Horse of the Year: Stalemate

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Laura House — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:30:58 GMT

Good job, Steve. I have a simplistic mind when it comes to the bottom line as well. [ Complex in variables, research, attention to detail, facts, stop watches, etc.... ]..but you get it! Simple. Some horses do well on turf, dirt, synthetic..sloppy, muddy, firm and on and on. In a simply broad example, look at tennis. Clay, grass, concrete, cement or whatever? Nonetheless, the same competitor. Yet, in football, it's narrowed to inside/ouside, or artificial turf vs. whatever. Go to basketball, though! Not many variables there. I think that horses should be run on their "preferred" surface and then let it be. Horse of the Year doesn't have to be EVERYTHING TO EVERYBODY ON certain SURFACES , much less from which coast or area of the world they are from!!!!! Simply, expand the categories , or be HUMAN and start something NEW AND INVENTIVE!!!!! ? Add a few categories..... Like "Racing Fan's Choice," or "Most wins," or "People's Heart" type awards. Why not invent a "Triple Crown" that encompasses, the Kentucky Derby, World Cup, and Breeder's Cup?" This is the sport of Kings (as well as Queens) as we have seen this year....hmm... I do recall the Queen of England being in Kentucky . Wouldn't it be awesome to see our President honor Zenyatta in The World Championship??

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Judy S — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 20:14:45 GMT

I am in complete agreement with this article. To pick just one would do an injustice to the other. These are interesting times in the sport of Thoroughbred racing (The tragedy of Barbaro, the Cinderella story of Mine That Bird, synthetic vs. dirt....) I'm just thankful I was able to witness two great great females. It takes me back to 1973 when Secretariat won the Belmont. I don't need to know who wins the honor. The honor is that I'll never forget them both.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Linda — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 00:25:58 GMT

Honestly, can't we just feel so lucky to be alive to witness two of the greatest race horses of all time? Reading about the accomplishments still gives me chills. I love them both. They are what compelled me to watch horseracing this year. How dare anyone belittle either horse. I worry bitterness will follow whichever wins the Eclipse for HOY. I, for one, am so glad they never raced each other. I couldn't stand to see either lose. And I am so glad that Rachel's owners gave her a well-deserved rest after her grueling campaign. To those who say the decision was "bad for racing", I say--Do you even remember Ruffian?? Should we force and exhausted animal to race, just so that we can see a match race? If one of them broke down, like Ruffian, THAT is what would be bad for racing. THAT is what would make me not want to watch anymore. We horseracing fans should never forget that. Horse breakdowns are the worst thing for racing, not forgoing match races. So, I'm just going to bask in the memories of watching both magnificent athletes over the past year, and I won't be bashing either animal. They both ran their hearts out and came back in one piece.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

JHorse — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:39:40 GMT

People who post that Zenyatta only beat the same "weak horses" in her races before the BCC or Rachel did more this year are just spreading Jess Jackson's propaganda. Some even argue that the 2009 BCC, loaded with G1 winners, was a weak field because Einstein, RVW etc. didn't fire their best shot. To say that nothing Zenyatta did counts because it was on a synthetic track would mean that no California based horse can ever win an Eclipse Award. Ginger Punch, Hysterical Lady, Music Note and Life is Sweet are not weak horses, Big Z just made them look weak. JJ is nothing if not a master spin doctor. Last year when Curlin was up for the award it was all about lifetime achievement. Leading all-time money winner blah, blah. Now, it's you can't consider anything but 2009, RA wins 8 to 5.

In 2009 Zenyatta completed several historic firsts that she began in 2007 and 2008. Tied and then broke Personal Ensign's unbeaten record for a horse competing in graded stakes. Completed the unique double of BCLC and BCC, which we may never see again in out lifetime, no disrespect to RA I would really like to see her do that too. Became North America's all-time leading money-winning distaffer and did it all with flair and style that captured the hearts of racing fan's around the world. Add to that the first female to win the BCC and that's why I think Zenyatta is 2009 Horse of the Year.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

jim — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 04:09:52 GMT

again & again...i have said...........what more proof is required....here it is:

Zenyatta, with 18 votes, finished a distant second to Williams, who received 66 votes from the 158 ballots cast by editors at U.S. newspapers who are AP members. The 3-year-old filly Rachel Alexandra, winner of the Preakness Stakes (gr. I), finished seventh with 10 votes.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Ohiofan — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 01:13:22 GMT

I'm sorry, but the only big race Zenyatta ran this year was the Classic. Sure, she's had a phenomenal career, but Horse of the year is just that, Horse of the YEAR.If the only race that mattered was one, Breeders' Cup, then why race at any other time of the year. Horse of the year should be a cumulative effort throughout the year, not just one big race. Had Rachel raced and beaten the same fillies repeatedly,on the same track, no one would be in awe of her. But she broke the mold and went for the golden ring, and somehow that just isn't good enough. HOY shouldn't even be an issue. She's had a year few can even imagine. She beat many of the horses that Zenyatta beat in the Classic and she even runs in the rain! Imagine that.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Pebbles — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:30:39 GMT

Jim:

I understand quite well that not all purse values are equal...

