Stillriledup
11-14-2009, 05:40 AM
I've been trumpeting RA's greatness here and believed that Rachel was the HOY, but then i just watched this "instant classic" on TVG and thought of a few things that haven't been discussed as to why Z, instead of Rachel, should be HOY.
This pains me to say, because i absolutely Love RA and think she's one of the best horses i've ever seen and i still think that RA might be better than Z at full power, but for this award, let me toss a few things out there for the voters to consider.
1) I think that Zenyatta raced in the BC and wasn't 100% throughout the race. She seemed to be a little 'rough' all the way, she was on her wrong lead early in the race, switched leads, and then i believe she switched back to her wrong lead on the straightaway by the stands the first time. She seemed to not be as 'smooth' as she had been in her previous races, i just didn't think she was moving all that sound to me. Also, on the gallop out, she didn't look fluid and sharp, she's looked better, this race she gave all she had and i think because she wasn't 100%, this is a more impressive race than meets the eye. She was a beaten horse on the far turn, lets face it, horses don't win from that spot vs this kind of competition, it just doesn't happen. Z not being 100% is strictly my own opinion, i'm just going on visually, she didn't appear to be as 'smooth' as usual.
2) I did some thinking about 5 for 5 vs 14 for 14 and i've been saying that only her last 5 races should count. I was saying that Rachel shouldn't be penalized because of the 'undefeated thing' and that only 5 races should be up for debate. I'm changing my mind. I think its no fair to Zenyatta that this is a 'yearly' award. If this award was called "the horse of the two years" she would be the easiest winner in the history of the award. I think that even though its worded as 'horse of the YEAR" it really MEANS "horse of the period" I think you can give out the award to a two year span of greatness if you want, rules are made to be broken.
3) Z's win vs Anabba's Creation. I think this victory is hurting Z a little bit, people are viewing that she 'struggled' to beat a horse no one has ever heard of, but let me say that this win was more spectacular than meets the eye and here's why. Z was absolutely beaten with 50 yards to go. She realistically couldn't win. At that moment, i said to myself "oh my god, so this is what it looks like to see Zenyatta lose". At that moment, she found some impossible gear to find a way to overcome improbable odds to win the race. While she was favored to win the race on the toteboard, she was 100-1 to win the race AT THAT POINT and she overcame those improbable odds to get the job done to preserve and undefeated career.
4) The great older horse vs the great 3 year old. I think when two horses of different age groups get together and both are spectacular, you give it to the older horse only because the older horse is percieved as better. A great older horse will defeat a great 3 year old in head to head competition. Horses in restricted races for age have to really be head and shoulders better than the older runner to gain a winning vote. I know Rachel did venture out of her age group and even her sex group, but the great older horse should get the nod over the great 3 yo.
5) If Rachel goes on to be a great 4 year old and wins HOY in 2010, she'll have back to back HOYs (if she wins for 2009) and Zenyatta will largely be forgotten as Rachel's equal.
6) If we had the 'every 2 year award for HOY' no way Curlin ever beats Z as he was 0 for 0 this year. Curlin beat Z only because the award's clock ran out and ended on Dec 31, 2008. You know the old saying "i didn't really lose, i was just behind when time ran out". I know, i know, its horse of the YEAR if you want to get technical, but in reality, horse of the 'period' makes more sense.
7) Undefeated. To be able to win your first 14 lifetime starts at this level of competition is really an underappreciated accomplishment. You could make the case that Zenyatta is the best female racehorse in history. You can make that case if you want to. The best female in history really deserves one HOY award i'm thinking.
Its going to be absolutely heartbreaking for the fans of whichever camp loses this award, i'm starting to get a little bittersweet feeling knowing that one group of fans is going to be absolutely crushed and heartbroken. Its really a shame that one of these horses has to lose, i love both horses so much and feel that they both deserve this award because they have done SO much for racing this year.
At any rate, what a magical 2009 we have had, girl power was on an unbelievable tour de force this year. This probably won't ever happen again in our lifetimes where two females are the two best horses regardless of age and sex, its just unheard of and its likely we won't ever see this again in our lifetimes. I guess you can say that Sea the Stars was the best and these two females were 2nd and 3rd best, but just in America, we had the two best horses as fillies.
