gfn02 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

That's what my whole point was: that it's possible to revere and recognize that both of them were great, but at the same time recognize that, by any method of measure, SECRETARIAT was faster. Feel free to come on over to my channel and explore my project, as I think you'd like it :)

drumma4lyfe06 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Exactly! I'm not bashing Ruffian because she is undoubtedly one of the best filly's, if the the best, to ever step on the race track. But, what I am saying is that Secetariat was the epitome of champions. Yeah, people make the excuses about an enlarged heart and what not but his speed was just unmatched. We certainly haven't seen another Ruffian or Secretariat this day in age and I'm not talking on the basis of accomplishments.

gfn02 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Also, are you still saying that Ruffian broke or equalled TRACK records every time out? Do you acknowledge that that's not true?

gfn02 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

When does continuously whipping a horse 6-7 times not constitute asking a horse for all he/she has? If that is not, then what is? Also, again I ask you this question: Both horses ran at Belmont, both over 1.5 miles, and both on a fast track, how can you possibly say that Ruffian was faster?

Kellsexi (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

...So you just automatically think that because she was hit she ran as hard as she could?The reason Ruffian was behind was because she popped a cold splint. So even if she was hit, she couldnt give very much because of her leg.And yes, I do say Ruffian was faster.Because she was never asked for speed in that race. The only race she was asked for her semi- best was the race against Hot n Nasty.

gfn02 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Explain to me how it was that she wasn't asked for that burst of speed? The jockey whipped at least 7 times? Your position is not supported by any evidence. Again I ask you: both horses raced at Belmont park on a fast track over 1.5 miles, do you say that Ruffian was faster? If so, how?

Kellsexi (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Because Ruffian never gave all she had, she just simply put on a burst of speed. Again, Ruffian was never asked for full blast, otherwise I think she would've pulled away so fast it would've made your head spin.And dear, when it floods my email inbox, it is stupid. And trust me, I am not getting nasty, nasty would be using words im sure you dont want to hear. And I did not refer to you as stupid, rather the replies.Ruffian was simply the better horse. Sorry if your opinion is different.

gfn02 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

The fact that he wasn't undefeated means absolutely nothing. I want you to explain when it was that he was asked for all he had. If you think it was in the Belmont Stakes you're wrong. Also, I refer you to the 1974 Sorority Stakes, when Ruffian's jockey repeatedly went to the whip in the stretch. I counted at least 6 seperate times. Tell me seriously, how is that NOT asking her for all she has? I'm rather offended that you would refer to my logical rebuttal to your statements as stupid.

gfn02 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I never said a sinlge solitary thing about Foolish Pleasure. I want you to directly to respond to this question: Both SECRETARIAT and Ruffian raced 1.5 miles at Belmont over a fast track, do you say that Ruffian was faster? If so, how?

gfn02 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Getting nasty with me is a mistake. I never referred to you, or anything about you, as stupid.