\"We\'re going to miss her, but that\'s what happens,\" Shirreffs said. \"The big thing is to enjoy the ones that you have when they\'re with you.\"
The Mosses couldn\'t resist a bit of campaigning, with both of them wearing \"Vote Zenyatta\" buttons in reference to her bid to win Horse of the Year honors in January.
Fans did the same, chanting \"Horse of the Year\" while Zenyatta was on the track.
\"I think the industry will miss a huge opportunity if they don\'t give her Horse of the Year,\" said Shirreffs
Ahem,
......okie dokie, the voters should just forget Blame and Goldikova.Shameless lobbying in Cali for this horse. It would be a travesty if Z is HOY.If she does win, on what will it be based and don\'t tell me that it\'s what she did for racing, thats bulls--t.It\'s supposed to be based on what a horse does on the racetrack.
Very sad though, no more \"Zenyatta days\" in Cali,don\'t know what I\'m gonna do.
Mike
Take a breath Mike.
So the fans and owners are doing a little campaigning. So, what\'s the harm in that?? People campaign for awards all the time, is it really that serious?? You have some kind of personal stake in the award?? Its a freaking award thats voted on, who cares??
Did you get this upset when Kirk Gibson won the MVP over Darrell Strawberry??
As for honoring Zenyatta, guess what?? If you don\'t like it, don\'t tune in to TVG or attend the track that day. Perhaps the most popular horse ever to race in California gets a few days in her honor, and you can\'t stand it.
You\'re kidding.
Pretty tame stuff Mike to get this worked up.
Paul
True greatness needs no campaign and her adoration is way over the top relative to her ability. Z was as much West Coast media hype as any horse that ever lived.If you never saw her race and read what the West Coast writes, you would think she was a freak, not even close.
Imagine if Ruffian were running today.
Mike
And I would add that SOME people here have gotten more worked up, over less.
Meanwhile, I\'m trying to understand the rational argument for HOTY 2010. Not a lifetime achievement award, which would be a no-brainer, for the year.
This is exactly why they have those lifetime awards at the Oscars.
New award, the Zenyatta trophy for lifetime achievement? Or for whoever does the most for racing?
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And I would add that SOME people here have gotten
> more worked up, over less.
>
> Meanwhile, I\'m trying to understand the rational
> argument for HOTY 2010. Not a lifetime achievement
> award, which would be a no-brainer, for the year.
>
> This is exactly why they have those lifetime
> awards at the Oscars.
>
> New award, the Zenyatta trophy for lifetime
> achievement? Or for whoever does the most for
> racing?
I know Jerry, good thing you have me around to keep things calm.
I can see Goldikova as the winner.
I would have no problem \"forgetting Blame\" in this vote. If Zenyatta won the BC Classic it would be no contest. She lost by a nose and...Blame is HOY? If I were voting I would pick Zenyatta. Especially since she did so well on real dirt after being lambasted as a \"plastic champion.\"
Comparing Zenyatta to...Ruffian. An all timer. Who would you compare Blame to? Among the great ones? Come on. Can\'t see voting for Blame as anything much besides an anti-Zenyatta vote. Goldikova I could live with.
Had to bring up freakin\' Kirk Gibson too? Now THAT should have been \"tooken down\" by Jerry!
HP
She showed more in that 1 defeat than in all her wins, imo. But Blame beat her, fair and square, along with QR at the Spa, and won the Foster too. He\'s HoY. Any other year or horse, there would be no debate. It\'s just because of sentiment (a terrible way to objectively assess accomplishment) that we\'re even having the debate.
This is what happens when you give your horse only 1 chance (on dirt against males) to prove herself. If she had run in the Whitney or the Foster, who\'s to say she might not have won one of those. Then we\'d have a real debate.
Her connections, while keeping her around for 3 years which is to be admired, really ended up cutting off their nose (one loss at exactly the wrong time) to spite their face (the win streak against joke competition). Imagine what we might have seen if she\'d been campaigned this year the way Blind Luck was. Too bad. Oh well, regardless of which of them wins, it still doesn\'t get fix the dead rail that screwed QR.
HP,
With somewhat similar accomplishments this year, Z and Blame should be compared head to head first for HOY.I could not agree more with you that Blame was a nice horse, nothing more.
Mike
Right. HOTY is based on accomplishment, not ability.
On another point, to all those this year and last that think winning the Classic should get get you HOTY no matter what-- if they want the BC to count that way, they shouldn\'t hold a vote. Just give it to the Classic winner.
