Who Is Horse Of The Year?

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by letswastemoney

SS defeated Easy Goer on the track.

Affirmed defeated Alydar on the track.
.

This would mean something but many many east coast people think Alydar and Easy Goer were the better horse.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

This would mean something but many many east coast people think Alydar and Easy Goer were the better horse.

Easy Goer was an all-time great 2yo and 3yo. Sunday Silence was an all-time great 3yo.

If you want to talk about the 4 head-to-head meetings ... I think you can draw a line through the Ky Derby (SS won) and the Belmont (EG won)

The Derby was on a similar wet track at Churchill where EG ran WAY below his form as a 2yo. Sunday Silence won the Derby, but it graded out a very mediocre performance. I think its clear that both SS and EG hated the track that day .. EG just hated it a slight bit more. Giacomo and Mine That Bird might have been able to beat them both on that day.

I also give a pass to Sunday Silence for the lopsided Belmont defeat ... when you consider the quality of races Easy Goer ran at Belmont Park all through his career .. and the 12 furlong distance of the race ... SS really was up against it. Easy Goer ran a number on Ragozin that day equal to the Ragozin number Secretariat got for winning the Belmont.

It leaves the Breeders Cup Classic and Preakness Stakes. Two narrow wins for SS in very fast races. In both instances ... anyone watching the tape can see Easy Goer was more impressive in defeat both times. Sunday Silence had the better tactical speed and in both of those races ran more professional.. and that was really the difference in the outcome.

The only way you can argue that SS was the better horse of the two - is if you think the offical results of those 4 head-to-head meetings are all that count.

Just from watching films and looking at pps and charts - I can't imagine how anyone could conclude that Alydar was a better horse than Affirmed.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Easy Goer was an all-time great 2yo and 3yo. Sunday Silence was an all-time great 3yo.

If you want to talk about the 4 head-to-head meetings ... I think you can draw a line through the Ky Derby (SS won) and the Belmont (EG won)

The Derby was on a similar wet track at Churchill where EG ran WAY below his form as a 2yo. Sunday Silence won the Derby, but it graded out a very mediocre performance. I think its clear that both SS and EG hated the track that day .. EG just hated it a slight bit more. Giacomo and Mine That Bird might have been able to beat them both on that day.

I also give a pass to Sunday Silence for the lopsided Belmont defeat ... when you consider the quality of races Easy Goer ran at Belmont Park all through his career .. and the 12 furlong distance of the race ... SS really was up against it. Easy Goer ran a number on Ragozin that day equal to the Ragozin number Secretariat got for winning the Belmont.

It leaves the Breeders Cup Classic and Preakness Stakes. Two narrow wins for SS. In both instances ... anyone watching the tape can see Easy Goer was more impressive in defeat both times. Sunday Silence had the better tactical speed and in both of those races ran more professional.. and that was really the difference in the outcome.

The only way you can argue that SS was the better horse of the two - is if you think the offical results of those 4 head-to-head meetings are all that count.

Just from watching films and looking at pps and charts - I can't imagine how anyone could conclude that Alydar was a better horse than Affirmed.

Pat Day himself admits that he cost Easy Goer the Preakness. He was tremendous in defeat.

NT

[10 pnt move up]

see, head to head means something but not everything, as Drugs so smartly pointed out.

[kgar311]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

This would mean something but many many east coast people think Alydar and Easy Goer were the better horse.

Easy Goer was "America's Horse" SS was the villain and as much as everybody loved EG me included, SS Beat EG more times then not on the track. SS won the Derby, Preakness and BCC, he came cross country and proved his greatness something Zenyatta did not. SS was a super horse and he proved it on the track not on paper.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by kgar311

Easy Goer was "America's Horse" SS was the villain and as much as everybody loved EG me included, SS Beat EG more times then not on the track. SS won the Derby, Preakness and BCC, he came cross country and proved his greatness something Zenyatta did not. SS was a super horse and he proved it on the track not on paper.

then how come sooooo many east coast people feel easy goer was the better horse?

[kgar311]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

then how come sooooo many east coast people feel easy goer was the better horse?

He was a super horse in his own right, I think many people run alot of races on paper. EG prob would of beaten SS in the Travers and the JCCC, but who knows.

[DaTruth]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Pat Day himself admits that he cost Easy Goer the Preakness. He was tremendous in defeat.

NT

Pat didn't cost EG the Preakness. Dr. Harthill won the Preakness for Sunday Silence.

[2Hot4TV]

Originally Posted by kgar311

He was a super horse in his own right, I think many people run alot of races on paper. EG prob would of beaten SS in the Travers and the JCCC, but who knows.

Come on you know, save us the suspense.

[kgar311]

Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV

Come on you know, save us the suspense.

You're right I do know, it would of been amerrrrrrica's horse, EEEEEEEEEEEEasyyyy Goer, IN FRONT! - MC

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Zenyatta was awesome on Saturday and it really saddens me we couldn't see her do that in a few more exciting spots. And unfortunately for them, and this is not a slap on their character at all, but I think it costs her Horse of the Year in the end. We'll see.

No matter how many more "exciting spots," she would have trouble getting this award. If people want to ignore the horse that won the most money/biggest race, then they're gunna do it. Look how much trouble Gomez had before he finally got his Eclipse Award.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

No matter how many more "exciting spots," she would have trouble getting this award. If people want to ignore the horse that won the most money/biggest race, then they're gunna do it. Look how much trouble Gomez had before he finally got his Eclipse Award.

