Quote:
|
Originally Posted by King Glorious
My thing is this though.....if u want to change the criteria for winning it to "most accomplished horse in North America" then they should change it and then there would be no debate at all as to who is the horse of the year. But when the only defined criteria says the best horse to race in NA during the year, then it opens up a debate. I don't know if any of u are basketball fans but back in 1993, they gave the NBA MVP award to Charles Barkley. It was a hollow award because then Michael Jordan, the acknowledged best player in the world, promptly went out and kicked Barkley's ass in the championship. Same thing in 1997 when they gave it to Karl Malone and then Jordan went out and kicked his ass in the championship. How does it make sense to give someone else the award as the best player when Michael Jordan was still in his prime? I personally would feel like the HOY award would ring hollow if it's not given to the best horse, especially when that horse fits that stated criteria. I could see if it said that u had to win x number of races or x amount of money or x number of grade ones in order to win the award. But it doesn't. So that's why I can't vote for Invasor if I don't feel like he's the best. Most accomplished without a doubt.....but not the best.
|
Who is the best horse if not the most accomplished. Define "best"!