TGJB - is there an official \"criteria\" for HOY? What do they send out with the ballot? Any kind of description of what they are actually voting for beyond the vague title? HP
The only rule I\'m aware of is that you can\'t look at foreign races unless the horse has run here at least once. I don\'t think there are any stated criteria.
Then there is nothing stopping someone from looking/voting on it like it IS a lifetime achievement award? Of sorts... Not saying that would be right...\"I\'m just saying\"...
I think phil\'s points are good. Blame did indeed accomplish something this year.
HP
Just let it be decided by one vote from Trevor Denman...he\'s impartial. (He also calls horses\' asses like a horse\'s ass.)
I agree, my earlier comment was not sarcasm. The only possible rational position one could take against Blame would be for Goldikova-- which would be my vote, but it ain\'t gonna happen.
One of the interesting questions here is who gets to vote, and how informed they are...
What does Ruffian have to do with the 2010 HOY conversation?
alm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just let it be decided by one vote from Trevor
> Denman...he\'s impartial. (He also calls horses\'
> asses like a horse\'s ass.)
Right Alm, unlike Ton Durkin. He\'s always impartial. It was very obvious he didn\'t care that Easy Goer couldn\'t run down Sunday Silence, or that he didn\'t care that \"Tiznow wins it for America\".
Let the hating on anything west coast continue. It\'s pretty amusing.
Some response...did I mention Tom Durkin? I don\'t think so.
As corny as Durkin can be, however, I never heard him root a horse on, chanting down the lane: Zenyatta, Zenyatta, Zenyatta! Are you serious?
I wouldn\'t trade one Mark Johnson for ten Denmans if I wanted an accurate call.
I really thought we were done with this topic. Nothing new is ever said. Let\'s move on.
phil23 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh well, regardless
> of which of them wins, it still doesn\'t get fix
> the dead rail that screwed QR.
This dead rail becomes \"deader\" as time passes. We\'re talking Biblical proportions
and if people are still talking about racing in 10 years, the tale will be told
how any horse running within 4 paths of the rail on BC 2010 weekend was
mysteriously swallowed up by the Earth.
Horses coming out of the Breeders Cup races are now about 3 for 20 in their
subsequent starts. Non-steroidal Dutrow\'s 2 BC returnees, Believe in AP and Court
Vision, took a lot of money in their return races and were rather dull. Three of
the four BC runners who returned in the Cigar Mile were non factors, though
Haynesfield came tantalizingly close to winning the Cigar. Dakota Phone
also a non factor in his Polywood return this weekend.
Things looking up for NY Racing. The Racino people with their futuristic
architects renderings have big plans for the Big A where, by the way, they ran a
10K Claimer on the turf on Sunday (PG and MacK spinning in their graves). Rumor
has it that the Racino people want to build a private airstrip for the high
rollers, and between the airstrip and other alterations racing at AQ will be
conducted over a half- mile oval beginning in 2013. Of course by then the
Saratoga season will run from May 1 through October 30 so no one will much give a
damn.
... and OTB is proving harder to kill than Glenn Close in \"Fatal Attraction\"...
I mentioned him because he used to call the BC.
It\'s ok not to like Denman. Calling him inaccurate.......that statement is inaccurate. If that is \"rooting\" a horse home, I can find you 20 other racecallers that have done the same thing. The horse was 20+ lengths behind, makes a stirring stretch run, was the main attraction on the biggest race day of the year, and he\'s supposed to call it like it\'s the 5th on a Wednesday afternoon.
Whatever Alm. Enjoy Mark Johnson.
Well, what can I say? I lived in Southern Cal for 10 years, listened to Denman calls most of that time and often never knew what he was calling...he\'s very personal and idiosyncratic...rooting for Zenyatta was the most egregious call I heard him make and it stunk. I\'m sorry, but it was uncalled for...she was beating a stack of pancakes at the moment he made the call.
As for Durkin, he was the most colorful racecaller in his prime. He is past his prime and is very aggravating now. The guy at Calder,whose name I cannot remember, may be superior to both...he\'s a comer.
Mark Johnson is the first racecaller I have heard since Fred Capposela who helps you know, during a race, where each horse is and what they are doing. He is so incredibly accurate it is frustrating. When is it frustrating? When he calls a horse coming from out of it that nails the one you bet...he sees it coming from a sixteenth to an eighth of a mile before it happens.
I don\'t know about 20 other announcers...most of them are pretty silly...but those are my impressions of the ones to whom I have been most exposed.
Horses coming out of the Breeders Cup races are now about 3 for 20 in their
subsequent starts.
