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

Can’t fault your two outstanding choices overall. Must say I found it a lot more difficult than I expected to come up with any others that are head and shoulders above the rest - lots of them seem to have their moment in the sun at one time or another.

I draw a distinction between rider (horsemanship) and jockey (tactical nous) and I suppose the best combination of the two results in a low number of horses losing that should have won and a high number of horses winning that shouldn’t have done. I’ll have to give it more thought.

In the meantime, from the “rider” side I would exclude, from a purely aesthetic perspective, any of them who have resorted to bumping up and down on their horses

<blockquote data-quote="barjon" data-source="post: 2428268" data-attributes="member: 66598">Can’t fault your two outstanding choices overall. Must say I found it a lot more difficult than I expected to come up with any others that are head and shoulders above the rest - lots of them seem to have their moment in the sun at one time or another.I draw a distinction between rider (horsemanship) and jockey (tactical nous) and I suppose the best combination of the two results in a low number of horses losing that should have won and a high number of horses winning that shouldn’t have done. I’ll have to give it more thought.In the meantime, from the “rider”&nbsp; side I would exclude, from a purely aesthetic perspective, any of them who have resorted to bumping up and down on their horses <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="barjon, post: 2428268, member: 66598"] Can’t fault your two outstanding choices overall. Must say I found it a lot more difficult than I expected to come up with any others that are head and shoulders above the rest - lots of them seem to have their moment in the sun at one time or another. I draw a distinction between rider (horsemanship) and jockey (tactical nous) and I suppose the best combination of the two results in a low number of horses losing that should have won and a high number of horses winning that shouldn’t have done. I’ll have to give it more thought. In the meantime, from the “rider” side I would exclude, from a purely aesthetic perspective, any of them who have resorted to bumping up and down on their horses :) [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?