Ryan Moore rode both on the track, so I doubt his opinion was solely based on homework. Workforce was a good worker, I have no idea about Harbinger, but I would have to presume that Stoute has seen enough horses down the years to form an opinion judged on more than just what he sees each morning on the gallops. Maybe there was an element of not wanting to rustle feathers at Juddmonte, but the Prince is fairly loyal and I doubt he would have taken great umbrage at the suggestion Workforce wasn't as good as Harbinger. Highclere may not provide Freemason Lodge with as many horses as Juddmonte do, but I think Harry Herbert would have been just as open to insult given his fondness for the horse in question.
What is said in interviews isn't necessarily worth putting complete stock in, but you have to admit it is interesting and there is just as much case for it being an honest, frank answer to a question, as being manipulated to favour one owner over the other.
Anyway, people will always point to horses in the past being over-rated, or current horses being under-rated. The same goes on in the NH scene with Arkle and Kauto. There will always be an unconscious want to view what we have now, as better than what went on in years gone by, but that doesn't make it so. Racing has been blessed recently no doubt, but what I think people forget was that some of the great horses from the past, rose to the top in generations of great strength. I'm not going to be drawn on the NH, but certainly on the flat you can't look at many of the horses we have been able to enjoy in the last ten years and say they did the same thing. It doesn't remove credence from their achievements, but like Camelot for example, it does make it harder to really assess how they compare / compared. I completely concur with an article I was reading this morning about his St Leger bid
http://www.racingpost.com/horses/home.s ... t7DaysNewsShould he win at Doncaster, it will be a great achievement, but that doesn't make him a great horse, not yet, not until he has proven his ability against horses with proven ability. Had he raced in a much stronger division, and was on the verge of the same thing, then it would be different entirely, but through no fault of the horse himself he hasn't.
If your opinion is that Harbinger was a good horse, I absolutely agree; if your opinion is that Harbinger would be in your top ten for the last decade, I have no issue with that, you have every right to your opinion, such as I have to mine; but if your opinion stretches on to say that he is a great horse, rather than just a good one, or worthy of 140 for his King George win, worthy to be considered next to horses such as Dancing Brave, I couldn't disagree more vehemently and I would absolutely challenge it.