But Rachel did run in 4 races valued at $400,000 or more -- all but one that were higher values than those that Zenyatta ran in...

Whether we knew who Zenyatta was or not is not the issue...she still has to put together a winning campaign. IMHO, her 2008 campaign is more impressive than 2009 since she beat a champion once on dirt and once on synthetic. She went 7-0 in stakes races.

Zenyatta's connections are good people. A talented trainer. A loving owner. True friends of horse racing and much better with the fans than her competitor owner. However, they made a muck of it charting out her campaign for 2009. They scratched her on an off track -- a sealed track at Churchill Downs the same track that Rachel ran on later that day...had they not scratched her -- and she had won on that track her case for HOTY would be much stronger.

You also seem to forget that Rachel was owned by two different persons who had different goals for her. This had a lot to do with the campaign planned for her. If you listened to her owner he said he did not believe in running fillies against males...which is why she did not run in the Kentucky Derby...or don't you pay attention to the newspapers?

She was challenged in at least five races this year...a three year old filly doing more than a 5 year old mare...

AND Zenyatta had NOTHING to lose running in the Classic. She would win older female horse no matter what -- whether she won the Classic or not. HOTY was already going to Rachel...so her ONLY CHANCE was to run on the Classic. Zenyatta was no longer in the conversation for HOTY until she entered the Classic if you were paying attention.

Forced the early retirement of Sea The Stars? Oh come on...it was highly unlikely he was coming over to the Breeders Cup UNLESS the Arc turf came up too soft...as noted you really need to pay attention to the papers...and not leave so much to conjecture...

As for Rachel running in the Classic you are ignoring one major factor again...the change in ownership...there was never any plan under her original owners of her challenging for HOTY...until after she had run 4 races already in 2009...when ownership changed...and she was entered in the Preakness. After her win there...her connections then started to plan a campaign for her which MIGHT include the Classic...but what they fouond out on September 5th is that she was tired having been campaigned harded than Zenyatta was ever in her career...

In 07 Zenyatta's race record was 2-0, in 08 it was 7-0 and in 09 5-0...while Rachel's record in 09 was 8-0...all stakes wins.

Rachel campaigned and won more races than any other horse in training this year...any horse...

She raced in more races than Gio Ponti...as many races as Einstein...

The major older only horses that ran more than her were Bullsbay and Richard's Kid who ran 11 races...

So, Rachel -- a three year old filly...raced as much or more than most of the older horses...and more than Zenyatta and you think she should have raced more?

Come on...

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

mach 2 — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 00:55:28 GMT

not only is ZENYATTA the horse of the year...She is also the female athlete of the year and amybe the decade

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Linda/Maryland — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 15:59:00 GMT

There are too many posts here to read them all today. The thing that will decided HOTY will be that Zenyatta raced last. If Rachel ran the Woodward next week and won like she did, everyone would sway in her favor. It is certainly not a fair way to make this judgement but it's human nature. I belive, "As MUCH as I adore" Zenyatta, that Rachel deserves horse of the year for her races and what she accomplished. Zenyatta's team played it safe all year. Rachel ran and won a Triple Crown Race. She faced the BOYS MORE than ONCE and WON. She just didn't win the last race run this year. I do not think that is a reason to vote Zenyatta. Look at the statistics ..Rachel wins!

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Nancy — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:44:14 GMT

I think Rachel put together the better year between the two and is more deserving of HOY. Zenyatta played it too safe running on 3 tracks in 1 state, 3 races at 1 1/16 which is laughable for a 5 year old that people are saying is as great as Secretariat. The BC is not the worlds championships, that's just a marketing ploy used by the BC committee, it's a tag they gave themselves. The biggest stage of the year was the Preakness as evidenced by TV ratings. Rachel brought in over a 6 share and Zenyatta brought in 0.9. Gee, the bull riding and figure skating the following Sunday brought in a 0.8. Apparently the nation and the world has spoken - more people were interested in watching Rachel face off against the colts in the Preakness then they were in watching Zenyatta in the BCC. The polls are bombarded with Zenyatta fans voting over and over, that's pretty clear. Reading the articles and blogs from real voters is more revealing as they have cast more votes for Rachel than Zenyatta.

