Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 1st_Saturday_in_May
Brian, by the same token IF Suave were to win the Classic, at least he would be beating talented horses - Dini, Drift, Lava, Invasor, etc, same with Kelly's over Henny, War Front, Bordonaro, etc.
Lets say Dubai Escapade were to become a F&M Sprint Champion. What great competition would she face in that race outside of Malibu Mint, and I really use the term 'great' loosely when applying it to Malibu. There just arent enough good F&M Sprinters, or turf sprinters, to merit running a 1000k race for them. It would be just like watching a rerun of the same cast that ran in the Princess Rooney. One of the greatest things about the BC IMO is that it brings together horses who have been battling in Grade 1's across the country and sometimes internationally and who havent beating up on one another over and over. A F&M Turf Division just isnt deep enough to have quality horses who havent faced one another several times previously.
|
that's a fair assessment in most regards -- but it really does place a premium on competition. so if we have a really weak handicap division one year, should the winner not be a BC champ because they aren't beating anything?
does this year's BCJF winner deserve to be a BC champ? it's sure as hell shaping up as a big "NO." If you suggest that we need depth to create merit for a BC champ, then we should by all means deny the winners of the depth-less races the title of BC champ.
sound problematic? sure should.
i get what you're saying -- though both arguments have holes in them that are impossible to plug up reasonably. cunningham racing brings it up too -- why shouldn't xtra heat, madcap escapade, etc etc been BC champions? i would argue that they deserve it -- like i would argue that dubai escapade or malibu mint deserve it -- the former has won some races brilliantly, and the latter has shown up at all the dances and done a pretty darn great job in them, winning some when she wasn't supposed to and losing some when compromised.