Racingpost.com's weekly write up World Class is headed "American Pharoah good but cannot yet be classed as great". They of course explain why but look more favourably on American Pharoah than Beyer.
http://www.racingpost.com/news/horse-racing/world-class-pharoah-good-but-cannot-yet-be-classed-as-great/1892795/international/#newsArchiveTabs=last7DaysNews
It's inevitable comparison's have been drawn. Damn pity as it denigrates what he had to undergo to claim the title when so many other amazing horses have tried and failed. Yes, the acid test comes when they take on older horses or train on as four year olds but can't we at least for the moment bask in seeing the first Triple Crown winner in 37 'effin years without nit-picking at it!? What struck me while reading both articles is whether previous Triple Crown winners were judged in the same vein which American Pharoah now finds himself in? I'd be interested to know. I get the impression that he is somewhat seen as 'the most unlikely' as he doesn't fit the mold of a Triple Crown winner asthetically-speaking. How could some plain looking unremarkable brown horse win the Triple Crown compared to the chiselled, golden adonis known as Secretariat or the elegantly proportioned chestnut specimen known as Affirmed. He may no look the part but by golly he has the talent and heart of a TC champion. Onya American Pharoah.