Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Slewbopper
I see no problem giving a divisional award to a horse that has run only once in NA....i.e. Arazi. The big prize, Horse of the Year, is a different tune though. It should be based on a body of work for the year, not one race
At this point, my ratings would be...
1....Rachel
2....Gio Ponti
3....Summer Bird
|
generally, it is based on the body of work. much as i don't like seeing a horse swoop in from europe, win one race, and walk away with an eclipse, the argument can be made that they had an outstanding year-high chapparal for instance. they just may not have had an outstanding year here. so, much as i thought with anticipation should have gotten the nod for top turfer, i can certainly understand why he did not. BUT, i think the vote for high chapparal proves the point that the bc has too much weight given to it by voters. hence my argument that a win in the bcc, over what is presumably the best field assembled in the year, isn't necessarily an indication of who the best horse is all year. case in point for that is volponi.
i don't think the award should be given for who someone
feels is the best, but for the horse who has competed at the highest level all year, and with the most consistency. the horse who best showed ability, regardless of surface, track, competition, length of race, etc.