REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Reply to thread

Message

I don't think it now has anything to do with what is fashionable. For all the fantastic horses and sires they have had, they will surely have been wondering if any horse could ever win it again and this year they find themselves with very strong candidate.

I remember when Nijinsky did it in 1970, it was heralded as a remarkable feat and when racing commentators banged on about how he was the first to do so since Bahram in 1935, that 35-year gap seemed like 350. I suppose someone born in the mid-1990s might feel the same about Nijinsky (whose Derby win was far better than Camelot's, by the way).

It's now 42 years since Nijinsky, which is maybe just a reflection of how few realistic candidates there have been or, as you suggest, it wasn't commercially attractive. Maybe it still isn't commercially attractive but maybe they feel it's time to have a shot at history.

<blockquote data-quote="Desert Orchid" data-source="post: 2394551" data-attributes="member: 65242">I don&#039;t think it now has anything to do with what is fashionable. For all the fantastic horses and sires they have had, they will surely have been wondering if any horse could ever win it again and this year they find themselves with very strong candidate.&nbsp;I remember when Nijinsky did it in 1970, it was heralded as a remarkable feat and when racing commentators banged on about how he was the first to do so since Bahram in 1935, that 35-year gap seemed like 350. I suppose someone born in the mid-1990s might feel the same about Nijinsky (whose Derby win was far better than Camelot&#039;s, by the way).&nbsp;It&#039;s now 42 years since Nijinsky, which is maybe just a reflection of how few realistic candidates there have been or, as you suggest, it wasn&#039;t commercially attractive. Maybe it still isn&#039;t commercially attractive but maybe they feel it&#039;s time to have a shot at history.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Desert Orchid, post: 2394551, member: 65242"] I don't think it now has anything to do with what is fashionable. For all the fantastic horses and sires they have had, they will surely have been wondering if any horse could ever win it again and this year they find themselves with very strong candidate. I remember when Nijinsky did it in 1970, it was heralded as a remarkable feat and when racing commentators banged on about how he was the first to do so since Bahram in 1935, that 35-year gap seemed like 350. I suppose someone born in the mid-1990s might feel the same about Nijinsky (whose Derby win was far better than Camelot's, by the way). It's now 42 years since Nijinsky, which is maybe just a reflection of how few realistic candidates there have been or, as you suggest, it wasn't commercially attractive. Maybe it still isn't commercially attractive but maybe they feel it's time to have a shot at history. [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?