01/17/2012 5:19PM

Indefensible Eclipse Award Votes

By Mike Watchmaker
Email

Reasonable people can disagree about the merits of Acclamation, Game On Dude, and Tizway for champion older male of 2011, a title that went to Acclamation at Monday night’s Eclipse Awards dinner in Beverly Hills. And they can debate whether Animal Kingdom or Caleb’s Posse was more deserving of being last year’s champion 3-year-old male. But this isn’t about reasonable people having an honest difference of opinion.

When only three votes make the difference between Animal Kingdom being a champion and Caleb’s Posse not being one, it underscores two things: Every Eclipse Award vote is an important one, and everyone who has the honor of voting for the Eclipse Awards should recognize that they assume a responsibility that should not be taken lightly.

It is for that reason that some of the first place votes in the 2011 Eclipse Awards were infuriating to anyone with real respect for the sport. I’m not talking about iffy first place votes, I’m talking about indefensible ones. Such as:

Secret Circle for 2-year-old male – This is a nice colt who completed a 3 for 3 season with a game score in the inaugural Breeders’ Cup Juvenile Sprint. But none of his victories came even in a graded stakes of any sort, let alone a Grade 1 event.

Uncle Mo for 3-year-old male – Another fine colt, but one whose reputation far exceeded what he actually accomplished on the track last year. Only one of his two victories last year came in a graded stakes, and that was a Grade 2 score. And Uncle Mo competed in a division with a boatload of Grade 1 opportunities.

Awesome Feather for 3-year-old filly – She only made it to the gate twice last year, although she did manage to win the late-season Grade 1 Gazelle. Still, I would like to meet the two voters who actually thought Awesome Feather surpassed Royal Delta in terms of strength of campaign, talent, or any other measure.

Drosselmeyer for turf male – This is one of my “favorites.” Drosselmeyer made one start on turf in 2011 and finished seventh, beaten 10 lengths, in the Sword Dancer. This might be a warning that it’s best to keep the Jack Daniel’s locked up in the liquor cabinet until after you hit send on your ballot.

Cambina, Cozi Rosie, and Goldikova for turf female – Cambina’s major claim to fame was a dead-heat win in the Grade 1 American Oaks. But apparently one voter wasn’t concerned that race was restricted to 3-year-olds, or that Cambina came back to finish off the board in three subsequent Grade 1 starts, including an eighth in the Breeders’ Cup Filly and Mare Turf. Cozie Rosie won two Grade 2 stakes, but not a Grade 1. Yet neither that, nor the fact that she lost both of her decisions to Dubawi Heights, who managed to win not one but two Grade 1 races (and which was only good for second in the real world to Stacelita) was able to dissuade one voter. As for Goldikova, she’s an all-time great, no question. But despite a weak third in a bad Breeders’ Cup Mile in her only U.S. start in 2011, two Eclipse Award voters incredibly thought she met championship standards.

Court Vision for Horse of the Year – This is my other “favorite,” and I think it might even surpass on the absurdity scale the four votes Rapid Redux received for our sport’s highest annual award. Court Vision made five starts in 2011. He finished fourth in the Maker’s Mark, ninth in the Woodford Reserve Turf Classic, fourth in the Colonial Turf Cup, seventh in the Woodbine Mile, and then got up by a nose at 64-1 in possibly the worst Breeders’ Cup Mile ever. I could speculate that one of the people who voted for Goldikova might have reasoned that the horse who beat her should be Horse of the Year, but I don’t even want to kid about it.

Look, when you have a large group engaging in a process, you’re always going to have a joker or two. We all learned that in assemblies back in elementary school. And I’m not even certain that making every Eclipse Award ballot public will sufficiently address the problem of wacky Eclipse Award votes because it might not result in enough embarrassment for the offender. Perhaps the three voting blocs could put together a panel to monitor everyone’s ballots, looking to weed out voters who show signs of impropriety, or who prove to be simply unqualified. There should be no room for this sort of stuff in our Eclipse Awards. They are too important.

[STEVEN CRIST: 2011 Eclipse Award vote totals]

