Does Accelerate now win HOY over Justify?

[cj]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Cat Thief and Arcangues would like a word with you.

I'd have to look at those fields again, but this one was atrocious outside the winner.

[Track Phantom]

Here is the issue: Horse of the Year is too vague and not well-defined. Thus, we're all using our own interpretation of Horse of the Year. In addition, we don't agree where the Triple Crown ranks in importance. It is obviously at the top for those outside of horse racing because that is really all they are exposed to.

Furthermore, is it fair to penalize horses for an abbreviated career/season? Is it also fair to consider the possibility that a horse may have won by way of performance enhancers?

My personal opinion is the Triple Crown races are actually "restricted" (to three-year old's) and should be weighted accordingly. I also believe a three-year old that does not face older horses has to be so dominant in his division to remove any doubt that he was the best horse overall. Justify, despite his Triple Crown sweep, did not remove any doubt, and a "test" vs older was the way to know if he was truly the best overall. Since we did not get that, I think he should be knocked down a peg.

On the grand scheme of things, I do not mind if Justify is awarded HOY based on winning the Triple Crown and, by extension, the horse racing community signals the Triple Crown sweep as the greatest North American accomplishment. It truly is an amazing feat that hasn't happened but a handful of times in history. But I feel Accelerate is more deserving primarily because I don't automatically give the Triple Crown such lofty weight.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by cj

127 for both, and both carrying 126 though one was obviously a young 3yo.

But that does not give Accelerate credit for ground loss. If you look at the ThoroGraph figures (which factor in ground loss). Accelerate's Classic negative 3 1/2 is significantly better than Justify's Derby figure of negative 1 1/2. I would never call a Classic run in a negative 3 1/2 "in contention for the worst of all time". Mabe Justify would have improved enough to match that but that is a matter of speculation regarding a horse who could not remain sound long enough to even make the Classic. Shouldn't the ability to remain sound enough to race an entire season? I thought the industry was striving for greater soundness. If so, they should reward horses capable of doing so successfully.
HOY should not be based on speculation of how much a horse might improve.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

Here is the issue: Horse of the Year is too vague and not well-defined. Thus, we're all using our own interpretation of Horse of the Year. In addition, we don't agree where the Triple Crown ranks in importance. It is obviously at the top for those outside of horse racing because that is really all they are exposed to.

Furthermore, is it fair to penalize horses for an abbreviated career/season? Is it also fair to consider the possibility that a horse may have won by way of performance enhancers?

My personal opinion is the Triple Crown races are actually "restricted" (to three-year old's) and should be weighted accordingly. I also believe a three-year old that does not face older horses has to be so dominant in his division to remove any doubt that he was the best horse overall. Justify, despite his Triple Crown sweep, did not remove any doubt, and a "test" vs older was the way to know if he was truly the best overall. Since we did not get that, I think he should be knocked down a peg.

On the grand scheme of things, I do not mind if Justify is awarded HOY based on winning the Triple Crown and, by extension, the horse racing community signals the Triple Crown sweep as the greatest North American accomplishment. It truly is an amazing feat that hasn't happened but a handful of times in history. But I feel Accelerate is more deserving primarily because I don't automatically give the Triple Crown such lofty weight.

I wonder how great the TC sweep really is.

Take any 3 open G1 races in a row, how many horses have won all 3? How many have won the Woodward, JCGC, and BCC? Or before the time of the BCC, how many have won the Whitney, Woodward and JCGC? If we want them to travel, then ok, pick 3 races which would make for more travel. I’m going to guess that winning those 3 open G1s in a row would be harder to do than the TC. The only thing that really makes the TC unique is they’re only 3 once, so one shot at it per horse. But is it really that hard?

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Cat Thief and Arcangues would like a word with you.

Your nuts if you think the Arcangues fields was weak.

Bertrando, Tinners Way, Devil His Due, Marquetry....thats just off the top of my head.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

1 1/4 mles is the most important distance, Spalding.

That hardly rings true in this day and age with just a handful of top level races run at that distance on the main track. Nevertheless, I didn't suggest that it wasn't important. Justify won 3 races at classic distances.

He was also as fast as Accelerate at 9 furlongs by April of this year after only 3 career outings.

