Zenyatta wins 2010 Horse of the Year title!

[TheGhostOfOscarB]

Zenyatta has given us a 21st thrill.

The joy of knowing her detractors just threw an embolism.

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by TheGhostOfOscarB

She spotted Blame 20+ lengths.

Could Blame spot ANYONE 20 lengths and win?

One of the greatest fallacies uttered about the race........

she was never more than 6 or 8 behind Blame, and I am doing this from memory

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by bigmack

While not love, I get a bang out of all you at the ready to ridicule the weight, home track, worthless 6 race campaign types who have little to say about a collection of experts who voted for a horse you all find undeserving.

No point in bantering back & forth anymo with the dolts 'round these parts. Take it up with those that actually voted and have been deemed worthy of voting for a hoss you found little reason to vote for.

Herein lies part of the problem. Assuming the horse racing media are experts is faulty at absolute best. As with any profession there are some sharp people in the media. They are the exception, not the rule.

[TheGhostOfOscarB]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

One of the greatest fallacies uttered about the race........

she was never more than 6 or 8 behind Blame, and I am doing this from memory

Here's a link you should be using.
http://www.alz.org/

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by TheGhostOfOscarB

Here's a link you should be using.
http://www.alz.org/

watch the damn race.....it's on the home page. she might have been ten behind him (he was at the back of the pack) when they crossed the line the first time. She was never close to 20 behind Blame at any time.

It doesn't matter how far back you are from the pacesetter. It matters how far you spotted the winner. And the winner ran a better race. End of story.

He also had a tougher campaign. What the hell else did he have to do? Fly the plane in to Churchill when he shipped ?

[TheGhostOfOscarB]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

watch the damn race.....it's on the home page. she might have been ten behind him (he was at the back of the pack) when they crossed the line the first time. She was never close to 20 behind Blame at any time.

It doesn't matter how far back you are from the pacesetter. It matters how far you spotted the winner. And the winner ran a better race. End of story.

He also had a tougher campaign. What the hell else did he have to do? Fly the plane in to Churchill when he shipped ?

lol, the 20 lengths+ was what she spotted the field.

Had to be 12 lengths behind Blame after an 1/8. Even the chart has it 9L after a 1/4

It OFFICIAL, HOY, learn to live with it. !!!!!!!!!!!

[bigmack]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

Herein lies part of the problem. Assuming the horse racing media are experts is faulty at absolute best. As with any profession there are some sharp people in the media. They are the exception, not the rule.

You, and a few others, have made a stout case for B over the last few months. In the end, it was not unlike the verdict for OJ. After seeing the jury pool the verdict made sense.

As a big follower of the game and after having a robust discussion over such a crowning you and others must feel sheepish about the voting pool being made up largely of blockheads.

Is this a black eye on the game or merely a result of underinformed fans & the pressure on media voting for the wrong horse?

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by TheGhostOfOscarB

lol, the 20 lengths+ was what she spotted the field.

Had to be 12 lengths behind Blame after an 1/8. Even the chart has it 9L after a 1/4

It OFFICIAL, HOY, learn to live with it. !!!!!!!!!!!

So you admit you posted a ridiculous post? A fallacy of grand proportions. Ok, as long as you can live with it. So can I............your little "LOL" in front of your mea culpa doesn't make it any less illustrative of your failure. Have a nice day........

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by bigmack

You, and a few others, have made a stout case for B over the last few months. In the end, it was not unlike the verdict for OJ. After seeing the jury pool the verdict made sense.

As a big follower of the game and after having a robust discussion over such a crowning you and others must feel sheepish about the voting pool being made up largely of blockheads.

Is this a black eye on the game or merely a result of underinformed fans & the pressure on media voting for the wrong horse?

The OJ analogy is actually a pretty good one. I think it's a mixture of a black eye and pressure. I just wish as a whole we could strive for journalistic integrity in the sport. If we don't have it from within how can we expect any attention from the mainstream?

In the end it feels like this was a make up award, similar to a make up call in sports. I've never been a fan of that stuff. If you make a mistake the first time around, don't compound the problem by making another one. I think the voters blew it in '08 when she was probably more deserving than Curlin. She was more deserving last year, but RA had a better year overall. This was the make up.

I just hope this isn't a sign of things to come.

[bigmack]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

I just wish as a whole we could strive for journalistic integrity in the sport. If we don't have it from within how can we expect any attention from the mainstream?

Fair point and again, you, cj, PA and others made sound points throughout the debate. Ironic in a way that after all the snappy repartee it comes down to a vote comprised of people that are clearly jaded by distractions and not the facts of the case.

I can't say that I am not surprised by the outcome and trust you feel likewise.

[Sericm]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

watch the damn race.....it's on the home page. she might have been ten behind him (he was at the back of the pack) when they crossed the line the first time. She was never close to 20 behind Blame at any time.

It doesn't matter how far back you are from the pacesetter. It matters how far you spotted the winner. And the winner ran a better race. End of story.

He also had a tougher campaign. What the hell else did he have to do? Fly the plane in to Churchill when he shipped ?

Since when is a 5 race campaign over 12 months, tough!!!

[Sericm]

Originally Posted by GatetoWire

This just shows how really messed up Horse Racing is!!!!!

The powers that be can't even get this right!!!!

How come everyone who runs this game or writes about it is a complete moron?

Apparently there same morons that voted for R.A. last year

[Sericm]

Originally Posted by bigmack

You, and a few others, have made a stout case for B over the last few months. In the end, it was not unlike the verdict for OJ. After seeing the jury pool the verdict made sense.

As a big follower of the game and after having a robust discussion over such a crowning you and others must feel sheepish about the voting pool being made up largely of blockheads.

Is this a black eye on the game or merely a result of underinformed fans & the pressure on media voting for the wrong horse?

The same blockheads voted for Rachel last year, so how smart are they?

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by Sericm

Since when is a 5 race campaign over 12 months, tough!!!

We don't have to do this dance. I've seen this thread before. I know where you are on the matter, and I don't think anybody cares to read it again.

You got your award. Now go back to your world and I will stay in mine.

[Charlie D]

Originally Posted by bigmack

While not love, I get a bang out of all you at the ready to ridicule the weight, home track, worthless 6 race campaign types who have little to say about a collection of experts who voted for a horse you all find undeserving.

No point in bantering back & forth anymo with the dolts 'round these parts. Take it up with those that actually voted and have been deemed worthy of voting for a hoss you found little reason to vote for.

Glad to hear you're enjoying the show.