I think i would be pretty excited if they figured out a way to give the award to both horses, its really too close to call, you could go either way on this.
This pains me to say, because i absolutely Love RA and think she's one of the best horses i've ever seen and i still think that RA might be better than Z at full power, but for this award, let me toss a few things out there for the voters to consider.
1) I think that Zenyatta raced in the BC and wasn't 100% throughout the race. She seemed to be a little 'rough' all the way, she was on her wrong lead early in the race, switched leads, and then i believe she switched back to her wrong lead on the straightaway by the stands the first time. She seemed to not be as 'smooth' as she had been in her previous races, i just didn't think she was moving all that sound to me. Also, on the gallop out, she didn't look fluid and sharp, she's looked better, this race she gave all she had and i think because she wasn't 100%, this is a more impressive race than meets the eye. She was a beaten horse on the far turn, lets face it, horses don't win from that spot vs this kind of competition, it just doesn't happen. Z not being 100% is strictly my own opinion, i'm just going on visually, she didn't appear to be as 'smooth' as usual.
2) I did some thinking about 5 for 5 vs 14 for 14 and i've been saying that only her last 5 races should count. I was saying that Rachel shouldn't be penalized because of the 'undefeated thing' and that only 5 races should be up for debate. I'm changing my mind. I think its no fair to Zenyatta that this is a 'yearly' award. If this award was called "the horse of the two years" she would be the easiest winner in the history of the award. I think that even though its worded as 'horse of the YEAR" it really MEANS "horse of the period" I think you can give out the award to a two year span of greatness if you want, rules are made to be broken.
3) Z's win vs Anabba's Creation. I think this victory is hurting Z a little bit, people are viewing that she 'struggled' to beat a horse no one has ever heard of, but let me say that this win was more spectacular than meets the eye and here's why. Z was absolutely beaten with 50 yards to go. She realistically couldn't win. At that moment, i said to myself "oh my god, so this is what it looks like to see Zenyatta lose". At that moment, she found some impossible gear to find a way to overcome improbable odds to win the race. While she was favored to win the race on the toteboard, she was 100-1 to win the race AT THAT POINT and she overcame those improbable odds to get the job done to preserve and undefeated career.
4) The great older horse vs the great 3 year old. I think when two horses of different age groups get together and both are spectacular, you give it to the older horse only because the older horse is percieved as better. A great older horse will defeat a great 3 year old in head to head competition. Horses in restricted races for age have to really be head and shoulders better than the older runner to gain a winning vote. I know Rachel did venture out of her age group and even her sex group, but the great older horse should get the nod over the great 3 yo.
5) If Rachel goes on to be a great 4 year old and wins HOY in 2010, she'll have back to back HOYs (if she wins for 2009) and Zenyatta will largely be forgotten as Rachel's equal.
6) If we had the 'every 2 year award for HOY' no way Curlin ever beats Z as he was 0 for 0 this year. Curlin beat Z only because the award's clock ran out and ended on Dec 31, 2008. You know the old saying "i didn't really lose, i was just behind when time ran out". I know, i know, its horse of the YEAR if you want to get technical, but in reality, horse of the 'period' makes more sense.
7) Undefeated. To be able to win your first 14 lifetime starts at this level of competition is really an underappreciated accomplishment. You could make the case that Zenyatta is the best female racehorse in history. You can make that case if you want to. The best female in history really deserves one HOY award i'm thinking.
Its going to be absolutely heartbreaking for the fans of whichever camp loses this award, i'm starting to get a little bittersweet feeling knowing that one group of fans is going to be absolutely crushed and heartbroken. Its really a shame that one of these horses has to lose, i love both horses so much and feel that they both deserve this award because they have done SO much for racing this year.
At any rate, what a magical 2009 we have had, girl power was on an unbelievable tour de force this year. This probably won't ever happen again in our lifetimes where two females are the two best horses regardless of age and sex, its just unheard of and its likely we won't ever see this again in our lifetimes. I guess you can say that Sea the Stars was the best and these two females were 2nd and 3rd best, but just in America, we had the two best horses as fillies.
I think i would be pretty excited if they figured out a way to give the award to both horses, its really too close to call, you could go either way on this.