canford excelbration or any other 2 yr old since has come close too! arazi's bc is close bit mill reefs was better imo


bg v frankel...... i just dont know but on performances on the track that we can all judge them by and not the 'supposed' ability that they have apparently in the locker bg has to be the winner.

in actual race ? who knows but bg proved more, not frankels fault i suppose but still....!

SP why do you keep coming on here talking rubbish. I don't have to prove anything to you. It is what I believe that matters to me not what you think. You have proved absolutely and conclusively nothing because you don't know.
And stop imploring me and begging me to listen to the utter rubbish you come out with night after night. I have tried, goodness knows I have tried but you obviously spend all day dreaming up some wierd and onderful schemes based  on absolutely nothing and all it is is utter rubbish and I really haven't the time available to educate you.
If you think Canford Cliffs and Excelebration are/were as good at a mile as Mill Reef that is your problem not mine, live with it.
This is supposed to be a forum where ideas and thoughts are discussed it is not a platform for you to disabuse great horses and though I have sent a lot of time answering your strange thoughts I have to accept you are beyond me.

Brigust, Don't try to patronise me, I'll ask once again "On all available evidence, was Mill Reef as good over a mile as over 10/12F"?

This was your statement, I've provided evidence to back up my argument, you keep telling me I'm talking rubbish and I'm weird, if so back up your statement with facts. Winning the Gimcrack at 2 by 10L on heavy ground from a fast ground horse is not empirical fact that he was as good over a mile as at 10/12F.

Please tell me how on all avaible evidence that Mill Reef was as good over a mile at 3 than Brigadier Gerard, thats the S#ite you're coming up with.

Soft Pawn ffs give it a rest. Mill Reef only ran once over a mile, twice over 10 furlongs and 4 times over 12 furlongs. I don't know but what I have shown you is how Mill Reef, through the 1971 2000Gns without Brigadier Gerard, would have beaten Frankel on Timeform ratings. With Mill Reef beating My Swallow (135) and Minsky (123)compared with Frankel beating Dubawi Gold (113)and Native Khan (115). So logically I have already proved beyond doubt that Mill Reef was better than Canford Cliffs and Excelebration. You just only read what you want to read. You add it up ffs.
That is proof.
That is an empirical fact.
If you don't like it, whatever you do, don't confuse me with someone who cares what you think because you completely avoid the points I have made and are just argumentative and destructive just for the sake of it.

I have also shown you through the Timeform rating system how Brigadier Gerard should be rated higher than Frankel in both the 2000 Gns and the QE11 '72.
I have shown you through the Timeform rating system how Sea Bird 11 should be rated much higher than Frankel where, in the Arc de Triomhe he beat Reliance rated 137 and Diatome rated 130 by 11 lengths compared with the Queen Anne of 2012 where Frankel beat Side Glance rated 115 by 11 lengths.

I have nothing against Frankel but I have a huge question mark against the Timeform rating system. That is my gripe.

Brigust, If yout gripe is against Timeform why do continually use them as a reference for the ability of BG, Mill Reef, Sea Bird etc. I'm only replying to you using your reference material.

I feel I must correct you, My Swallow was rated 132 by Timeform at 3, this by virtue of how close he was to BG in the Guineas, none of his others starts at 3 were close to 132, therefore there is an element of doubt whether he could could have been at that level in the Guineas. BG ended 1971 at 141, again there must be an element of doubt whether he put up his best performance of 1971 in his first start of the season. If we are to believe BG and My Swallow did run up to their best that day then the best we attribute to Mill Reef over the mile is 134, do you not agree with that empirical fact.

If that is true then I'd be correct in my assessment that over a mile Mill Reef was about the same level as Canford Cliffs. Do you accept my analysis?

Sorry but I have just now joined in this thread and couldn't be bothered to plough through all the posts so apologies if anyone has posted this already.

Surely it's impossible to decide who is best from generation to generation, so why not simply refer to each of the champs from the different generations as "all time greats".

Nobody can possibly doubt that the Brigadier was an all time great just as nobody can dispute that Frankel is an all time great, despite somebody joking that he dodged So You Think, as were Sea The Stars and Dancing Brave in their time.

There have been lots of all time greats through the years and to lessen their greatness by trying to demean them to prove that your favourite is better than the rest is wrong imo.

Everbody is entitled to have their all time favourite and to believe he/she was the greatest ever, but their argument is ruined by denegrating other favourites.       

