Shared Belief

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

Lava Man is only "incredibly overrated" if you hold internet opinion in high regard. The betting public determines whether a horse is over or underrated.
In the pps shown Lava Man was a beaten favorite 5 times as was Commentator. In Lava Man's last 7 races it took the public 3 races in a row to realize he was no longer the horse to beat. The bottom line is that Lava Man returned more to the betting public than either of the other two.

There is no disputing that Commentator was incredible when he was on his game. That is how I will remember him. Lava Man was one of the great claims in racing and he failed outside of California. Perfect Drift was one of the memorable ex/tri/super keys at the highest level.

Using Student Council as the only barometer the 3 have in common Commentator gets the edge. If BSF are used to measure who was better then Commentator was best. If graded races are used then Lava Man was best.
It's a tough call. The quality of competition Lava Man faced should be scrutinized to some degree. I could say that if you remove the Whitney from his resume Commentator only won one graded stakes race. I could also say that he only ran out of the money once in all of his graded stakes appearances when routing.

One thing I got a kick out of in the pps was how the chartcaller had Commentator 47 1/2 lengths in front of the 4th horse in the Woodward.

Not the under attack? Because that's literally what happened.

[my miss storm cat]

It's interesting reading the arguments.

Half the time, when I do (read threads like these) I can appreciate it...the equivalent of listening to the great orators. Some of your arguments are pieces of art.

There are the other times though when I feel like well what does it matter? How does one say this was better than that? It's like choosing John or George... how exactly would that work when they were both brilliant yet so individual?

I loved Commentator. I guess it was the Met Mile that I was at the track for (out here, not there) and my friend was such a huge fan... a perfectly well-adjusted and reasonable woman who turned into well... like some lady at a Baptist Church getting all into it and "getting happy" as I think it's called... man she was screaming COME ON SON! COME ON SON! and as she did she swung her enormous purse around like she was possessed. At one point a corner of it nailed me in the face...my lip was bleeding but who cares he was winning haha!

After Divine Park ruined our day she looked at me and pointed out that my lip was bleeding. (No. Really?).

I can't count the number of times we would go to see Lava Man run.

The way I remember it he was one of two horses that electrified the crowd the most (the other wasn't Zenyatta it was Rock Hard Ten. Maybe it was a different kind of crowd in the space of a few years or something.... who knows.).

NIck you are far too nice to be mean so I will point out that 1. when you post this refrain it feels very Greek Chorus to me and 2. doesn't the fact that you remember it say something about it? I mean in a positive way?

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Maybe it was because he was "the originals rags to riches."

I think it has a little to do with the geography, at times, cause I'll tell you if you were there that day? It didn't matter where you were or who you were... Lava Man was all that mattered. Everyone was behind that horse and the kind of anticipation that day? The build up to the race and then the actual race itself?

Vic's emotional call matched the day, reflected the day, represented everyone who was there... the way his voice cracked and the simultaneous joy and relief ... I just think if you had been there you'd hear it in the context of the day and might appreciate it a little more.

Anyway I did love both horses and don't really care who was better.

I think the two of them share beloved status by their vast numbers of fans and so the whole argument is a bit silly.

[cakes44]

So I've got Commentator's record vs open stakes company as 15-5-1-4 if my math is correct?

All time great...

[cakes44]

And Perfect Drift's 2003 year, which was far better than any year Commentator put together, was conveniently left off NTamm's PPs.

And I'll assume, because I've clearly lost my mind, that in Commentator's best years, 2005 and 2008, that they did not have a Breeder's Cup, because I don't see them on his PPs?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

so, by using the logic of money won, curlin is the best horse ever?

perfect drift was more lucrative over his career, doesn't mean he was better. to say otherwise would be the same as saying mark rypien was a better QB than dan marino, because rypien won a super bowl.

I never said that Perfect Drift was better.

Money won is important. It's certainly not the only important factor but it is an important factor. I don't know how a person could compare two horses and not use money won as one of things you would look at. You obviously can't look at money won if you are comparing a modern horse with a horse from 60 years ago, but if you are comparing two horses that ran in the same general time frame then I would certainly look at it. I would say money won and number of graded stakes wins would be two of the most important things.

That being said, I would still probably pick Ghostzapper as the best horse in the US in the last 15 years. He made $3.4 million, won 6 graded stakes races including 4 grade I races. He had 9 wins from 11 starts. His career wasn't that long but he was spectacular. And he easily won what was probably the deepest field in terms of talent in the BC Classic when he beat Roses in May and Pleasantly Perfect.


Curlin was a great horse. I would put him in the top 5 or so best horses in the US in the last 15 years.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I never said that Perfect Drift was better.

Money won is important. It's certainly not the only important factor but it is an important factor. I don't know how a person could compare two horses and not use money won as one of things you would look at. You obviously can't look at money won if you are comparing a modern horse with a horse from 60 years ago, but if you are comparing two horses that ran in the same general time frame then I would certainly look at it. I would say money won and number of graded stakes wins would be two of the most important things.

