If Zenyatta wins the Classic

Antitrust32 · #1 09-24-2009, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

The part in bold is what makes this a debate that has no clear answer. If the award is truly for the most accomplished horse of that year, then Rachel is a clear winner. But the criteria is not clear enough, IMO. It says it's to be awarded to the best horse to race in North America and is open to all horses that have run at least one time in NA. You get a situation like last year. I thought that even with his running only once and her running only once, it was extremely clear that Raven's Pass and Goldikova were the best 3yo male and female to run in NA last year. Even with a win in the Classic, Zenyatta won't have accomplished as much as Rachel this year but by beating a better set of horses, even if it's only once, she can still make a very valid claim to being the best horse to run in this country this year. As I've said many times, if people want the award to be for the entire year, I'd have no problem with that but they need to change the criteria. To me, it's hypocrital to say that it's not about one day or one race after they've awarded many championships to horses simply because of one race.

It is based on a years worth of work. Sure we have a turf horse here and there that comes over for the BC and blows away the field, and they get Turf Champion. But longshot winners of the BC usually dont get voted champ. I dont think Volponi did, not sure about Cat Thief but I also dont think it happened there either. Usually the horse that wins the BC has also had a very good campaign all year (like Curlin in 2007, Invasor, etc, etc).. so it makes sense for them to be champ.

King Glorious · #2 09-24-2009, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

It is based on a years worth of work. Sure we have a turf horse here and there that comes over for the BC and blows away the field, and they get Turf Champion. But longshot winners of the BC usually dont get voted champ. I dont think Volponi did, not sure about Cat Thief but I also dont think it happened there either. Usually the horse that wins the BC has also had a very good campaign all year (like Curlin in 2007, Invasor, etc, etc).. so it makes sense for them to be champ.

With all due respect, this doesn't make any sense. You say in one sentence that it's based on a year's worth of work but then in the next sentence that we get the occassional winner that wins it off of one race. Which is it? A season or a race? You are admitting that it's both. In this case, Zenyatta wouldn't be a longshot winner that had nothing else in her record. It wouldn't be a Volponi or Arcangues situation. It would be a legitimate horse making a legitimate case by beating the best field of the year.

Antitrust32 · #3 09-24-2009, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

With all due respect, this doesn't make any sense. You say in one sentence that it's based on a year's worth of work but then in the next sentence that we get the occassional winner that wins it off of one race. Which is it? A season or a race? You are admitting that it's both. In this case, Zenyatta wouldn't be a longshot winner that had nothing else in her record. It wouldn't be a Volponi or Arcangues situation. It would be a legitimate horse making a legitimate case by beating the best field of the year.

Only in Turf Championship and occasionally Juvi championship is it determined off of one race... which kinda makes more sense because Euro turf horses are vastly superior to US turf horses.

Also, a Plastic Classic may not mean as much to voter as in years past where it was an actual dirt race. It obviously didnt mean much to voters last year.

King Glorious · #4 09-24-2009, 03:08 PM

I don't think the issue we are talking about is who's horses are superior but whether or not championships can be won off of one race. If you are saying that you don't think the SHOULD be, I can respect that opinion. I just think it's wrong to say that the awards ARE based on the whole year when there is plenty of history that say that isn't always the case. I will say that in a situation where I think it's close between two horses as far as who's best, I'll look at the whole year as a sort of tiebreaker. But when one has a clear advantage to me, that horse wins out whether it's one race or 100.