[Kasept]

Beyer's last 3 paragraphs. As perfect and logical a summation of this discussion as anyone will write...

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 race summary. 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.