Well Armed earned more money than her and as far as Zenyatta winning the biggest race and that being the only criteria where do Pleasantly Perfect, Volponi and Raven's Pass' connections file their complaints for being snubbed?

NT

[pick4]

Rachel Alexandra won an American Classic when she broke from post 13 to win the Preakness. This was two weeks after she won the Kentucky Oaks by 20 lengths. She set a stakes record in winning the Mother Goose. It was a lightning fast track that day but she ran very well. She beat males again in the Grade 1 Haskell when she pressed a hat pace and dusted the probable 3 year old colt of the year. Her Woodward win against older males while running hard every step of the race was sensational.

Zenyatta is a great horse and is a sure thing 1st ballot Hall of Famer. However her acheivements this season fall short of what Rachel Alexandra's.
Zenyatta was great in winning the BC Classic but it was on her home track. She's a monster on synthetic race tracks. She might be just as good on dirt tracks. Unfortunately all we have is just the 08 Apple Blossom.
While her Classic victory was pretty good look at who ran second and third. It was two grass horses.

If I was a voter I would select Rachel Alexandra for HOF. Hopefully the voters have a few more weeks to move on and have time to consider the whole year and what each horse has accomplished.

[westcoastinvader]

Originally Posted by johnjaydog95

Could someone please explain Joe Drape's argument that the BCC field represented the "best in the world"?

Last I checked, Sea the Stars and Rachel weren't at Santa Anita. I credit Zenyatta's connections for taking the chance in the BCC, and she could only run against who showed up. But who showed up wasn't the best the world had to offer.

It WAS the best the world DID offer against Zenyatta.

Perhaps everyone else was looking for a more high profile and richer race than the Breeders' Cup Classic?

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

...

It leaves the Breeders Cup Classic and Preakness Stakes. Two narrow wins for SS in very fast races. In both instances ... anyone watching the tape can see Easy Goer was more impressive in defeat both times. Sunday Silence had the better tactical speed and in both of those races ran more professional.. and that was really the difference in the outcome.

The only way you can argue that SS was the better horse of the two - is if you think the offical results of those 4 head-to-head meetings are all that count.

Really? I've watched that Preakness many times, and I always come away marvelling at Sunday Silence's race. How "anyone watching the tape can see Easy Goer was more impressive in defeat" comes as a complete surprise to me. Sunday Silence has to steady as Easy Goer passes and squeezes him into Houston. He loses a length or more by steadying, but his incredible athleticism allows him to accelerate again to the outside and set up the historic stretch run. Yes, that put Easy Goer at a disadvantage on the rail, but IMO if Easy Goer was the better horse, Sunday Silence would have never caught up with him in the first place after the squeeze.

Let others decide for themselves:

The Preakness: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Tw09xHXUhI

or this one, for some commentary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoY_U8NTC7E

Yeah, if Sunday Silence's apparent ability to make lightning fast adjustments and his 3 out of 4 wins don't count, you can argue that Easy Goer is the better horse. But I still wouldn't agree with you. And I certainly don't agree that Easy Goer ran the better Preakness.

--Dunbar

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by westcoastinvader

It WAS the best the world DID offer against Zenyatta.

Perhaps everyone else was looking for a more high profile and richer race than the Breeders' Cup Classic?

so, it's not that it was a particularly tough field, but because it was the bcc...

i thought the general consensus was that this wasn't a particularly good thing for racing, having so many treat much of the year as unnecessary, as long as you showed up for some sort of supposed 'championship'. hell, i think i'll name my house buckingham palace and see how many tourists show up.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

It leaves the Breeders Cup Classic and Preakness Stakes. Two narrow wins for SS in very fast races. In both instances ... anyone watching the tape can see Easy Goer was more impressive in defeat both times. Sunday Silence had the better tactical speed and in both of those races ran more professional.. and that was really the difference in the outcome.

Brilliant. So Easy Goer was more impressive in those races because he was less professional, had no tactical speed, and hated the mud more than Sunday Silence.

Whatever.

Easy Goer certainly appeared to have more stamina than Sunday Silence, but unfortunately outside of the Belmont and JCGC (at the time) most of the important races were 10f which was clearly within SS's range.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i thought the general consensus was that this wasn't a particularly good thing for racing, having so many treat much of the year as unnecessary, as long as you showed up for some sort of supposed 'championship'. hell, i think i'll name my house buckingham palace and see how many tourists show up.

It's similar to Tiger Woods winning Player of the Year this year... he never won a major, and didn't even win the Tour Championship, but his season as a whole was best. The key word is "year."

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

It's similar to Tiger Woods winning Player of the Year this year... he never won a major, and didn't even win the Tour Championship, but his season as a whole was best. The key word is "year."

I think its another indictment of racing that you have one of the all time greatest fillies, who was undefeated in two racing seasons, competing at the highest levels in her division, and in this years case out of her division, win twice on "racings championship days" but somehow she is not deserving of being considered the best horse racing in either year, to horses who lost or did not show up on the definitive day of racing where the best field is assembled.

Horse racing = college football? Just saying.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by kgar311

You're right I do know, it would of been amerrrrrrica's horse, EEEEEEEEEEEEasyyyy Goer, IN FRONT! - MC

If we're going to quote Marshall Cassidy, it was "New York's EEEEasy Goer."