Rachel is HOY 2009!

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

maureen — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:36:32 GMT

those votes were from the east coast. it should be votes from across the nation. let the whole public speak. as fantastic a horse as racheal is, it rightly should go to zenyatta. at her age alone she did the miracle.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Ann — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:37:35 GMT

Fascinating--almost 2,000 votes for Rachel from Friday afternoon to Sunday night. Looks fishy.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Maureen — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 03:44:17 GMT

As brilliant and as exciting as the two ladies are. the horse of the year should rightly go to zenyatta. had racheal raced her like people had asked it would be more clear. but im sure they are trying to keep racheal ready for next year so she doesnt shadow zenyatta like sham shadowed secretariat. so its only right that zenyatta get her prize. give her the horse of the year, next year just might belong to racheal.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

jim — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:15:21 GMT

Reg. comments by pebbles. Not all grade 1 races are equal. The purse values and in some case prestige like the BC classic is to attract the BEST horses. Plus more value including purse money is given to longer races, one race here got All Along the HOTY, but, two super races did not get "pebbles" that.

At the beginning of the year we knew who Zenyatta was and her connections charted out her races eyeing the BC classic.

RA had to prove she was super, she was not even in the fillies juvenile race in 2008,if her connections were eying for HOTY they would have first run her in the KY derby and after the triple crown, could have given her a short rest & brought her back for the classic after a tightner, but, because of her inexperience she needed to prove against the 3YO boys then the distance and the older boys before taking on a solid class of classic runners.

Zenyatta had a lot to lose if she lost, the HOTY, with this title what is going to be the value of her little ones, and lets not forget the undefeated status. In my mind she even forced the early retirement of "sea the star".

RA could have gained a greater stature if her schedule was altered a bit to run in the classic(i dont think her connections would have chosen the classic, instead they would have gone for the ladies classic).But she would have run and won the classic we would not have this debate. Plus, we are still respecting RA, and if she has a good form next year, I do not think she will run in the classic.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Pebbles — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:03:47 GMT

Steve:

I have no problem having the Breeders Cup races carrying more weight than a regular race...but how much more?

Enough that a win there supplants a robust record throughout the year?

I could see giving super weight to a BC race...and it counting for 1.5 Grade 1s or something like that...but that would still make Zenyatta half a Grade I and a Grade II and a stakes race short of Rachel Alexandra's race record this year.

She made history in seven of eight races...which is pretty darn spectacular.

Zenyatta is getting consideration only because of her victory in the Classic. Had she won the Distaff again this would not even be a question. So, based on a performance in ONE RACE you think she deserves to be co-horse of the year?

What about all the other horses that deserved to be co-Horse of the Year like Personal Ensign, or Medalia D'Oro or other horses?

Isn't a co-HOTY solution here just a cop out?

Would we think of doing this if we had two male horses vying for the award? Is it a little sexist to suggest a co-horse of the year solution when we have two quality female horses, but we would not think of such a solution for two quality male horses? Or why wasn't last year an opportunity for a co-horse of the year award between Curlin and Zenyatta?

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

bcfath — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:02:43 GMT

Two amazing horses, they have done so much for thoroughbred racing, ( at a time when the industry is on its knees). Hopefully the powers that be, will recognise and capitalise and keep up the momentum. It is such a tough call, both filly and mare are true champions, but in my heart I think Zenyatta should get the HOTY, she showed up at the World Championship, and won the hardest, longest and most testing question of her career.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

MyBigRed — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:45:02 GMT

I totally agree with Dr. Sarah's comment made on Nov. 11 @ 12:28am. Horseracing needs Amazing Horses like Rachel Alexandra & Zenyatta to revive the Sport. Therefore reward both of them for their Outstanding Achievements in 2009. Allow both to win the HOY :) It is the only fair solution.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Dave R — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:43:35 GMT

Horse of the Year award is based on a single year's performance.

In my opinion, Rachel Alexandra's performance in 2009 was much more deserving than that of Zenyatta's.

Zenyatta had basically one signature great win in the Breeders Cup Classic on her favorite surface and track. It was a great win by a great filly.

