No doubting Sir Henry was a top class trainer but he needed to have the ammunition. One thing he said in an interview was that he was offered and sent the cream of the top private studs to train  whereas Richard Hannon had to buy his horses from what was left over. Sir Henry never bought a single horse in his life. His words not mine.

Epsom Derby  (Olympics)

On exactly what basis could the Derby be looked at as a top calibre race? The field's invariably mostly made up of horses who barely reach listed class with most of the field not staying and/or not acting on the track. The fact is a horse very rarely has to win the Derby by beating other top class horses running somewhere near their best.

Undoubtedly it's a prestigious race but in terms of real quality it's rarely little more than Commonwealth games standard. A lot of people (mostly the oap generation) go all soppy about it but in real terms the Derby isn't a top class race and hasn't been for quite some time.

One of Sea the Star's greatest attributes was his constitution, as a 3yr old, to win six Group 1's six months in a row, Mick Kinane has commented on this many times, and Oxx's handling of him was superb. Kinane never bottomed him out and never asked him for 100%, this makes him a real freak and marks him down as one of the greats! His constitution and what he did should be factored in to his rating ....

Gerry McCann who looked after Nashwan (a fantastic horse) gives a great example of how great Sea the Stars achievement was

'We had a stretch of gallop, about a mile and a quarter,' McCann continues. 'It was like the very best carpet -
beautiful turf. We all called the stretch "the trial gallop". We'd use it only three or four times a year. It was close to the
Guineas, and the Major told me to lead off. We had no sticks. The first one who passed me would be the winner.
Nashwan and I went fifteen lengths clear even without a whip. The Major said, "The Brigadier [Gerard, who won the 2,000
Guineas in 1971] wouldn't have done that." At 8.30 in the morning he was 33-1 for Newmarket; by midday he was
down to 8-1; and by mid-afternoon he was the 3-1 favourite.

After the Guineas we left him alone a bit. The Derby was academic. He was spot on that day. At West llsley when we won a Classic there was always a party at the village hall.
With Nashwan, the hall was booked a week before the Guineas. 50 was the disco. We knew. Then, after the Guineas, we booked the hall again straight away for after
the Derby. It wasn't like booking a room in Newmarket. Everyone would know then. West Ilsley was more of a farming community. The yard was part of everyone's life.
Our horses were their horses. 'After the Derby the Major gave Nashwan every chance for the rest of the 1989 season, right up to his last run, in the Prix Niel.
For that he arranged for him to go to Stansted airport in a horsebox for a trial run before the race, which was his prep for the Arc. It meant that when it was for real
Nashwan wouldn't be spooked at all by the road trip.

The thing was that we all knew Nashwan was finished after the Eclipse and King George. He grew a little bit during the
summer. He was still a bit weak. Those two races against the older horses, that was the end of him. His work wasn't ever
as good as it had been. You don't have easy races at his level. The Eclipse meant he had to take on older horses in early July.
To my mind, he was given a lot to do on dead ground. They went nearly ten lengths clear of him so he had to pick up
Opening Verse - Indian Skimmer's lead horse and a pretty good one in his own right - and was then ridden all the way
to the line to win. He had also got a bit worked up in the days leading up to the Eclipse.

After the Eclipse, the first time he cantered, things were different. The Major asked me how he was. I told him I thought he was knackered.
He couldn't care if he walked, cantered or galloped. He was just very tired. For the King George, he needed a lead horse. Not to make the pace,
but actually to hold them up. Look at the tapes of the race - Nashwan's pulling. At the time, the Major was quite surprised.
"It took them a while to work out that the pacemaker was in there to slow the field down," he said.
Greville Starkey, who rode Cacoethes,  realised too late. At least not too late for us.'

In the end, it was just the unique sequence of Guineas,Derby, Eclipse and King George. 'The thing about Nashwan
was that he had a really competitive spirit,' McCann says.'He loved passing horses. He'd be on the gallops and you
would just have to edge him out. He was gone.'

Why do people keep mentioning human beings when talking about horses?

I am aware of the definition of the word analogy, duncan. But am not sure that athletic enthusiasts would use examples of horse races in comparing certain individuals.

Mrtopnotch I don't where you got your information from but McCann never looked after Nashwan I'm pretty sure AlanThimbleby did. And he never said BG wouldn't do that he said it was the best since BG. Plus Dickie has often said he kept Nashwan's work horses to a lower grade to give him confidence so when the press saw him work on the trial ground that morning he looked good against poor animals. The press did the rest. Nashwan was clearly the best 3 year old at that time during an 11 week spell but they caught up with him and the form is not great. Add to that Dickie wasn't even thinking about the  Gns for Nashwan it was only after his owner Sheikh Hamdan suggested running him because his main hope Al Hareb had been disappointing that he decided to run.
The main thing about Nashwan, as with Frankel, was that Dickie was  going through a real bad time medically, he was in a wheelchair and the rumours were that the Queen was about to end his tenure at Hodcott. The press did the rest and the public got behind him and sympathised with him.

brigust= parallel universe

The reason for the comparison between humans and horses is pretty valid to my eyes. No-one cares too much about the lesser events, the Commonwealths, Europeans etc, but they all get geared up for the Olympics. In horse racing, breeders and buyers alike all would prefer a Derby winner or Arc winner as opposed to QE2 winner. Many would sidestep the QE2 but not many would turn their nose up at a Derby winner! This should be factored in to the greatness/rating of a horse. If a horse omits to race in THE VERY BIGGEST RACES, how can you say they were the best of the best ever?

