Maiden Derby winners

[Danzig]

according to the book i'm now reading by dorothy ours, about man o war, he was part of the fifth smallest foal crop registered.
but i think ID is too hung up on the size of the foal crop. i just got thru to the end of MOW's two year old season, in which he carried 130 earlier than any horse to date, more than once at that!, winning his races geared down and still either tying, nearing, or breaking records. those he faced also set down fast times. matter of fact, upset beat the record when he beat man o war, and considering that man o war was left at the start--well, you do the math! what he ran that race in is mindboggling--esp considering he was still only two.

First, to the original subject and maidens winning the Derby: Today it'd be all but impossible unless the maiden had a lot of high quality seconds in graded stakes because you need to be in the top 20 in graded stakes earnings to even qualify to run in the Kentucky Derby.

Now, for the real joke of the thread where people actually are performing revisionist history on Man O'War's career and status as the greatest racehorse in history. Sure a case can be made for either Secretariat, Citation, Native Dancer of even Kelso. But to call Man O'War massively overrated or way overrated and any part overrated is just comical at best and incredibily ignorant at worst. He lost one race in his career, set track and world records for speed, beat a Triple Crown winner straight up in a match race, and then turned into perhaps the greatest sire of all time. Any chance that those of you who think that Man O'War is overrated are part of the Babe Ruth is overrated, Bobby Jones is overrated, and Muhammad Ali is overrated fan club?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by FairPlay

First, to the original subject and maidens winning the Derby: Today it'd be all but impossible unless the maiden had a lot of high quality seconds in graded stakes because you need to be in the top 20 in graded stakes earnings to even qualify to run in the Kentucky Derby.

Now, for the real joke of the thread where people actually are performing revisionist history on Man O'War's career and status as the greatest racehorse in history. Sure a case can be made for either Secretariat, Citation, Native Dancer of even Kelso. But to call Man O'War massively overrated or way overrated and any part overrated is just comical at best and incredibily ignorant at worst. He lost one race in his career, set track and world records for speed, beat a Triple Crown winner straight up in a match race, and then turned into perhaps the greatest sire of all time. Any chance that those of you who think that Man O'War is overrated are part of the Babe Ruth is overrated, Bobby Jones is overrated, and Muhammad Ali is overrated fan club?

i think it's only one poster who says he's overrated, first time i've ever seen MOW called that. i've seen him lower than #1 on peoples all time list, but he's always on the list!!

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

i think it's only one poster who says he's overrated, first time i've ever seen MOW called that. i've seen him lower than #1 on peoples all time list, but he's always on the list!!

Yes----because turf writers are lazy and massively incompetent.

He was from the 2nd smallest foal crop of the 1900's---not the 5th.

The smallest foal crop of the 1900's featured only 15 fewer horses. The best of that crop was Morvich--who went into the Kentucky Derby with an 11-for-11 record--and won the Kentucky Derby to go 12-for-12.

Morvich was said to be a very ugly looking Cal bred....and he almost certainly wasn't that much horse inspite of his record.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by FairPlay

Now, for the real joke of the thread where people actually are performing revisionist history on Man O'War's career and status as the greatest racehorse in history. Sure a case can be made for either Secretariat, Citation, Native Dancer of even Kelso. But to call Man O'War massively overrated or way overrated and any part overrated is just comical at best and incredibily ignorant at worst.

In context to him being rated the #1 horse of the 1900's, of course he's massively overrated, and anyone who can't see that is a complete fool. It's pretty obvious.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

In context to him being rated the #1 horse of the 1900's, of course he's massively overrated, and anyone who can't see that is a complete fool. It's pretty obvious.

how fortunate for you that you're so enlightened...

[The Indomitable DrugS]

I know.

I'm not trying to give you a hard time---and I obviously have no reason to bash a horse who was racing when my Grandpa was a year or two old---but, no one else seems to want to point out some pretty key things regarding Man O' War's competition---or lack there of.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Yes----because turf writers are lazy and massively incompetent.

He was from the 2nd smallest foal crop of the 1900's---not the 5th.
The smallest foal crop of the 1900's featured only 15 fewer horses. The best of that crop was Morvich--who went into the Kentucky Derby with an 11-for-11 record--and won the Kentucky Derby to go 12-for-12.

Morvich was said to be a very ugly looking Cal bred....and he almost certainly wasn't that much horse inspite of his record.

this from legend like lightening by dorothy ours-page 15:

...he was one of 1961 thoroughbred foals registered in the united states that year. it would be the fifth-smallest crop of the entire twentieth century.


dorothy ours-from the book jacket--worked for seven years for the national museum of racing and hall of fame in saratoga springs new york, while researching man o war and has been cited for research contributions to several books on thoroughbred racehorses.


sorry, i'll go with her info.

and again, you're too hung up on foal crop size. also, keep in mind that it took years, sometimes decades, and in some cases hasn't happened YET where a horse ran faster than man o war. his travers is a case in point. NO horse has run the first six furlongs as fast as big red did in his travers, and crossed the finish line first.
and then there's the fact that man o war would set or equal track or american records eight times at three. one mile, one and one sixteenth, one and an eighth, one and one quarter, one and three eighths, one and one half, and one and five eighths. he topped triple crown winner sir bartons belmont mark by three seconds, setting an american record for that distance as well.

so, again, when there's no competition-there's the clock. man o war took that on, and won vs it many times. and many times his pps comments were never extended, under restraint, easing late, under a pull, etc.

he was voted best american racehorse of the first half of the 20th century in an ap poll of sports writers in 1950. bloodhorse magazine convened a panel of racing historians to rank the century's top hundred horses, man o war again. ap did a poll in '99, man o war again. lot of fools out there i guess...

