They're Kidding!!

[Rich Curtis]

Miff,

  You are beginning by giving me your opinion about spades. Then you are asking me to discuss Beyer\'s own mix of fact and opinion. But you are denying me the right to give my own opinions as I do this?

 Is this what just happened here?

[TGJB]

Pretty sure he\'s asking you for a factual basis for your opinions.

[JimP]

TGJB, you say \"What gets me about this whole thing-- this year and last-- is that if you don\'t think Z should get HOTY you are some kind of Z hater.\"

Here\'s what gets me. Anybody who states an opinion that Z should get the award is assumed in advance to be irrational.

As you posted earlier:\"The only possible rational position one could take against Blame would be for Goldikova\".

When you declare in advance that yours is the only rational position, don\'t you think that might tend to stir up some emotions.

Beyer did exactly the same thing in his article. After stating his case for Blame very well, he ends by declaring that any other arguement is just \"specious\".

Terms like those just tend to stifle honest debate and inflame emotions.

[miff]

Why is there any debate?How does one conclude that Z is HOTY over Blame(let\'s forget Goldie) based on accomplishment. The Z fans want to dwell on \"what Z did for racing\" but how is that relevant as to what was accomplished by Z/Blame on the track, especially head to head.Z fans won\'t admit she lost to Blame, they wish to skirt that overriding fact.

As JB said, and I agree, I\'m waiting for a Z fan to put forward a factual case for Z getting HOTY.

Mike

[JimP]

\"The Z fans want to dwell on \"what Z did for racing\" but how is that relevant\"

Please explain why it isn\'t relevant. Which rule for the selection of HOY are you applying that would prohibit a vote based on that criterion?

When a selection is based on a vote, and there are no defined rules for how that vote should be determined, then it seems by definition that there are many rational ways that one may decide how to vote. That is the case with the HOY award. Declaring that there is one and only one way to determine the appropriate vote, is not very sound logic in the absence of rules for the voting.The HOY vote is a matter of opinion not fact. The Z fans are just as entitled to their opinion as the Blame fan club. It\'s obvious that the Blame fan club is larger on this board than the Z fan club. But that doesn\'t make their opinions less rational or relevant. They\'re just opinions in both cases.

[Rich Curtis]

JB wrote:

\"Pretty sure he\'s asking you for a factual basis for your opinions\"

 Except that he explicitly ruled out my opinions (\"no opinions please\"). He wants me to fact-check an opinion column (\"just facts\"). He should have addressed his post to Jack Webb.

[miff]

Doubt there any real Blame fans, just people who are not biased and look at accomplishment vs adoration.


Mike

[Lost Cause]

plasticman Wrote:

>
> Blame is a forgettable horse who got lucky in one
> race, got embarrassed in one of his 5 starts on
> the year and retired on the spot after his win. If
> that horse \'loses\' horse of the year to a
> legendary horse who\'s 19 for 20 lifetime, its
> anything BUT a \'travesty\'. I can see your point
> that you think Blame is deserving. That\'s fair,
> its your opinion and you\'re entitled, but to call
> it a travesty is coming a little too strong.


Blame will not be a forgettable horse..alot of people will remember the horse that beat the mighty Zenyatta..people still remember Onion for beating secretariat..I\'m sure people will remember Blame.  He didn\'t get lucky in one race.  He ran down the numbers legend named Quality Road who was loping along at a slow pace in the whitney and then beat the Queen on the square in the worlds biggest race.  So he beat the two biggest horses in Racing not named Goldikova this year  I don\'t understand why Blame can\'t get any respect.  It waqs a much tougher decision last year.  My opinion is that the only way Z wins this thing is if the voters vote with their hearts and not with the facts.

[MonmouthGuy]

I think you just proved Miff\'s point.  No relevant facts to back your argument.

I think the bottom line is that Zenyatta, like Barbaro (but unlike Blame) has \"fans\" who view her career as a romance novel.  Fans are by definition \"fanatics.\"  No rational thought allowed.

There is a teller in the Clubhouse at Monmouth who is a big Zenyatta \"fan\" and who to this day insists that Barbaro is \"undefeated\" because he never \"lost\" a race---she is a sweetheart, but cuckoo for cocoa puffs...probably has 3 dozen cats and as many half open bottles of gin in her house.  There is the foundation of your \"fanbase.\"





JimP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> \"The Z fans want to dwell on \"what Z did for
> racing\" but how is that relevant\"
>
> Please explain why it isn\'t relevant. Which rule
> for the selection of HOY are you applying that
> would prohibit a vote based on that criterion?
>
> When a selection is based on a vote, and there are
> no defined rules for how that vote should be
> determined, then it seems by definition that there
> are many rational ways that one may decide how to
> vote. That is the case with the HOY award.
> Declaring that there is one and only one way to
> determine the appropriate vote, is not very sound
> logic in the absence of rules for the voting.The
> HOY vote is a matter of opinion not fact. The Z
> fans are just as entitled to their opinion as the
> Blame fan club. It\'s obvious that the Blame fan
> club is larger on this board than the Z fan club.
> But that doesn\'t make their opinions less rational
> or relevant. They\'re just opinions in both cases.

