Finley on Eclipse Awards...

[smuthg]

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/hor...ill&id=3813940

I know there are a million different thoughts on Eclipse Awards (and 1000's of posts on this site), but I think his positions on Conduit and Goldikova are as misguided as some people thought Steve Davidowitz's position on Eight Belles is/was. If they are honoring the "best" turf horses to run in the US this year (or 3YO filly in addition to the turf in Goldikova's case) I think its hard to argue that the "Best" turf horses of their respective gender in 2008 are not Conduit and Goldikova...

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by smuthg

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/hor...ill&id=3813940

I know there are a million different thoughts on Eclipse Awards (and 1000's of posts on this site), but I think his positions on Conduit and Goldikova are as misguided as some people thought Steve Davidowitz's position on Eight Belles is/was. If they are honoring the "best" turf horses to run in the US this year (or 3YO filly in addition to the turf in Goldikova's case) I think its hard to argue that the "Best" turf horses of their respective gender in 2008 are not Conduit and Goldikova...

His point about Conduit is that performance over the entire year should count for more than just what some horse does in the monumentally stupid Breeders' Cup (although he probably wouldn't agree with me on the 'monumentally stupid' part). I agree with his basic point there.
Voters can vote on whatever criteria they like, but if I had a vote I wouldn't assign a Breeders' Cup race any more significance than any other G1 race.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by miraja2

His point about Conduit is that performance over the entire year should count for more than just what some horse does in the monumentally stupid Breeders' Cup (although he probably wouldn't agree with me on the 'monumentally stupid' part). I agree with his basic point there.
Voters can vote on whatever criteria they like, but if I had a vote I wouldn't assign a Breeders' Cup race any more significance than any other G1 race.

So the BC Classic is really worth no more than the Donn in your opinion? Do you have the same thoughts about all grade ones? Is the Kentucky Derby no more significant to you than the Florida Derby? I would think that a race that's a prep, a regional prep at that, for a bigger race.......shouldn't be held in the same regard as a season ending race that is the goal race for all of the competitors.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

So the BC Classic is really worth no more than the Donn in your opinion? Do you have the same thoughts about all grade ones? Is the Kentucky Derby no more significant to you than the Florida Derby? I would think that a race that's a prep, a regional prep at that, for a bigger race.......shouldn't be held in the same regard as a season ending race that is the goal race for all of the competitors.

Basically I just hate the whole idea of the Breeders' Cup so much that it particularly infuriates me when a horse is considered the default division winner simply because it won one race.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Basically I just hate the whole idea of the Breeders' Cup so much that it particularly infuriates me when a horse is considered the default division winner simply because it won one race.

It's not like it happens often though. It usually only happens when no horse has made him or herself the clear leader throughout the year. When that happens, the defining race is often the BC race. It's really not much different than the Derby or Oaks would be for a 3yo if no horse stood out. I personally have no problem with awarding the horse who had the standout race in a year in which no horse distinguishes themselves. My only issue is that I don't think that standout race has to necessarily be the BC race. I felt in 2005 that Ghostzapper's Met Mile was the single best race of the year and if horses can indeed win it off one start, why couldn't that be the one?

[Cannon Shell]

Bill Finley makes my head hurt.

He says....

I'm all for coming down hard on drug cheats. But anyone who thinks Asmussen should be denied an Eclipse Award in this instance is way off the mark. A lidocaine positive isn't that big of a deal and it doesn't mean Asmussen is a cheater. When a horse tests positive for a relatively innocuous drug like lidocaine it's almost always because there was a slip up and not because the stable was trying to juice a horse to win a race.

though his premise is probably right in this case this is coming from the guy who thinks Lasix is some evil drug. Conduit has to be male turf horse simply because the male turf horses in the US last year were very weak. Forever Together has far greater credentials for her division than Grand Cout or Einstein has.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Basically I just hate the whole idea of the Breeders' Cup so much that it particularly infuriates me when a horse is considered the default division winner simply because it won one race.

i think high chaparral winning over with anticipation is a perfect example of this.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i think high chaparral winning over with anticipation is a perfect example of this.

Interestingly, Augustin Stables and Sheppard... the same situation their filly Forever Together is facing versus Goldikova.