[mark2061mn]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I know.

I'm not trying to give you a hard time---and I obviously have no reason to bash a horse who was racing when my Grandpa was a year or two old---but, no one else seems to want to point out some pretty key things regarding Man O' War's competition---or lack there of.

i believe that druggie here brings some much needed perspective to considering MOW as the greatest horse ever. Based on some of his points, i'd have to agree that he's unlikely the best ever, but on the other hand, his accomplishments on and off the track would seem to validate his overall greatness.

besides, anyone with a brain knows that indian charlie is the greatest horse ever!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

i believe that druggie here brings some much needed perspective to considering MOW as the greatest horse ever. Based on some of his points, i'd have to agree that he's unlikely the best ever, but on the other hand, his accomplishments on and off the track would seem to validate his overall greatness.

besides, anyone with a brain knows that indian charlie is the greatest horse ever!

there are several horses that could be called the best ever. but i disagree that man o war is overrated. arguments could be made for quite a few horses out there-but saying man o war is overrated would be like saying secretariat is overrated. but then, i've seen some call native dancer overrated....and i also happen to agree with man o war being placed #1 on the list, so i guess i don't care for being called a fool because of my opinion.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

this from legend like lightening by dorothy ours-page 15:

...he was one of 1961 thoroughbred foals registered in the united states that year. it would be the fifth-smallest crop of the entire twentieth century.


dorothy ours-from the book jacket--worked for seven years for the national museum of racing and hall of fame in saratoga springs new york, while researching man o war and has been cited for research contributions to several books on thoroughbred racehorses.


sorry, i'll go with her info.

And that would be yet another mistake on your part.

But hey, perhaps she is right and The Jockey Club is wrong...

http://www.jockeyclub.com/factbook.asp?section=1

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

i believe that druggie here brings some much needed perspective to considering MOW as the greatest horse ever. Based on some of his points, i'd have to agree that he's unlikely the best ever, but on the other hand, his accomplishments on and off the track would seem to validate his overall greatness.

Even if you're someone who believes he might possibly have been the best ever from an ability standpoint (I absolutely don't believe that) ...... It is still impossible to make any rational case justifying him as the best horse of the 1900's ...... simply because of the highly questionable quality of horses he was racing against. He only race against two horses in his entire career from outside of his microscopic foal crop--and both times, in match races where he was able to use his superior early speed fully to his advantage. Who's ever fault it was...he also never faced Exterminator.

Secretariat, Spectacular Bid, Native Dancer, and Dr. Fager are four horses whom I believe all have a MUCH stronger claim to that ranking than Man O' War.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

so i guess i don't care for being called a fool because of my opinion.

And I probably should appologize to you and all the fine turf writers (I'm sure not all of them are "lazy and incompetent")

My flight to Florida, and out of this bitterly cold weather, had to be rescheduled because I wouldn't have made my connecting flight to Atlanta, which was delayed. I also wasn't about to stay in Atlanta over night and catch a connecting flight to Tampa in the morning--like the Delta guy wanted me too. Our rinky dink local airport doesn't fly directly to Tampa.

Another four days in this craphole has me in a foul mood.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

And I probably should appologize to you and all the fine turf writers (I'm sure not all of them are "lazy and incompetent")

My flight to Florida, and out of this bitterly cold weather, had to be rescheduled because I wouldn't have made my connecting flight to Atlanta, which was delayed. I also wasn't about to stay in Atlanta over night and catch a connecting flight to Tampa in the morning--like the Delta guy wanted me too. Our rinky dink local airport doesn't fly directly to Tampa.

Another four days in this craphole has me in a foul mood.

That sucks for you... the weather is great down here right now!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

And I probably should appologize to you and all the fine turf writers (I'm sure not all of them are "lazy and incompetent")

My flight to Florida, and out of this bitterly cold weather, had to be rescheduled because I wouldn't have made my connecting flight to Atlanta, which was delayed. I also wasn't about to stay in Atlanta over night and catch a connecting flight to Tampa in the morning--like the Delta guy wanted me too. Our rinky dink local airport doesn't fly directly to Tampa.

Another four days in this craphole has me in a foul mood.

can't say i blame you about not wanting to overnite in atlanta. never could figure out why my cousin lives there.

hopefully your mood will lighten with the sun. we're enjoying a bit of early spring weather here right now. doubt it will last tho!!