[JimP]

\"I think you just proved Miff\'s point. No relevant facts to back your argument.\"

Actually I think you and Miff proved my point really well. first Miff declared that anybody who disagreed with him was just \"biased\". And then you declared that anybody who disagreed with you was not capable of \"rational thought\".

And what is most interesting about both of your responses is that I was very careful to not even take a position on which horse should get the HOY award. My \"arguement\" was that the award is based on OPINION, not facts, and that the ardent fans of both Blame and Zenyatta should be free to express their OPINION without being attacked as \"irrational\", \"specious\", or \"biased\". There are NO RULES for making the HOY selection. There is no rule that head to head competition should settle it. There is no rule that says the best TG figures should settle it. There isn\'t even a rule that says that the best campaign on the track should settle it. When there are no rules there are many rational ways for approaching it. Some of those rational ways might lead to a selection of Blame. Some might lead to a selection of Zenyatta. Some might lead to Goldikova. Or maybe even Uncle Mo.

[miff]

Jim P,

While you may not intend to, you are skirting the real issue like the Z fans who wish to make HOTY a popularity contest. The HOTY has always been an attempt to honor the horse who accomplished the most on the race track that year, written criteria or not. What else should determine HOTY??

While I don\'t follow HOTY proceedings religiously, have never heard the argument made that a horse should get the award because of \"what it did for racing\" like Zenyatta.The talking heads at TVG surely are in bed with Z as there is rarely a word about comparative accomplishment with other HOTY contenders, but lots about how Z paws and plays to the crowd.Yeah,definitely HOTY attributes.

Think Z may win since many writers like the romance novel nonsense coming out of the biased west coast. Forget that Blame beat Z and every other top dirt runner in the world. Forget that slug Goldikova defeating the the toughest grass males on the toughest grass circuit in the world and then coming here and whistling against males.

Lastly, never said if you disagreed with several who see it the same way,that you were wrong or had no right to an opinion. It would be nice for any Z HOTY supporter to just back up that opinion with racing facts for this year.I\'m anxious to learn what racing facts I missed about Z in that regard.



Mike

[JimP]

I don\'t know what else to say Mike. You apparently want to define the rules for the HOY selection. Maybe you should work with the Eclipse committee to get your rules accepted by them. Maybe they could come up with a system like the BCS and just have the award settled by a computer. My only point was that as long as there are no rules for the HOY selection, it is just a matter of opinion, not fact, and all the voters are free to use whatever criteria they choose. Since that is the way it is, I don\'t understand why it is necessary to reject others\' criteria for the selection simply because they differ from yours. I\'ll leave it at that and you can have the last word.

[TGJB]

Come on. Beyer gave the facts that led to his conclusion and made his case. You think there are other facts that lead to a different conclusion. Miff is asking you to state them.

[TGJB]

Jim-- I made a CASE for why that was the only rational position. You are free to do so yourself and make me look irrational. All we have so far from you and others is bobbing and weaving. That\'s not a knock on Z, just those that think this should be a popularity contest.

Yeah, no criteria. So if a voter wants to name the horse he cashed the biggest bet on, or Secretariat because he thinks the movie helped racing, that\'s just fine, that\'s the intent of the award.

Re Z helping racing-- correct me if I\'m wrong but handle is down and tracks and OTB\'s are closing. Even if you want to say \"helping racing\" should matter, show me that Z did that. 60 Minutes? I think they had Pol Pot on there once.

[Rich Curtis]

No. I wrote that Beyer\'s Zenyatta writing was a disgrace, and then Miff took that sentence and started making assumptions off of it.

 The thing is, Miff is here. So it is kind of silly for me to rely on your translation of what he actually meant--especially given that he has not come in and cleared things up.

  What he asked for, as written, is ludicrous, and he\'s not going to get it. Your translation is sensible and I\'d be happy to do what you\'re asking, but it\'s going to be long, and I\'m not going to be holding back. This means there\'s going to be collateral damage going all the way back to the Rachel vote of last year. So it\'s your call.