The Babe Ruth analogy is decent but limited. Your oft-repeated conclusion that today's horses are 'better athletes' is a little oversimplified and deserves more discussion.

A more accurate extension of the analogy might be that today's horses, like Mark McGwire, may be 'pumped up' on a more regular basis for better performances, but these performance levels cannot be sustained and often result in injury. They run faster and jump higher. This does not make them 'better athletes', especially if they only run faster and jump higher once or twice. Call them what they are, chemically aided freaks who couldn't surpass past greats on natural talent if their lives depended on it. I'm sure training has something to do with it, but how much? Ask Ken Caminiti. After all, the weights work better with the drugs and I don't know how different it is for horses.

Baseball is a useful comparison. The benefits of these increased levels of performance to the respective sports are minimal. The horses run a few big races and then they're finished. McGwire's real legacy will be steroid testing in major league baseball, which will be going on long after the last flashbulb pops in his heartfelt Hall of Fame speech (where he will not mention steroids and be heralded, sickeningly, as a 'nice guy').

MLB attendance is down, which means that people are already saying '70 homers, big effin' deal.' I don't have to tell you that, with a few notable annual exceptions, compared to 30 years ago nobody goes to the track, any recent superhorse notwithstanding. If Mark McGwire is taking this stuff by choice, God only knows what they're giving horses. MLB and horse racing have two things in common, (1) drug issues and (2) long term and potentially irreversible troubles.

Do you really believe Mark McGwire was a 'better athlete' than Babe Ruth? After the 'inflated' years where he hit 150 homers in two years, McGwire had to hang it up because he couldn't hold a bat or walk around the bases. Some athlete. Great role model too. Take this stuff and hit home runs, kids, it's worth it. Take those two years out of his stats and you see a very good first baseman, but not MARK McGWIRE! Mantle, Mays, Williams and DiMaggio were easily as good if not better than anyone playing today. Compared to these guys, 'McGwire' and 'athlete' do not belong in the same sentence. And before you say Barry Bonds, add in five lost seasons for Ted Williams. Nobody today is 'better'.

Same goes for horses. Point Given ran four or five big races. He had his 70 home run season (six months, tops). You can't really believe this makes him a 'better athlete' than Secretariat.

There may be more horses today that can run at the Secretariat-level, but in these tainted times, I don't think the word 'better' will be accurately applied to any of them. TG figures reflect the 'new reality' but not the quality of today's athletic talent in comparison to yesterday's athletic talent. Such comparisons are unfortunately impossible. HP