And yes, just because they wear fancy hats at the Derby doesn't mean we forget that it is a restricted race.

And just because a race is open to Pavel and Dr. Dorr doesn't make it a stronger race than a Triple Crown event.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

And just because a race is open to Pavel and Dr. Dorr doesn't make it a stronger race than a Triple Crown event.

LOL, perfectly stated. I really think people are underestimating how tough it was for Justify to put away a G1 winning sprinter (one that went on to beat older at Keeneland) in the Kentucky Derby and still have enough left to win.

[AskinHaskin]

... even Bodemeister only had enough for runner-up honors after putting-away the champion sprinter early in the Derby.


And the difference between Justify and Accelerate remains glaringly obvious:


Justify has never lost, and Count Fleet before him was named HOY with a 6-for-6 three-year-old campaign during which he never raced again after the Belmont Stakes back when the competition was probably more durable.

Justify is now the sole T.C. winner to have done so without racing as a 2yo just as another is the only T.C. winner to have won the Derby off of an 8-month layoff.


Some keep trying to compare Accelerate of November to Justify of June and before, when a more apt comparison would be Justify of May-June as a 3yo to Accelerate of May-June as a 3yo. It's laughable!


Nobody knows what it would take to beat Justify, and everybody knows that all it takes to beat Accelerate is City of Light, who then returned to finish behind the aforementioned Dr Dorr, a runner who then topped 6 foes in 3 subsequent 2018 starts.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

... even Bodemeister only had enough for runner-up honors after putting-away the champion sprinter early in the Derby.


And the difference between Justify and Accelerate remains glaringly obvious:


Justify has never lost, and Count Fleet before him was named HOY with a 6-for-6 three-year-old campaign during which he never raced again after the Belmont Stakes back when the competition was probably more durable.

Justify is now the sole T.C. winner to have done so without racing as a 2yo just as another is the only T.C. winner to have won the Derby off of an 8-month layoff.


Some keep trying to compare Accelerate of November to Justify of June and before, when a more apt comparison would be Justify of May-June as a 3yo to Accelerate of May-June as a 3yo. It's laughable!


Nobody knows what it would take to beat Justify, and everybody knows that all it takes to beat Accelerate is City of Light, who then returned to finish behind the aforementioned Dr Dorr, a runner who then topped 6 foes in 3 subsequent 2018 starts.

About a 105?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

That hardly rings true in this day and age with just a handful of top level races run at that distance on the main track. Nevertheless, I didn't suggest that it wasn't important. Justify won 3 races at classic distances.

He was also as fast as Accelerate at 9 furlongs by April of this year after only 3 career outings.


And just because a race is open to Pavel and Dr. Dorr doesn't make it a stronger race than a Triple Crown event.

If the older division was so weak Justify's connections didn't need to duck it.

They ducked it because they are a bunch of parasitic chickens who wanted to protect their overrated colt's phony undefeated record of 5 for 5 against restricted competition plus a 6th win achieved by cheating in the Belmont.

[cj]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

If the older division was so weak Justify's connections didn't need to duck it.

They ducked it because they are a bunch of parasitic chickens who wanted to protect their overrated colt's phony undefeated record of 5 for 5 against restricted competition plus a 6th win achieved by cheating in the Belmont.

How do you have access to his vet records? Impressive.

[ultracapper]

Originally Posted by bobphilo

HOTY should go to the horse that has actually accomplished more against all comers in open competition throughout the year. It has nothing to do with what promise a young horse has shown it may someday achieve if it meets open competition. Justify would be a good candidate for most promising newcomer award this year if such an award existed.

So who would have been your HOTY in 1972?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by cj

How do you have access to his vet records? Impressive.

My standard for the injury is "would it have forced the retirement of a cheap claimer?". The answer to that is obviously "no", so Justify's injury should be considered a contrivance for HOTY voting.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by ultracapper

So who would have been your HOTY in 1972?

Key to the Mint?

Favorite Trick didn't deserve it either.

[cj]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

My standard for the injury is "would it have forced the retirement of a cheap claimer?". The answer to that is obviously "no", so Justify's injury should be considered a contrivance for HOTY voting.

That is an impossible standard that no sane owner should or would ever follow.