Are you referring to horses who ran on the dead rail that are 3 for 20?
Dead rail does not explain Quality Road\'s performance. Sorry
\"Dead rail does not explain Quality Road\'s performance. Sorry\'
Foot,
Agree, but a contributing factor for sure.You may be surprised how much a bad path/superior path can affect the performance of a horse.
Mike
QR displaced.
Footlick-- you know this how? At least you said you\'re sorry, though.
By my count 4 horses coming off the dead rail have already won back, including $17 and $35 winners. There may be others that have shown up at other tracks, I wasn\'t watching all of them.
Pdub-- You had to go back 20 years to find one? Seriously?
Everybody is entitled to their opinion JB. Alm doesn\'t care for Denman and thats fine.
It was 20 years ago yes, but you don\'t think Durkin was wanted EG to get up?? Tiznow earlier this decade.... if you were a European race fan, you wouldn\'t think that call wasn\'t a bit biased??
I don\'t care if someone doesn\'t care for his calls, but lets leave the hyperbole out of it. Alm was a bit dramatic with the characterizations of Denman. I\'m sure Denman wanted her to win; however, with millions of casual fans tuning in specifically because of Zenyatta it wasn\'t particularly egregious to give a race description focusing on her. It was a pretty dramatic run she put in considering how far back she was.
I\'ll drop it. Thought the criticism was a bit over the top. Kinda like a certain joc.....aw never mind.
And by the way, I\'m thinking the EG Belmont call was Marshall Cassidy, no?
I think Alm is taking the role of the race caller much too seriously. I mean if
you need Durkin or Denman or Harry Henson or Marshall Cassidy to tell you where
your horse is, or whether you have a chance to win, you may need another hobby.
The race caller needs to be neutral? Like a judge? Like a referee? I thought that
was what the stewards were all about. Denman has admitted that Zen is the best
he\'s ever seen. Should he recuse himself from calling her races?
Should Vic Stauffer (sp?) have been allowed to call races in which a rider he
worked as agent for had a mount? Not neutral? Cause for recusal?
So what if Marshall Cassidy liked Easy Goer? Did I mind that MC was booting for
him at the same time I was trying to beat him? Not a bit. Do you think Marshall\'s
calls somehow helped the colt in his victories or somehow affected the outcome?
And if you think Durkin went over the top calling Alysheba and Tiznow, how do you
think it sounds when he\'s yelling at the top of his lungs in the stretch drive
of a 7500 Claiming race?
I don\'t think any horse captured Marshall\'s race calling fancy so much as Bodacious Tatas. It took him half the Belmont stretch to bellow her entire name.
Who says its supposed to be based on what a horse does on the racetrack? Is there some HOY voting rules that i\'m not aware of?
Blame is a forgettable horse who got lucky in one race, got embarrassed in one of his 5 starts on the year and retired on the spot after his win. If that horse \'loses\' horse of the year to a legendary horse who\'s 19 for 20 lifetime, its anything BUT a \'travesty\'. I can see your point that you think Blame is deserving. That\'s fair, its your opinion and you\'re entitled, but to call it a travesty is coming a little too strong.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And by the way, I\'m thinking the EG Belmont call
> was Marshall Cassidy, no?
Yeah JB, Marshall Cassidy did the Belmont call. \"Its New York\'s Eaaassssyyy Goer in front\". Or something like that.
Local horse, home track. He was a very popular horse and damn talented, Marshall and the fans certainly enjoyed that race. I didn\'t have a problem with the call, just the outcome.
Whoops...wrong race...I wasn\'t referring to the recent BC Classic...it was the mare\'s last or next to last race in SoCal, where Denman made the call to which I was referring.
She was circling the field at the head of the stretch and he started chanting her name....he wasn\'t calling the race and he wasn\'t just rooting for her. He was screaming like some 16 year old out of control.
I don\'t care whether some people here think the race announcer is important or not, but I do care. Denman, as I said, is very personal and idiosyncratic...and often announces the race in reverse...listen to him closely...it sounds sophisticated, but it\'s stupid. Very often the race develops and he\'s catching up to it, not leading the commentary.
Durkin has decided it\'s more important to be cute, at this stage in his career...and it doesn\'t work much anymore. I prefer the guys who call what they see happening or what they anticipate from the back of the pack...some dork said I need a new hobby? I\'d hate to tell the IRS this is a hobby...they\'d want some money back.
Think about it. You watch a race...you tend to focus on your bet...the race announcer informs you about other aspects of the action. It\'s important.