That being said, I would still probably pick Ghostzapper as the best horse in the US in the last 15 years. He made $3.4 million, won 6 graded stakes races including 4 grade I races. He had 9 wins from 11 starts. His career wasn't that long but he was spectacular. And he easily won what was probably the deepest field in terms of talent in the BC Classic when he beat Roses in May and Pleasantly Perfect.


Curlin was a great horse. I would put him in the top 5 or so best horses in the US in the last 15 years.

Hard Spun was better.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

Hard Spun was better.

Agreed. Hard Spun was a beast.

[cakes44]

Okay so clearly Perfect Drift and Lava Man are the arguing points. Maybe even throw Game On Dude in there. No one has argued the 9 other horses on my list, and that is only since 2003. How in the world is Commentator among the all-time greats if he might not even be among the top 10 since 2003 according to nearly everyone on here, which was my original point?

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by cakes44

Okay so clearly Perfect Drift and Lava Man are the arguing points. Maybe even throw Game On Dude in there. No one has argued the 9 other horses on my list, and that is only since 2003. How in the world is Commentator among the all-time greats if he might not even be among the top 10 since 2003 according to nearly everyone on here, which was my original point?

My post about Perfect Drift lacked his '03 running lines cause I could only screengrab so much. I'll post the rest tonight.

There's really only one person who has said that Commentator was an all-time great in this thread. Myself, and just about everyone else have offered that what Commentator lacked in durability he made up for in brilliance. He just didn't do it very often at all.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by cakes44

Okay so clearly Perfect Drift and Lava Man are the arguing points. Maybe even throw Game On Dude in there. No one has argued the 9 other horses on my list, and that is only since 2003. How in the world is Commentator among the all-time greats if he might not even be among the top 10 since 2003 according to nearly everyone on here, which was my original point?

who in the world is calling commentator an all time great?

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Danzig

who in the world is calling commentator an all time great?

PG1985.

[declansharbor]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Agreed. Hard Spun was a beast.

He would've been a SCARY good miler. One of my favorites. Absolutely crazy that 2 of my top 5 favorites are Porter owned.

[Indian Charlie]

It's kind of funny how Hard Spun went from an under appreciated speedster during his running days to a now somewhat overrated runner in peoples memories.

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

As Arletta said, CC is not running in the Pacific Classic. He's not even in training right now. They sent him out to the farm for a rest. I believe their plan is to prep in the Goodwood (which is usually around Oct. 1st) and then run him in the BC Classic. CC obviously loved the old Santa Anita track, but there will be a new surface at SA come October. CC seemed to run fine on every track but he was most dominant at Santa Anita. I think he was at least a couple lengths better at Santa Anita than other tracks. He probably won't have that same advantage on the new surface.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...rly-from-break

He's coming back early apparently. Sounds like Los Al Mile, then BCC. Not loving that. All those major 3yo graded stakes and he goes in one ungraded stake and into the Classic? He's not a delicate flower. Meh.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

My post about Perfect Drift lacked his '03 running lines cause I could only screengrab so much. I'll post the rest tonight.

There's really only one person who has said that Commentator was an all-time great in this thread. Myself, and just about everyone else have offered that what Commentator lacked in durability he made up for in brilliance. He just didn't do it very often at all.

This is not true Nick. I said since 2000.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by declansharbor

He would've been a SCARY good miler. One of my favorites. Absolutely crazy that 2 of my top 5 favorites are Porter owned.

Probably would have turfed well.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by Seattleallstar

Commentator was much better than Lava Man, Lava Man beat Grade 2-3 type horses in those Gold Cups. Anytime faced with the competition that was a step above of what he was beating in socal, he failed miserably. Lava Man was a good horse but in no way was he a "great" horse. Lava Man never ever came close to defeating a horse the caliber of a St Liam, which Commentator did.

Lava Man and Game on Dude are pretty much the same, good horses who gained a popular following in Socal. Not great and not even in the conversations for best horses in the country. Grade 2 caliber horses that were able to pick off weak Grade 1 races

Not in the conversation for best horses in the country...really? Grade 2 horses, the races they won and the figures they achieved strongly rebut that argument.

[cakes44]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

This is not true Nick. I said since 2000.

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985 View Post
I agree with one thing in that post. Commentator is one of the GOAT.


"one of the GOAT" now means "one of the 13 greatest since 2000?"

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by cakes44

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985 View Post
I agree with one thing in that post. Commentator is one of the GOAT.


"one of the GOAT" now means "one of the 13 greatest since 2000?"

Well, duh.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

so, by using the logic of money won, curlin is the best horse ever?

perfect drift was more lucrative over his career, doesn't mean he was better. to say otherwise would be the same as saying mark rypien was a better QB than dan marino, because rypien won a super bowl.

Your analogy is absurd. Mark Rypien would be a good analogy if I was claiming a horse was great because of a single race he won. If I claimed that Giacomo was better than Commentator because Giacomo won the Ky Derby, that would be like saying Rypien is better than Marino because Rypien won the Super Bowl.

When a horse wins millions of dollars and multiple graded stakes races over his career, that is the exact opposite of a one-hit wonder like Mary Rypien. Mark Rypien would be comparable to a horse that won one big race but never really did anything else.