Baffert, Point Given among Hall of Fame finalists

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

You really need to see a speed figure to know her workman like wins over an allowance horse like Future Pretense were lackluster performances?

You really need to see a speed figure to see that going head-to-head with Charismatic through wicked fractions in a 12 furlong race like the Belmont is a taxing thing for a 3yo filly?



Sky Beauty had over a month between the CCAO and Alabama - and that was back in the 90's when over a month was like too much time between starts.

Sorry but everything in racing cannot be reduced to lame excuses that horseman use to explain away subpar performance ... though I can assure you that Allen Jerkens never would say that 5 weeks wasn't enough time between races.

How laughably stupid.

Look, all I said to start this discussion was to observe that Sky Beauty was an exhausted horse the day she won the Alabama. I don't need a speed figure to tell me anything. I'm not the one quoting them like they are some sort of gospel truth. If you feel compelled to use a speed figure to justify your opinion or say that the performance was subpar, that's your prerogative. And it's fine by me. I simply thought that Sky Beauty showed a lot of heart and class when she won the Alabama. Nothing more, nothing less.

The "laughably stupid" comment in this thread was your statement that SBD was "more exhausted" in the Alabama because she had run more times over more race tracks. No reasonable person in attendance at Saratoga for either filly's Alabama (and I was there both days) would have said that Silverbulletday was more exhausted in the Alabama. Later that fall, SBD probably was exhausted, as evidenced by her dismal performance behind Beautiful Pleasure in the BC Distaff, but not at Saratoga.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

The "laughably stupid" comment in this thread was your statement that SBD was "more exhausted" in the Alabama because she had run more times over more race tracks. No reasonable person in attendance at Saratoga for either filly's Alabama (and I was there both days) would have said that Silverbulletday was more exhausted in the Alabama.

Nice job failing to detect my sarcasam Pedigree Ann Light.

No kidding Silverbulletday wasn't exhausted when she won the Alabama by 9 lengths with a 115 Beyer.

Actually - I'm thinking it's more like Pedigree Ann Ice instead of Pedigree Ann Light ...

she is the master of the silly spin and even she wouldn't argue that five weeks wasn't enough time between starts.

I never said Sky Beauty isn't Hall of Fame material either. However, your painfully silly explanation as to why she performed so poorly in the Alabama deserves it's own wing next to old PG 1985 quotes in the DT Hall of fame.

[slotdirt]

Am I the only one that just went looking for the DT Hall of Fame? PG 1985 was clearly exhausted when DaHoss whooped him in the great handicapping contest.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Yeah, if only he had more than five weeks to prepare for Hossy.

[Cannon Shell]

The issue that I have with the Hall of Fame is that it pits Open Mind, Sky Beauty and Silverbulletday against each other when they all are clearly Hall of famers regardless of what King says.

Why not put the horses and people on the ballots and vote on them. In or out. We dont need a jockey category to know that Alex Solis is a jockey. The current system allows a candidate to be compared to other candidates instead of the standard that is set by the current members ALREADY IN the Hall of Fame. And unlike other sports, a horses career is much shorter, even in the glory days where they raced more than 2 years. Add to the fact that there are both male and female horses in many different categories (turf, dirt, sprint, etc) and there are approximately 35k born a year makes it stupid to vote the same amount of people and horses in any given year.

[King Glorious]

Let's just make it a hall of good horses then. Forget making it the elite of the elite. Put Open Mind and Sky Beauty in the same sentence with Personal Ensign and Lady's Secret. Put Best Pal in the same hall with Spectacular Bid. There's virtually no difference.

The thing that your aren't getting is that they aren't all CLEARLY hall of famers. If they were, nobody on here would be debating it. If Spectacular Bid is on a ballot, do you really think anyone would say "no"? Would we really have to break out his past performances and go over his record? Would anyone need to make a convincing argument on his behalf? That's the point I'm making. You may clearly believe that all three of those mares deserve to be in. That's fine because it's all subjective anyway. But if you can't get 90% of the people to agree on it with you, then I just don't believe they should be in there.

[letswastemoney]

So.....

basically they are doing this every year just for the sake of having a ceremony?? Won't they eventually run out of horses to put in the Hall of Fame if they do this every single year??

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Let's just make it a hall of good horses then. Forget making it the elite of the elite.

If they did that.. King Glorious would be in the hall of fame... as would Indian Charlie.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Let's just make it a hall of good horses then. Forget making it the elite of the elite. Put Open Mind and Sky Beauty in the same sentence with Personal Ensign and Lady's Secret. Put Best Pal in the same hall with Spectacular Bid. There's virtually no difference.

The thing that your aren't getting is that they aren't all CLEARLY hall of famers. If they were, nobody on here would be debating it. If Spectacular Bid is on a ballot, do you really think anyone would say "no"? Would we really have to break out his past performances and go over his record? Would anyone need to make a convincing argument on his behalf? That's the point I'm making. You may clearly believe that all three of those mares deserve to be in. That's fine because it's all subjective anyway. But if you can't get 90% of the people to agree on it with you, then I just don't believe they should be in there.

Well if you got your way the trip through the hall would be really short because there would be about 12 horses in there.

Those horses are all clearly hall of famers based upon the current standards. If you dont like the standards that is your problem. But to look at these horses records and say they dont deserve to be in basically means that after 2000 no other filly will ever get in because name a filly that has a record near theirs.

Using your example if Curlin was on the ballot versus Spectacular Bid he would have no chance to get voted in. Yet he clearly belongs based upon his accomplishments but when compared to perhaps the best horse in 30 years he has no chance. It would be like saying that John Stockton shouldnt be in the hall of Fame because he isnt as good as Micheal Jordan.