Didn\'t know that
If you really feel that a horse that talented can run such a bad race and say it is just because of a dead rail, then you do. I didn\'t say that it could not be a factor. I just don\'t believe it is the only reason. I know that other horses have run well and won after the dead rail, but there could also be other contributing factors, i.e. the class of horse they are running against as compared to the ones they ran against on BC day. That is all I meant. I wasn\'t refuting anything you have said about the dead rail.
Alm:
I was about to get upset that you called me a \"dork\", but then noted that you
posted this early in the AM, probably long before you had your prune juice, your
Metamusical, your sponge bath.
A few of the posters on this board are old enough to have heard Cappy, but he
retired in what? 1970?
A point to make is that simulcasting changed the whole race calling business.
You had people watching races on TV and this was before big screen TVs. If one
was watching a large strung out field it was likely that not all betting interests
could be seen on the screen at all times. Racecallers were forced to try
to adopt a non traditional narrative style. I think Tom and Trevor were 2 of the
pioneers here, though each would admit they are past their prime.
OTB Memory: In the mid 70s, OTBs did not have unfettered access to the NYRA
signal. Live call, audio only, that was that for Marshall Cassidy, who made no
attempt to alter his laconic style and minimalist calls.
Simulcasting also meant the end of silent racing at Keeneland (early 80s) which
was rather surreal.
The racecaller never meant much to me unless he was awful, like the carnival
barker at Tampa or Mike Battaglia. The voice I am hearing at the crucial points
of races I bet is the voice in my head -- the voice that frequently is saying
\"You f-----g Idiot!\" or thankfully now and then \"You\'re a f-----g Genius!\"
Enough already with the racecallers. I\'ve been looking through Saturday\'s entries
and can find very little compelling racing. Any ideas?
Dork? Moi?
Rationally speaking, Blame is Horse of the Year
By Andrew Beyer
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Zenyatta has stirred passions and arguments this year that evoke memories of 1989, when Easy Goer and Sunday Silence polarized the racing community. The two colts\' partisans hotly debated their respective merits throughout the year until their final showdown in the Breeders\' Cup Classic.
When Sunday Silence held off Easy Goer\'s late charge and beat his archrival by a neck, the debate ended. Despite the closeness of the finish, almost nobody questioned the fact that Sunday Silence had earned the Horse of the Year title and secured his place in history.
Racing seasons don\'t regularly come to such a decisive climax, but 2010 did. Zenyatta brought her 19-race winning streak into the Classic against a field that included every colt with potential championship credentials. The Daily Racing Form wrote: \"Should any of the accomplished . . . horses - like Blame, Haynesfield or Quality Road - win the Classic, his 2010 r sum would make him a worthy choice as the best horse of this calendar year.\"
After Blame beat Zenyatta by a head, the performance did indeed make him worthy of the sport\'s top honor. His owner, Seth Hancock, assumed the title had been decided.
\"Blame won it,\" he said at the postrace news conference. \"I don\'t know who else you could vote for.\"
But Hancock underestimated the passion of Zenyatta\'s fans. Unfazed by her defeat, they have filled the blogosphere with arguments that she deserves the Horse of the Year title instead of Blame. With voting set to begin next week, the outcome is very much in doubt.
Zenyatta\'s admirers cite her outstanding performances that spanned three racing seasons. They believe she deserves redress after losing the vote to Rachel Alexandra last year despite her perfect record and her victory in the Classic. And they maintain she deserves recognition because she was the sport\'s brightest star. Referring to the 72,000 people at Churchill Downs who cheered Zenyatta after her defeat, Joe Drape of The New York Times wrote, \"My vote is with the people. Zenyatta is not only Horse of the Year. She\'s the Horse of a Lifetime.\" Drape cited the \"60 Minutes\" segment about Zenyatta and other media coverage and asked, \"Other than everyday horseplayers, had anybody heard of Blame?\"
There are no official criteria for the Eclipse Awards, but voters have always been guided by historical precedents and tacit standards. For example: Horses must excel at distances of a mile or more. Good form on dirt takes precedence over grass.
However, the aforementioned arguments for Zenyatta have no precedent. In 40 years of voting I cannot recall ever hearing horses\' popularity or lifetime achievements mentioned as qualifications for year-end honors.
The Horse of the Year title is bestowed for performance in a given calendar year. Data sent to voters makes no reference to what any candidate did in previous years. The sport recognizes horses\' exemplary careers through election to the Racing Hall of Fame.
