New Hall of Fame

King Glorious · #1 02-14-2008, 09:33 AM

Ok, by now u all know me and know that I like to come up with crazy ideas. Here is the latest. What I'd like to do is see if we can come up with a new horse racing hall of fame. What I'd like to do is have the members of the forum weigh in with their opinions on what should be required to gain entry. As it is now, it's totally subjective. I have no problem with it being subjective but it leads to so many arguments. How can we say GZ or Smarty shouldn't be in there because they raced so sparingly when Ruffian, Majestic Prince, and AP Indy are in there? So I'd like for all of the forum members to list what would be their requirements for making the hall of fame and then we'll try to come up with a consensus opinion on the matter.

I looked all over and the best I could find was a list of champions going back to 1940. I'm sure some of u have better lists than the one I found. So what I would like to do is include only horses that raced from 1940 till the present. We'll figure out another way to deal with horses prior to that.

What this thread is NOT for is listing horses that u think should be there. All we are doing here is coming up with a consensus on what should be the requirements. Then what we can do later is go through the members that are in there and see who meets the requirements and who doesn't.

I'll start it off. My requirements to enter the hall of fame would be:

-a horse has to have been named a divisional champion in more than one season or HOY at least once.

-has to have won outside of restricted company. For fillies, they don't have to beat the boys but they do have to have won outside of the just 2yo or 3yo restricted races.

-if 10 or less career races, has to have won 70% and been ITM 90%

-if 11-20 career races, has to have won 65% and been ITM 80%.

-if 21-30 career races, has to have won 60% and been ITM 75%.

-if 30+ career races, has to have won 55% and been ITM 70%.

SniperSB23 · #2 02-14-2008, 09:43 AM

I've always been a big fan of Bill Simmons' idea for a pyramid style HOF and I think it would work perfectly now for racing. You could have four tiers to the pyramid. The top pier is the all time elite. The second pier is the all time greats that just don't quite have the credentials to make the top tier. The third is the horses that currently belong on the HOF but wouldn't be classified as all time greats. Then the fourth is open to the horses who might not have classic HOF credentials but either had incredible periods of brilliance or remarkable accomplishments. You wind up with more in the HOF altogether but there is a clear distinction between what level of HOFer they are. It would make for a great HOF setup too where you start on the first floor looking at the tier 4 HOFers and eventually work your way up to the top where the all time elites are.

King Glorious · #3 02-14-2008, 10:21 AM

The problem that I have with that is that there is still no criteria involved. It's still subjective as to who gets in and even more subjective as to which level they would be at. I want some minimum standards that have to be reached first then if you want to break them down further after they are in, feel free.

SniperSB23 · #4 02-14-2008, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

The problem that I have with that is that there is still no criteria involved. It's still subjective as to who gets in and even more subjective as to which level they would be at. I want some minimum standards that have to be reached first then if you want to break them down further after they are in, feel free.

I'm not a fan of set standards. Eras change and it makes it so tough to have a set of standards that are going to work through all times.

jballscalls · #5 02-14-2008, 10:45 AM

Can we put Tom Durkin into this Hall of Fame??

my miss storm cat · #6 02-14-2008, 06:26 PM

Are we including international runners here (and no I don't mean HK in particular but i want to know if horses like Pride and Ouija Board count).....

Pedigree Ann · #7 02-15-2008, 04:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

-if 21-30 career races, has to have won 60% and been ITM 75%.

-if 30+ career races, has to have won 55% and been ITM 70%.

These criteria might keep out many of the great weight-carrying champions of the past, who lost races because they were conceding 20 or more lbs to the lightweights. Stymie, for instance, had a career record of 131/35-33-28.

Triple Crown winner Assault wouldn't make it, either, despite stellar years at 3 and 4 (42/18-6-7 lifetime). He was retired to stud at 5, proved sterile, and was not the same horse when he raced at 6, although he did win the Brooklyn (was a real G1 type race in those days).

Exterminator, from even farther in the past, won only 50 of 100 because as a gelding he was kept running long after his prime. (No Bute to deal with his arthritic joints in those days.)

Port Conway Lane · #8 02-15-2008, 07:00 AM

I'm surprised influential sires aren't included. Raise A Native is not inducted.I would think someone would nominate a champion 2 year old whose blood runs through half of american racehorses.

Pedigree Ann · #9 02-16-2008, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

I'm surprised influential sires aren't included. Raise A Native is not inducted.I would think someone would nominate a champion 2 year old whose blood runs through half of american racehorses.

Because this is a RACING hall of fame, not a breeding one. Raise a Native showed a lot of promise at 2, but so did Favorite Trick, and Devil's Bag, and, well, you choose a top 2yo who didn't train on - Arazi? All nice horses but not Hall of Fame material. Only if they race at the same level at 3, at least, should horses be under consideration to be classed among the greats.

King Glorious · #10 02-15-2008, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pedigree Ann

These criteria might keep out many of the great weight-carrying champions of the past, who lost races because they were conceding 20 or more lbs to the lightweights. Stymie, for instance, had a career record of 131/35-33-28.

Triple Crown winner Assault wouldn't make it, either, despite stellar years at 3 and 4 (42/18-6-7 lifetime). He was retired to stud at 5, proved sterile, and was not the same horse when he raced at 6, although he did win the Brooklyn (was a real G1 type race in those days).

Exterminator, from even farther in the past, won only 50 of 100 because as a gelding he was kept running long after his prime. (No Bute to deal with his arthritic joints in those days.)

What would be your criteria then? That's the point here.