However, Rachel Alexandra did more on different tracks over a longer time span this year. My vote goes to Rachel Alexandra.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Robert Peter — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:31:46 GMT

Wow...What a response. There really are a lot of racing fans out there and a lot of good comments. Subjectivity is what it's all about. My terse comments from 11/16(I think) aside, A real and positive solution may be HOY for:Dirt, Synthetic, and Turf. When racing historians look back at the events of 09' it wood be good to have HOY behind both the filly and the mares names. This, in my mind, would be lengths better than completely excluding one or the other from HOY recognition. peace.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Footlick — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:15:59 GMT

Tiznowbaby- after seeing Midday dismantle our Filly/Mare turf field, I would have to think Goldikova would pretty much outclass them. Midday was probably the third best 3 yr old filly in Europe at a middle distance, behind Sarkisa and Stacelita. Goldikova would at least be able to stretch out to 9 furlongs here and possibly longer. But I understand the hesitation. It comes down to whether you feel Goldikova's dominance over her mile field is enough. When I was little I thought each horse that won the award was the best horse in that division. When I got a little older, I realized that many times the best horse didn't win the award. That's ok. That's voting. I would like to see her win it because she towers over them, in my opinion. But I understand the reluctance.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Tiznowbaby — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 05:14:05 GMT

Footlick, I believe Goldi is the best grass miler in the world, but I don't know if she's the best grass mare in North America -- she raced once at a mile here. I'd like to see more.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Lou in TX — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 04:16:23 GMT

Greg and all....how about Skype? Not sure if that's how u spell it. You can buy the camera at Walmart or Radio Shack for very little and it's free to subscribe to Skype. My daugher talks to a friend in Italy all the time, for free. I thought about getting one for my grandson so we could see each other when we talk. Now we just text. Just a suggestion.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Marilyn K — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 04:12:13 GMT

Your column had a box asking readers to vote for Horse of the Year and only listed Zenyatta and Rachel Alexandra as choices. Considering the column content and the controversy, shouldn't you also have had BOTH as a 3rd choice even though this would probably not be a choice available to the votes? This would certainly better reflect the fans and readers positions.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

Laura — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 03:49:13 GMT

(Blushing) Thank you for the kind comments. I'm just a librarian who loves horses and racing. I grew up in the midwest boonies in the 70s with no access to a track so I followed racing any way possible -books, newspapers, magazines, Wide World of Sports, etc. I was the only girl I knew with subscriptions to Sports Illustrated and Sporting News. (Sorry, BloodHorse, I didn't know about this mag. until I was in college - my folks wouldn't let me go anywhere that might have carried it <grin> ) I studied and I learned in those days before cable and the internet, all for the love of the horses. I never even placed a bet until we took my daughter, another horse lover, to the track for her birthday three years ago. I just love the horses.

My comments re Ghostzapper and Native Dancer were merely in response to those who said a five-race season was not enough for HOY, nothing other than that. Ghostzapper certainly deserved his award, and Native Dancer got his 1954 HOY as a career "thank you" on those three races. He and Tom Fool should maybe have split it the year before as they both deserved it- Tom Fool won the Handicap Triple Crown and went undefeated after all. Like I said, I'm a librarian and historian - my head is full of information like that! And information, they say, is power.

Another piece of trivia that I mentioned above: the 2006 Breeder's Cup dirt races at Churchill were dominated by synthetic horses too - look it up. Maybe it's easier for horses to go from syns to dirt than the other way 'round. I don't have an answer for that, but Rachel Alexandra ran a 1:09 6f at Keeneland last year on syns so her form obviously didn't suffer. She should have run in the BC if healthy enough to do so. Zenyatta ran the best race of her life prior to the BCC in the dirt at Oaklawn last year. She can obviously handle it just fine. She came to the big dance, and won when the "experts" said she couldn't. (Remember, her "home" track is Hollywood - not SA, as different as Saratoga is from Belmont). Saying that, I'll repeat: I'M MORE THAN OK WITH A TIE, FOLKS. They are each separately and collectively deserving for amazing years. If only we could have this problem every year! What a boost to the sport we love that would be.

re: Horse of the Year: Stalemate

LAZMANNICK — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 03:08:01 GMT

Pasturelands

I love your passion for Rachel.......It seems to be almost as much as your dislike or disrespect for Zenyatta.......Personally I think that they are both great, but one thing that I question is why Zenyatta is so far ahead of Rachel in the BloodHorse Poll.....Maybe by the end of the month the vote will become much closer but I would have thought that Rachel should be FAR AHEAD by now.