Horses\' starpower has not been a factor in the voting. In 2004 Smarty Jones was the nation\'s most recognized and popular horse as a result of his near-miss in the Triple Crown series. Ghostzapper was mostly known to racing aficionados, yet he was the superior racehorse, and he swamped Smarty Jones in the year-end balloting. Last year Rachel Alexandra was a star of the first magnitude; she performed before bigger live crowds and TV audiences than Zenyatta did this year. Yet nobody argued that she should be Horse of the Year because she \"did so much for the sport\" - a common refrain during the last month. Rachel Alexandra earned the title on her merits, and Zenyatta should have to do the same.
However, Zenyatta\'s fans cannot make an honest case that she had a better 2010 season than Blame, who raced against the country\'s best males, recording four wins and a second-place finish in five starts. Zenyatta scored all of her five victories against relatively weak filly-and-mare rivals - if Blame or the other leading males had run against such competition, the outcomes would have been routs. No female racehorse in history would have been considered a potential Horse of the Year on the basis of such a flimsy r sum . The Classic was Zenyatta\'s make-or-break test.
She made a gallant effort as she rallied from last place and barely failed to catch Blame. She won over many skeptics, myself included, who doubted her ability because she had never before raced against top competition on dirt. Nevertheless, she lost - a fact that eludes her admirers who believe an honorable defeat counts as a win. Ed Fountaine of the New York Post concluded his Horse of the Year argument for Zenyatta by writing, \"She was hopelessly outdistanced in the race, yet lost by inches.\"
Zenyatta\'s fans imagine that their heroine overcame terrible adversity in the Classic and that the fact she was \"hopelessly outdistanced . . . yet lost by inches\" underscores her greatness. This is nonsense. She trailed the field because that is the way she always runs. For a horse rallying from last place in a 12-horse field, she enjoyed a relatively easy trip. She saved ground on the turn and avoided serious traffic trouble. She was abetted by the fast early pace that enervated the leaders. Blame got the jump on Zenyatta because he is a quicker, more versatile runner, and he was resolute enough to withstand her late charge. He earned the Horse of the Year title by beating his main rival in a head-to-head championship showdown, and the outpouring of specious arguments on Zenyatta\'s behalf cannot alter that fact.
The last paragraph is brilliantly written.
miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rationally speaking, Blame is Horse of the Year
> By Andrew Beyer
>
> Zenyatta\'s fans imagine that their heroine
> overcame terrible adversity in the Classic and
> that the fact she was \"hopelessly outdistanced . .
> . yet lost by inches\" underscores her greatness.
> This is nonsense. She trailed the field because
> that is the way she always runs. For a horse
> rallying from last place in a 12-horse field, she
> enjoyed a relatively easy trip. She saved ground
> on the turn and avoided serious traffic trouble.
> She was abetted by the fast early pace that
> enervated the leaders. Blame got the jump on
> Zenyatta because he is a quicker, more versatile
> runner, and he was resolute enough to withstand
> her late charge. He earned the Horse of the Year
> title by beating his main rival in a head-to-head
> championship showdown, and the outpouring of
> specious arguments on Zenyatta\'s behalf cannot
> alter that fact.
What gets me about this whole thing-- this year and last-- is that if you don\'t think Z should get HOTY you are some kind of Z hater. If anything, as has been pointed out here many times, the bad feelings are directed at those who picked her spots (and this year, those of RA as well).
TGJB: You know this how?
Because as it used to say in a great ad (based on characters from a great script that never got made) that ran on TVG, because I can read.
I certainly agree that there is terrific writing in that script, but your ability to read is not the question here. The question is what you have actually been reading. So let me ask you: Which racing websites do you read?
As for Beyer, he openly admitted to detesting Seattle Slew because he thought him overrated, and then it blew up in his face and made him look like a complete ass. He is a bit more subtle now. But I think his Zenyatta writing is a complete disgrace.
First of all, I was commenting more about what has appeared on this site. But it appears to me that Beyer was talking about who she has faced and beaten this year outside the BC, which is a function of who she was asked to run against. Can\'t beat them if you don\'t run against them. Like last year, the only case that can be seriously made for Z for HOTY is based on one race-- and in this case it\'s a race she lost.
\"He is a bit more subtle now. But I think his Zenyatta writing is a complete disgrace\"
Rich,
Why is calling a spade a spade \"a disgrace\"? Clarify Beyers factual racing inaccuracies concerning Z, no opinions please, just facts.How did so many who follow the game very closely not see Zenyatta\'s brilliance(no argument re her unparalleled consistency)
Mike
Miff,
You are beginning by giving me your opinion about spades. Then you are asking me to discuss Beyer\'s own mix of fact and opinion. But you are denying me the right to give my own opinions as I do this?