The reason for the comparison between humans and horses is pretty valid to my eyes. No-one cares too much about the lesser events, the Commonwealths, Europeans etc, but they all get geared up for the Olympics. In horse racing, breeders and buyers alike all would prefer a Derby winner or Arc winner as opposed to QE2 winner. Many would sidestep the QE2 but not many would turn their nose up at a Derby winner! This should be factored in to the greatness/rating of a horse. If a horse omits to race in THE VERY BIGGEST RACES, how can you say they were the best of the best ever?

I'm afraid that's a rather simplistic analysis. It would clearly depend on what type of horse they were looking to breed.

Whilst I accept that many would clearly be keen on a Derby/Arc winner, you cannot ignore the worldwide context where many of the biggest races are not over 1m4f. Take the USA for example; of the top 25 North American sires this year there's only about 4 who ever ran, let alone won a big race, over further than 10f.

STS acceleration between horses as mick pulled of the rail up the home straight at Longchamp is as good as the sport gets.

both horses are incredibly special.

dodged big races early in the season tho keeping him over a mile instead of going straight to 10f

I'd say the only race you can legitimately make that claim regarding is the Eclipse (and i'd be inclined to agree). Did it really make much different that he went for the QA instead of the SJP?

Apologies, I meant the POW, of course.

The comparison between Sea The Stars and Frankel is unfair. Frankel went on to run as a 4 year old, Sea the Stars was retired as a 3 year old.

At the end of their 3 year old careers both had an Official Rating of 135. Both rated the same.

Lets compare the human element again.  Both were rated the same as 18/19 year olds.
Only Frankel went on to race as a 20/21 year old and improve is rating by 5lb. Lets imagine STS ha been trained for a 4 year old campaign, i would expect him to improve further as he matures with age.

No worries Ima. As I say, I don't think there was a great deal between him going for either of the Royal Ascot races in his 4yo year (up against either Excelebration/Strong Suit, or So You Think/Planteur) but I would've liked to have seen him in the Eclipse. It doesn't have a significant bearing on his record for me though.

Hi Brigust, hope life is good with you.

I'm fully aware of your support for BG (and rightly so), without doubt he's one of the best ever and whilst I never saw him live, i'm old enough to have been around during his racing career, even to back him. I'm not convinced Frankel would be outstayed, BG only raced at 12f once and was all out to win (hung badly) albeit by 1.5L. Frankel was never given the chance over 12f, but he certainly wasn't stopping in the Juddmonte (probably his best performance) and whilst there are those that say he was flagging in his last race, I don't support that, and if the race had been over 12f, he would have still beaten CDA on very soft ground he didn't like. I think that if HRC had not been ill, he may have gone for the Arc. Yes BG won 15 on the spin; Frankel didn't have 15 races, but I have no doubt if he had raced as a 5 yr old, he would have finished unbeaten in 18. I think the thing that sets the 2 apart is Frankel had the ability to retain that incredible turn of foot and pace in the final couple of furlongs that simply 'broke' the hearts of others. Don't get me wrong, i'm not knocking BG, Mill Reef, even Sea Bird and Ribot, I simply believe that Frankel was a 'one off' and probably the best ever.

HRC stated 'He's the best i've ever had, the best i've ever seen. i'd be very surprised if there's ever been a better'.

Angel Gabrial
24 Oct 14 19:59

Lets imagine STS has been trained for a 4 year old campaign, i would expect him to improve further as he matures with age.


But maturing with age is already accounted for by weight-for-age ie you have to mature with age to stand still in terms of ratings...a horse's rating would only improve if it progresses over and above natural improvement (maturing)

Don't intend to get embroiled in the BG V Frankel debate again. There's not a single thing anybody can say that hasn't been said before in the numerous arguments on that subject. However, I do wish people would stop pointing at course records as any type of meaningful way of proving greatness. Look at course records at any course in the country and the majority of them are held by a mixture of good and average horses.

In terms of proving greatness course records have about as much relevance as saying one horse is better than another because his jockey wore nicer colours.

You may say that DIbut I'm sure it is something you would bring up if the boot was on the other foot. And you are right I don't want to go over it again either. I was only responding to an earlier post.

Ima aren't sectionals merely comparisons with other horses running on the same day in other races etc? They cannot be compared with other horses running on different days?

Also isn't it likely that a horse breaking the course record carrying 9st 7lbs by 6 lengths and 9s 8lbs by 5 lengths would also have pretty good sectionals?
If you saw the recent article on RUK the likelihood of course records on ground with give in it is far more likely because horses won't let themselves down properly on really firm ground. Plus with the advent of plastic rails horses are racing on fresh ground in the big races as they were at Ascot on Saturday.  Before they had to race on what was there however many races they had on it.Add to that nowadays races are shortened often by rail movements not always registered or measured.