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

can't say i blame you about not wanting to overnite in atlanta. never could figure out why my cousin lives there.

hopefully your mood will lighten with the sun. we're enjoying a bit of early spring weather here right now. doubt it will last tho!!

Three of my cousins live there as well and to be honest, while I don't care for Atlanta itself, the suburbs are very nice and I wouldn't mind living there.

[slotdirt]

I read the Legend like Lightning book about six months ago. It was a pretty good read, and I definitely don't think it was biased towards the horse himself.

As for Man O' War the horse: he set a gang of world, track, and stakes records at a variety of distances - some of which were never broken - and even broke a world record in a race where the place horse finished an estimated 100 lengths in arrears. It's estimated that on that particular day - in a virtual walkover - Man O' War bested the world record by as much as eight lengths. He gave up as much as 33.5 pounds to his competitors, beat the first Triple Crown winner in a match race, and won 20 races by a median of 9.5 lengths.

Secretariat, by contrast, never gave up more than 12 pounds, and won 17 of 21 starts by a median of 3.5 lengths.

Stats can work both ways, eh?

I would not worry. The contrarian probably thinks that Lincoln is overrated as a President. There's one in every crowd.

Lincoln is terribly overrated...

Anyhow, the original pt. by Drugs about foal crop size I think is a valid pt. You can make similar pts. about major league baseball before black players arrived or say Olympic in the days before before many kids even had the chance to compete at track and field instead of having to go to work in Africa or China or Texas or whatever.

But moving on from that pt. the argument DrugS has some serious explaining to do.

1. Track records. In the original post he said something like "...if you really believe that horses ran 20 lengths further today..."

Well dont they? Look at the records in MoW's day and compare them to todays. MoW who is running some of the fastest times of his day is still running some 2 sec. behind records from the 50s and somewhat more than that today.

I mean there is no doubt that horse times were slower back then and it wasnt the horses fault: track surfaces were slower, iron shoes were heavier, and the turns werent banked. There is also another thing that is not mentioned often: these jocks were often fighting each other, recall the famous photo of the '33 derby. This appears to have happened alot, although prolly not much to MoW who was usually clear of the field. (as aside, prolly the reason MoW and Sec were able to set so many records is that they usually were clear of the field and able to cut the turns so sharply, or in MoW case not have to fight through the jocks)

Another thing that really has not been talked about much is that there must have been a lot of time loss on the turns, for the above reason. One could probably study track records on straight courses, and one turn courses vs 2 turn courses, and put together a reasonable guess that these horses are losing up to a sec. or so on the turns alone.

As an aside: MoW could throw a very fast quarter in 23 sec. very comparable to modern horses (this in iron shoes!), this also makes me think again, that much of the time loss in pre-1950 racing has more to do with unbanked turns.

Anyhow, you have not put together any sort of cogent argument that horse times are some sort of delusion in those days. There are reasons the times were slower and they are objective. What you cannot deny is that MoW was setting records nearly every time he went out. SImilar to Swaps 4 yr old campaign, Secretariat's 3 yr old; Spect Bid; and maybe a few others Certainly puts him in good company.

2. Carrying wt. This argument is some sort of bad joke to cite Exterminator for carrying 150# and citing this against MoW is intellectually dishonest. Completely dishonest. Famous hi weight carrying horses includes like Bold Ruler, Dr Fager and Forego. I thnk you will find in their great seasons the most they carried was 136-138#. I dont think BRuler carried more than 136 in 1958 and Fager 138 in 1968, maybe there are a few exceptions, did Forego ever carry 140#?

One thing is clear:

NO ONE CARRIES 150# ANY MORE, NOR DID ANY HORSE CARRY 150# OFTEN!

Okay? So Jeezus Christ get off this stupid argument about wt. MoW was obviously carrying nearly as much as the great wt carriers of the late 20th cent. MoW carried up to 138# in his 3 yr old season (as much as Dr Fager and BOld Ruler) and set track/world records, this makes him one of the great wt carriers of history. Jeezus what a stupid freakin argument. Exterminator carried 150# So that means....Dr Fager sucks????

What a dumb argument.

3) Match race vs Exterminator. According to Avalyn Hunter and her pedigree book, p. 77, the reason the race w/ MoW and SIrBarton did not take place was that the connections of SirBarton and Exterminator could not agree on what the distance would be. They felt that Exterminator was better at 10f+ and SB better at <10f. What Mr. Riddle thought is not mentioned, I seriously doubt they thought he was inferior at 10f as the horse won the JCGC and Lawrence Realization by 100 lenghts...

It seems to me that given his destruction of the opposition and the track records he set. MoW 2/3yr old campaigns are something comparable to Secretariats and they both seem to be on a similar plane. If you like Sec for top 5, then you should like MoW. Personally, I like BUckpasser, Dr. Fager and Spect. Bid as much as Sec. and dont really see much between them but this is off pt. a little.

[boswd]

You also have to remember, back then The Derby didn't have some prestige that it holds now. It was still an important race but the Belmont, Preakness and even The Travers were regarding as more important races.
I think it was in the 40's when the Derby started to make it's move as the most important race.
So therefore you would get some "not so great" horses winning the Derby