It wasn't quite to be for Constitution Hill as he finished fifth in Milan over the weekend, but calls for his retirement are premature and completely wide of the mark.
The brilliant nine-year-old has dominated column inches pretty much ever since he burst onto the scene at Sandown Park almost five years ago, winning on debut, before producing the performance of a lifetime to land the Surpeme Novices' Hurdle just a few months later; third in a sequence of 10-straight victories to begin his career.
Success in the Champion Hurdle followed 12 months later, before issues with wind, injury and jumping saw him beaten in four consecutive races.
A crushing fall in the Fighting Fifth would spell the end of his time over obstacles and, instead of retiring him, it was decided that he would get a go on the Flat.
After choosing to pull stumps on his hurdles career, Michael Buckley and Nicky Henderson could have ended things there and then - taking away the chance for fans to witness a true superstar on the track altogether.
But, thankfully, they didn't.
And, on his first Flat outing at Southwell, he provided one of the moments of the season by running out a breathtaking nine-and-a-half-length winner in front of a packed, Friday night crowd. The vast majority of whom were there only to see him.
For me, that night alone completely vindicated their decision to race on.
In the time since then, we have only seen Constitution Hill make three more starts, with the latter two provoking strong reactions from a good proportion who think he should now be retired.
Amazingly, these are the two races where, despite defeat, the Blue Bresil gelding has ran to his highest level on the Flat. In fact, his latest effort saw him trail just a nose behind Dubai Honour, last seen finishing second in a Group 1.
In the current climate, connections are often berated for not running their horses often enough, and yet, here we are with a very solid mid-100s performer that -- in the opinion of many -- should be retired immediately.
Why? He very much looks as if he is still enjoying his racing and there is far less risked attached to his career now he doing his work on the Flat.
I think a lot of the outrage stems from the fact that he is not winning every race with ease, like at the beginning of his career, but a fifth-placed finish in a Group 2 comfortably eclipses what the average horse will achieve in its career.
Does this render horses of a lesser ability undesirable?
Of course it doesn't.
And, I'm sure that, given the right conditions, there is still a Group race to be won with Constitution Hill in the very near future.
Buckley and Henderson's decision to race on does not require justification, but maybe that would put an end to the nonsense once and for all.
