Thor's Echo

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

I'll never understand why people argue endlessly over who should have or should not have won the eclipse award. Who cares? are you guys wagering on it? Its mythical, subjective, its like winning an oscar.

What's to understand? Some of us obviously do care about it. While making money at horseracing is important to me, I'm also a fan of the sport. It's the only sport I go out of my way to watch. I don't think twice about passing up watching the Superbowl or the World Series, but it would take something humongous to keep me from watching the Breeders Cup.

Fans are naturally interested in which horse gets credit for what. It's just as natural as arguing which baseball or football player deserves the MVP. Or, as you pointed out, arguing who deserves the Oscar.

In the case of Thor's Echo, I'm definitely biased because betting him was one of the bright spots of my Breeders Cup capping. I thought questions about his worthiness were put to rest by his subsequent Gr I win at Laurel. But as soon as he throws in the clunker in Dubai, the vultures come out with mention of needing the needle, ignoring the fact that he ran a good race in Dubai a year ago.

See? I'm still not done arguing about this!

--Dunbar

[boswd]

I agree with Dunbar, not about Thor's Echo but having fun debating and such. Like him I am a huge fan of the sport itself. I follow the jockey's, trainers, horses like I would follow the Red Sox or Syracuse etc.
It wouldn't phase me not to have a single dollar bet on a race and still watch a great race with as much enthusiasm as if I did. I have favorite horse and trainers and root for them and love to debate he is better etc etc .

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by boswd

I agree with Dunbar, not about Thor's Echo but having fun debating and such. Like him I am a huge fan of the sport itself. I follow the jockey's, trainers, horses like I would follow the Red Sox or Syracuse etc.
It wouldn't phase me not to have a single dollar bet on a race and still watch a great race with as much enthusiasm as if I did. I have favorite horse and trainers and root for them and love to debate he is better etc etc .

As I just replied to Dunbar, its not a matter of needing the discussion to be only about betting money on a race. Many weekends I bet nothing and only watch and I enjoy that tremendously. Also I really enjoy debating some things. Its just the stuff like MVP, Eclipse, etc, just doesn't do it for ME. I'm not saying that I don't understand why people who are fans would enjoy it.

[boswd]

Fair enough

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

What's to understand? Some of us obviously do care about it. While making money at horseracing is important to me, I'm also a fan of the sport. It's the only sport I go out of my way to watch. I don't think twice about passing up watching the Superbowl or the World Series, but it would take something humongous to keep me from watching the Breeders Cup.

Fans are naturally interested in which horse gets credit for what. It's just as natural as arguing which baseball or football player deserves the MVP. Or, as you pointed out, arguing who deserves the Oscar.

In the case of Thor's Echo, I'm definitely biased because betting him was one of the bright spots of my Breeders Cup capping. I thought questions about his worthiness were put to rest by his subsequent Gr I win at Laurel. But as soon as he throws in the clunker in Dubai, the vultures come out with mention of needing the needle, ignoring the fact that he ran a good race in Dubai a year ago.

See? I'm still not done arguing about this!

--Dunbar

I wasn't being critical, I guess I just wonder why it doesn't strike my fancy like it does most everyone else. Oh I'm a rabid fan as well and wouldn't miss any of the big days (translation - every Saturday of the year!) Also, you mentioned something about being a fan of the sport and that its not just about making money. Its the same for me and the reason I don't get the eclispe stuff isn't cause I just want to focus on making money. Its just something about there not being any one correct answer. I enjoy the debate initially, then I'm bored right away and have to move on. It could be that I have ADD.

What I am really passionate about is debating the relative merits of horses that will actually be competing against each other soon, for example who will win the FOY, or the Hutcheson or the seventh race at Turfway. What I like is that after all the debate and back and forth we get to take the test (watch the race) and see who was correct. I like how that gives you an immediate and more definitive answer.

For the record, I think Thors Echo was a deserving winner of the Eclipse Award, and I don't know how you can make a case for another horse above him.