Is this what just happened here?
Pretty sure he\'s asking you for a factual basis for your opinions.
TGJB, you say \"What gets me about this whole thing-- this year and last-- is that if you don\'t think Z should get HOTY you are some kind of Z hater.\"
Here\'s what gets me. Anybody who states an opinion that Z should get the award is assumed in advance to be irrational.
As you posted earlier:\"The only possible rational position one could take against Blame would be for Goldikova\".
When you declare in advance that yours is the only rational position, don\'t you think that might tend to stir up some emotions.
Beyer did exactly the same thing in his article. After stating his case for Blame very well, he ends by declaring that any other arguement is just \"specious\".
Terms like those just tend to stifle honest debate and inflame emotions.
Why is there any debate?How does one conclude that Z is HOTY over Blame(let\'s forget Goldie) based on accomplishment. The Z fans want to dwell on \"what Z did for racing\" but how is that relevant as to what was accomplished by Z/Blame on the track, especially head to head.Z fans won\'t admit she lost to Blame, they wish to skirt that overriding fact.
As JB said, and I agree, I\'m waiting for a Z fan to put forward a factual case for Z getting HOTY.
Mike
\"The Z fans want to dwell on \"what Z did for racing\" but how is that relevant\"
Please explain why it isn\'t relevant. Which rule for the selection of HOY are you applying that would prohibit a vote based on that criterion?
When a selection is based on a vote, and there are no defined rules for how that vote should be determined, then it seems by definition that there are many rational ways that one may decide how to vote. That is the case with the HOY award. Declaring that there is one and only one way to determine the appropriate vote, is not very sound logic in the absence of rules for the voting.The HOY vote is a matter of opinion not fact. The Z fans are just as entitled to their opinion as the Blame fan club. It\'s obvious that the Blame fan club is larger on this board than the Z fan club. But that doesn\'t make their opinions less rational or relevant. They\'re just opinions in both cases.
JB wrote:
\"Pretty sure he\'s asking you for a factual basis for your opinions\"
Except that he explicitly ruled out my opinions (\"no opinions please\"). He wants me to fact-check an opinion column (\"just facts\"). He should have addressed his post to Jack Webb.
Doubt there any real Blame fans, just people who are not biased and look at accomplishment vs adoration.
Mike
plasticman Wrote:
>
> Blame is a forgettable horse who got lucky in one
> race, got embarrassed in one of his 5 starts on
> the year and retired on the spot after his win. If
> that horse \'loses\' horse of the year to a
> legendary horse who\'s 19 for 20 lifetime, its
> anything BUT a \'travesty\'. I can see your point
> that you think Blame is deserving. That\'s fair,
> its your opinion and you\'re entitled, but to call
> it a travesty is coming a little too strong.
Blame will not be a forgettable horse..alot of people will remember the horse that beat the mighty Zenyatta..people still remember Onion for beating secretariat..I\'m sure people will remember Blame. He didn\'t get lucky in one race. He ran down the numbers legend named Quality Road who was loping along at a slow pace in the whitney and then beat the Queen on the square in the worlds biggest race. So he beat the two biggest horses in Racing not named Goldikova this year I don\'t understand why Blame can\'t get any respect. It waqs a much tougher decision last year. My opinion is that the only way Z wins this thing is if the voters vote with their hearts and not with the facts.
I think you just proved Miff\'s point. No relevant facts to back your argument.
I think the bottom line is that Zenyatta, like Barbaro (but unlike Blame) has \"fans\" who view her career as a romance novel. Fans are by definition \"fanatics.\" No rational thought allowed.
There is a teller in the Clubhouse at Monmouth who is a big Zenyatta \"fan\" and who to this day insists that Barbaro is \"undefeated\" because he never \"lost\" a race---she is a sweetheart, but cuckoo for cocoa puffs...probably has 3 dozen cats and as many half open bottles of gin in her house. There is the foundation of your \"fanbase.\"
JimP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> \"The Z fans want to dwell on \"what Z did for
> racing\" but how is that relevant\"
>
> Please explain why it isn\'t relevant. Which rule
> for the selection of HOY are you applying that
> would prohibit a vote based on that criterion?
>
> When a selection is based on a vote, and there are
> no defined rules for how that vote should be
> determined, then it seems by definition that there
> are many rational ways that one may decide how to
> vote. That is the case with the HOY award.