Having said all that, although I'm a massive Frankel fan, I tend to agree with Brigust's reasons for starting this thread.

Soft Pawn you don't know what My Swallow was rated for the 2000 Gns so be quiet. My Swallow ran 12 times in just over a year winning 4 Group 1's and being placed in 2 Group 1's and Frankel has run 12 times in  three seasons. It is completely feasable he was on a high rating after the 2000 Guineas then dropped after his two subsequent defeats. When you look at the ratings of Excelebration and Farhh it is very concievable. So please don't correct me as if you somehow have some superior knowledge beause you don't. I am not in the least interested in your opinon and if you think I am going to agree with your ridiculous hypothesis you are mad as well.

You in yor little world can believe if you wish that Mill Reef was as good as Canford Cliffs and Excelebration but the facts on the ground speak otherwise.

I don't know who is the best between Frankel and Brigadier Gerard but I certainly don't agree with the Timeform rating Frankel has because the facts do not support his rating.

So NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO I do not accept your assessment because it is just plain stupid.

Excelebration has just beaten 8 previous G1 winners at Deauville, does that not underline the absolute brilliance of Frankel!

Imagine what Frankel would have done to the field.

The best miler ever

Yes, but I'm already in your camp.

It has and always will be down to the individual to decide for themselves who they believe to be the greatest, no debate however long will ever be resolved between two or more people when it is a topic of this kind, at least not to everyone's satisfaction and that's the way it should be when horse's from different era's are involved.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and no other has the right or authority to argue that the other is wrong and that their own view is superior, it is meaningless and insulting.

I'm sure all who have posted believe themselves to be right and all others should have the courtesy to respect that fact whether they are in agreement or not.

This thread has lasted well with some very interesting and well written views but is in danger of descending into farce now because the same points are being raised and discussed repeatedly because the relevant individuals are blinkered by their own beliefs and are now just going round in circles.

Well said Cork. I hope the Frankel fans had their money down. I know I did.

Impossible to compare previous generations so i for one will not say Frankel is better than the Brig or vice versa.

However todays result shows Frankel to be light years ahead of the other current crop of milers.

Glad to hear that Brigust, I had a bob or two on him as well, he had the best form in the race. My only concern was the drubbings by Frankel could have bottomed him, but a great result.

He was the best horse and highest rated in the race. I couldn't beleve some of the comments on here or that Laddies went 5/2 and then SJ went 11/4. Feet up time.

Just being mischievous here Brigust but you can't believe the price about a horse that, according to you, doesn't truly stay a mile taking on 8 Group 1 winners over a mile?

Marcce no I can't I had 1k on him at various and 300 (at 3.6, 3.8 and 4) of it on here. Thanks all the same, I hope all the Frankel fans who give me grief followed suit.
He was the highest rated and, as I've said before the number of Group 1's nowadays only devalues the breed. For betting it is fine but for quality I would rather have 2 horses who have won 4 Group 1's each.

Not waving but drowning eh Brigust.

Give us a clue Tree?

Take a look at the 'If Exelebration gets beat tomorrow' thread.

Just joking Brigust.Great thread by the way.

That's OK Tree, I hope you had a few quid on.

And I couldn't have written a much better script. I backed the winner because I couldn't see him getting beaten but he was desperately, desperately, desperately lucky because Moonlight Cloud was the moral winner. At least that's what some are saying.

However todays result shows Frankel to be light years ahead of the other current crop of milers.


Who knew?!

brigust1 12 Aug 12 16:50
Marcce no I can't I had 1k on him at various and 300 (at 3.6, 3.8 and 4) of it on here. Thanks all the same, I hope all the Frankel fans who give me grief followed suit.
He was the highest rated and, as I've said before the number of Group 1's nowadays only devalues the breed. For betting it is fine but for quality I would rather have 2 horses who have won 4 Group 1's each.


He did beat four opponents with more than 1 G1 victory, Golden Lilac is a triple G1 scorer, not quite up to scratch for you but pretty good all the same.

Stop nit-picking SP. I was speaking hypothetically. A winner of four Gr1's just has more substance than the winner a single Group1, that's all. You know very well what I mean. Have the night off.

Pull yourself a Carlsberg Brigadier Gerard or, if you are on the wagon a Frankel 'light'.

Thanks for the advice Brigust, now pi$$ed on Brigadier Gerard White Lightning.