2013 Eclipse Finalists

[Kasept]

There isn't a 'ballot'. The NTRA/NTWBA/DRF assembles a Past Performance booklet that has 'candidates' by division. Authenticity, Streaming and some others were left out of it in a case of apparent omissions. As for 'not a G1 winner', Funny Proposition managed to be included in the group of suggested Older Filly & Mare considerations but the winner of $830k between Jan-Nov wasn't.

Simply put, it's an embarrassment.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Kasept

There isn't a 'ballot'. The NTRA/NTWBA/DRF assembles a Past Performance booklet that has 'candidates' by division. Authenticity, Streaming and some others were left out of it in a case of apparent omissions. As for 'not a G1 winner', Funny Proposition managed to be included in the group of suggested Older Filly & Mare considerations but the winner of $830k between Jan-Nov wasn't.

Simply put, it's an embarrassment.

She wasn't a likely or worthy winner of award... Basically she was Satished

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by freddymo

She wasn't a likely or worthy winner of award... Basically she was Satished

No one suggested she was going to be the winner of the award. She was simply the clear 2nd best Older Filly & Mare of 2013 and deserved to be recognized as such as an Eclipse finalist behind division winner Royal Delta. The mechanism involved in 'assisting' voters was slapdash and poorly executed. There wasn't anyone at the 3 organizations that acutely omitted Authenticity, but it doesn't diminish what a farce the resultant outcome is due to laziness of voters.

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by Kasept

There isn't a 'ballot'. The NTRA/NTWBA/DRF assembles a Past Performance booklet that has 'candidates' by division. Authenticity, Streaming and some others were left out of it in a case of apparent omissions. As for 'not a G1 winner', Funny Proposition managed to be included in the group of suggested Older Filly & Mare considerations but the winner of $830k between Jan-Nov wasn't.

Simply put, it's an embarrassment.

Ah ok then that's just stupid. They effectively create a short list for nomination when they send this out. If they can do points systems for the Derby and Win and You're In for the Breeders' Cup, surely there could be some reasonable threshold where they can say 'if you do X, Y, or Z your PPs end up in the booklet.' That takes out any opportunity for this level of facepalmery.

[Danzig]

you would have to think, tho, that if you're asking racing people to vote, that you wouldn't have to send out info. if they follow so little of it as to require assistance in knowing who did what, why do they have a vote?

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Danzig

you would have to think, tho, that if you're asking racing people to vote, that you wouldn't have to send out info. if they follow so little of it as to require assistance in knowing who did what, why do they have a vote?

Absolutely.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Absolutely.

they should have to answer questions about racing and horses to get the vote. have doug put together a trivia question package, revedere to send photos for them to identify (with saddles cloths appropriately edited of course)....that's a good start to make sure they have the credentials to help decide awards.
i mean, what is this, the people's choice awards?

[Timely Writer]

Lost all in interest in process after Blame was denied.

Regards,

A. Stall

Ria Antonia wins a Breeders Cup race on a DQ, becomes a finalist. Did nothing prior to her "win"

Why should there be a category just for the sake of giving out an award? A certain standard has to be established.
Otherwise you can have Ria Antonia win it and be in the same eclipse category as some of the greats in the past. Sad.