> Declaring that there is one and only one way to
> determine the appropriate vote, is not very sound
> logic in the absence of rules for the voting.The
> HOY vote is a matter of opinion not fact. The Z
> fans are just as entitled to their opinion as the
> Blame fan club. It\'s obvious that the Blame fan
> club is larger on this board than the Z fan club.
> But that doesn\'t make their opinions less rational
> or relevant. They\'re just opinions in both cases.
\"I think you just proved Miff\'s point. No relevant facts to back your argument.\"
Actually I think you and Miff proved my point really well. first Miff declared that anybody who disagreed with him was just \"biased\". And then you declared that anybody who disagreed with you was not capable of \"rational thought\".
And what is most interesting about both of your responses is that I was very careful to not even take a position on which horse should get the HOY award. My \"arguement\" was that the award is based on OPINION, not facts, and that the ardent fans of both Blame and Zenyatta should be free to express their OPINION without being attacked as \"irrational\", \"specious\", or \"biased\". There are NO RULES for making the HOY selection. There is no rule that head to head competition should settle it. There is no rule that says the best TG figures should settle it. There isn\'t even a rule that says that the best campaign on the track should settle it. When there are no rules there are many rational ways for approaching it. Some of those rational ways might lead to a selection of Blame. Some might lead to a selection of Zenyatta. Some might lead to Goldikova. Or maybe even Uncle Mo.
Jim P,
While you may not intend to, you are skirting the real issue like the Z fans who wish to make HOTY a popularity contest. The HOTY has always been an attempt to honor the horse who accomplished the most on the race track that year, written criteria or not. What else should determine HOTY??
While I don\'t follow HOTY proceedings religiously, have never heard the argument made that a horse should get the award because of \"what it did for racing\" like Zenyatta.The talking heads at TVG surely are in bed with Z as there is rarely a word about comparative accomplishment with other HOTY contenders, but lots about how Z paws and plays to the crowd.Yeah,definitely HOTY attributes.
Think Z may win since many writers like the romance novel nonsense coming out of the biased west coast. Forget that Blame beat Z and every other top dirt runner in the world. Forget that slug Goldikova defeating the the toughest grass males on the toughest grass circuit in the world and then coming here and whistling against males.
Lastly, never said if you disagreed with several who see it the same way,that you were wrong or had no right to an opinion. It would be nice for any Z HOTY supporter to just back up that opinion with racing facts for this year.I\'m anxious to learn what racing facts I missed about Z in that regard.
Mike
I don\'t know what else to say Mike. You apparently want to define the rules for the HOY selection. Maybe you should work with the Eclipse committee to get your rules accepted by them. Maybe they could come up with a system like the BCS and just have the award settled by a computer. My only point was that as long as there are no rules for the HOY selection, it is just a matter of opinion, not fact, and all the voters are free to use whatever criteria they choose. Since that is the way it is, I don\'t understand why it is necessary to reject others\' criteria for the selection simply because they differ from yours. I\'ll leave it at that and you can have the last word.
Come on. Beyer gave the facts that led to his conclusion and made his case. You think there are other facts that lead to a different conclusion. Miff is asking you to state them.
Jim-- I made a CASE for why that was the only rational position. You are free to do so yourself and make me look irrational. All we have so far from you and others is bobbing and weaving. That\'s not a knock on Z, just those that think this should be a popularity contest.
Yeah, no criteria. So if a voter wants to name the horse he cashed the biggest bet on, or Secretariat because he thinks the movie helped racing, that\'s just fine, that\'s the intent of the award.
Re Z helping racing-- correct me if I\'m wrong but handle is down and tracks and OTB\'s are closing. Even if you want to say \"helping racing\" should matter, show me that Z did that. 60 Minutes? I think they had Pol Pot on there once.
No. I wrote that Beyer\'s Zenyatta writing was a disgrace, and then Miff took that sentence and started making assumptions off of it.
The thing is, Miff is here. So it is kind of silly for me to rely on your translation of what he actually meant--especially given that he has not come in and cleared things up.
What he asked for, as written, is ludicrous, and he\'s not going to get it. Your translation is sensible and I\'d be happy to do what you\'re asking, but it\'s going to be long, and I\'m not going to be holding back. This means there\'s going to be collateral damage going all the way back to the Rachel vote of last year. So it\'s your call.
I far prefer your making the case to your just being a critic-- it\'s easy to sit on the sidelines and be a sniper, not sticking your neck out (a lot tougher to write the book than write the review in the Wash. Post that takes potshots). And frankly I would like to hear the case about last year, you never told me that (although my memory is not wht it used to be, as you have pointed out).
Rich,
\"Going all the way back to the Rachel vote last year\" is not relevant to this year\'s HOTY.It\'s got nothing to do with last year but a voter can, like JB said, vote for any reason they choose.There are actually a couple of NY voters that are going to vote for Z because they feel she was cheated out of HOTY last year without giving some facts to back up their opinions.
It wasn\'t that close last year between Rachel and Z as to what was accomplished on the racetrack.This year it is close but the deserving winner,by accomplishment,is painfully obvious.
Collateral damage? I\'m frightened, but not my place to allow you to rant about Z.
Mike
Wouldn\'t everyone\'s time be better spent handicapping some races? It seems to me that someone must have a wager on who will be HOY, because i\'ve never seen a thread last so long. I think I\'ll just enjoy my autographed pictures of Rachel and Zenyatta I have hanging in my office and look forward to meeting Calvin in
February so he can autograph his 3 KD winners. He\'ll be inducted into the Arkansas Sports Hall of Fame. I hope I don\'t offend him. I heard he has a little bit of a temper, but then he is a rajun cajun. Let\'s go to Aqueduct and get paid on TG\'s longshot pick for the ROTW. Thanks in advance due to my power of positive thinking. Gotta buy the grandkids some Christmas presents.
It\'s not a case of me not wanting to make the case. It\'s a case of me wanting to make the case too damned much. This gives me pause, and it ought to give you pause to. I\'m not talking about just one Beyer column here. I\'m talking about everything coming out of him over the last couple of years. And there is no way that I can hit Beyer without hitting some \"innocent\" people at the same time.
As for Rachel and last year\'s HOY vote, I did give you my thoughts privately--in that \"High Noon: You Have to Show The ##CK Up\" email I sent you.\" Then we agreed to leave it there.
You can reply on point without going into everything Beyer has written. The argument here isn\'t really about him, to the degree he\'s involved at all it\'s about his specific arguments on this issue.
Miff:
Please do me a favor and try seeing what is there instead of seeing what you expect to see. What, exactly, have I written about this year\'s HOY vote?
And by the way: I know 12 New Yorkers who are voting against Zenyatta strictly because they don\'t like her dance steps. So there! Ain\'t that grand? Both of us know New Yorkers.
\"Please do me a favor and try seeing what is there\"
Rich,
You\'re coming around. Now, Blame beat Z head to head and had faced and beat tougher/faster horses than Z all year(check the pp\'s of both horses, if you don\'t already know that).Their race records for the year are kinda similar.
Let\'s hear your counter, facts only,opinions not relevant.Doubt you know 12 NY voters that are voting against Z.What are their names?
Mike
JB wrote:
\"You can reply on point without going into everything Beyer has written. The argument here isn\'t really about him, to the degree he\'s involved at all it\'s about his specific arguments on this issue.\"
My point, as I stated, is that Beyer\'s Zenyatta writing has been disgraceful. That is what I wrote. That is what I am prepared to defend--at length. It\'s a broad subject.
Now let me ask you the same question Miff (who is priceless) just ignored:
What, exactly, have I written about this year\'s HOY vote?
By memory, nothing. That\'s the point.
Rich,
Had a recent lobotomy? Precisely what did you mean while dancing around \"what Beyer wrote\" which is basically that Z does not deserve to be HOTY vs Blame.
You\'re getting boring beating around the bush,post your great wisdom about Beyer, Z, HOTY whatever.
Mike
Enough. I\'ll correct \"libotomy\" before he takes your head off.
\"You are free to do so yourself and make me look irrational.\"
I\'m not trying to make anybody look irrational. In fact my point was just the opposite. But apparently some people are too emotionally involved in this subject to read clearly. My point was that there is more than one rational way to settle an award that is just purely opinion and has no rules defined for the selection. Your defense of Blame as the rightful recipient is very rational. Beyer\'s is very rational. P-Dub\'s support of Zenyatta is very rational. I interjected myself into this exchange only to point out that a) there are no rules for this award, and b) in light of that it\'s disappointing to see so many people take the position that there is one and only one \"rational\" way to make the selection. I personally don\'t have a great need to take sides on which horse should get the award. I have no emotional stake in either one getting it. But I am impressed by the degree of narrow mindedness that both sides evidence regarding the views of the other side. Those were my only points. I\'ve stated them as clearly as as I can. So I will withdraw to other pursuits, but continue to observe the sniping with interest.
JB,
What happened to spell check??
Mike