Gary G 9 months ago
I think the overriding factor is that ultimately very few people care who wins an Eclipse Award other than the people in the industry. I am a longtime bettor and racing fan, and the opinions of other people are what I bet against in parimutuel racing. I care not at all who wins these awards since the actual racing, of which I do care, is done on the track by the horses, not voted upon. That is all that matters. These award votes are so subjective and arbitrary that they become meaningless to most people. Maybe a points system would be more compelling. 10 for a G1, 7 - G2, 5 - G3, 3 - ungraded and 1 for other wins, with bonuses for Beyers above a certain mark, etc. That would be more interesting to me, but still, if I can't bet on it, only marginally so.
Steve Hewlett 10 months ago
I definitely think that Eclipse Award ballots should be made public and that on the ballots there should be a mandatory section for each category where the voter must explain the rationale for their vote in a paragraph. If the explanation section isn't filled out then the vote is tossed for that category. If this sounds like too much work then you shouldn't be an Eclipse Award voter. Those voters who continue to cast utterly indefensible votes in the merit sense should be dropped poste haste to ensure the integrity of the process. There will always be disagreements, which is fine. The problem is the absolute nonsense votes that are completely indefensible and which should have been cast by someone knowledegable enough to cast an informed vote.
jerry 10 months ago
This year i did not care who won or lost. I had no problem with the winners only with the who had the vote. Why do many major sports allow the fans choose and not the writers.The eclipse awards belong to the fans who put the dollars at tracks and on line.The writers can write stories all year long but please do not tell me who my favorites are. We support the sport we love but get no credit to pick what and who we like. Only the ntra winner and a few others said a word about the fans. With the sport in a bad spot do not take the fans for granted, some day the will not be there. Then who will the writers write for.
BB 10 months ago
I attend the track regularly with a number of friends. The subject of HOY NEVER surfaces. Now if you want to talk about take-out being too high, taxes too high, concession prices too high, being charged admission/parking so one may gamble, why the BC is now only held at two tracks, etc., subjects that impact the fans and bettors.......now those subjects manage to enter the conversation multiple times.
bobby branch 10 months ago
Sports writers voting for "the best" of the year doesn't work. We don't vote for the Super Bowl champ, the NBA champ, the World Series champ, etc. NCAA football continues to decide its champion thru the polls (which is all the BCS is); in reality, there has never been an NCAA football champion at the highest level decided on the field (this year alone there are 5-6 teams who have an argument). So vote, then enjoy complaining and/or debating.
Jason 10 months ago
Mike - To make the 3 YO comment about Cambina, wouldn't you have to include Winter Memories, Summer Soiree and Star Billing in the same sentence...? Of that bunch, she's the filly I'm most interested in seeing this year. Tough luck trips in both the Yellow Ribbon and BC Filly and Mare Turf and she was finishing strong in both.
Unbias Railbird 10 months ago
HdG HOtY . .. You gotta be kidding. Whats the point of voting when year after year it's the same old story. Z would've pounce all over HdG and RA had they all met. Unfortunately, T-bred racing as a whole is in serious decline.
bob raimonto 10 months ago
This column on mindless Eclipse voting by alleged experts is excellent. Whether or not one agrees with all of Mike's assertions, it is clear that he genuinely loves and respects the sport, as do we all. Should fans be allowed to vote for thoroughbred racing's best equine and human competitors? Would this intensify interest in racing, or just result in many more questionable picks and an epidemic of ballot stuffing? this issue is worth examining.
Old Timer 10 months ago
It's hard to add to what has been said here. I like your "favorites" and the Jack Daniels comment. I'd add Uncle Mo for 3 yo champ as another "favorite". There were half a dozen horses more deserving than him. Drosselmeyer takes the cake though when he didn't even finish in the money on the lawn.
b. cade 10 months ago
I agree with Dave B. There will forever be a few whose votes are unaccountably ridiculous. Yet trying to weed them out will prove futile. The larger number of voters will hold sway, so let it go. There is a terrific year ahead with so many high caliber horses returning. Have fun!
twodollarbettor 10 months ago
Thanks for the blog, Mike! Year in and year out, I take for granted the names of Eclipse award winners (almost always, they're within my range of belief). But the examples you cited of egregious errors in judgement suggest strongly that the voting process needs to be revamped. I can see where a few might vote for Rapid Redux for HOY in a year where no one distinguished themselves without seriously believing he would actually win the award, but Court Vision? A fine veteran, but even a survey of regular goers to the racetrack would yield more reliable responses.
Donna Brothers 10 months ago
Agreed, Mike. As a broadcaster this was the first year I was allowed to vote and I did not take this privilege lightly. I actually wish every voter's ballots were made public so that people would only vote for horses they could take a reasonably defensible position on.
Ron 10 months ago
In response to blackseabass comment, not only has NASCAR gone from voting by writers for their awards, but most all individual sports worldwide. The PGA tour has instituted their wildly sucessfull Fedex point system to decide their champions, the ATP and other men's and women's tennis tour no longer vote but use a point system to decide their yearly awards. Even the LPGA tour uses one. Animal Kingdom wins exactly one grade 1 race and he is crowned champion?
Bill Daly 10 months ago
One of the problems with the Eclipse Awards is that there are no criteria other than age and sex in some of the categories. You can even vote for a deceased horse or one who ran like he was deceased. Some hard and fast rules are necessary to prevent the ludicrous votes you mentioned. Another thing; if the powers that be cannot produce a more professional ceremony for television just forget about it. For the most part, what we saw on HRTV the other night was amateurish at best. (MW - There is the rare and unfortunate circumstance when voting for a deceased horse is entirely justified, with Ruffian being a perfect example.)
Lima 10 months ago
Mike... I have a question? Why is it that Acclimation won older male and lost turf male to Cape Blanco? Cape Blanco won the turf male award (easy 172-55) over Acclimation at his own game TURF! So that means Acclimation was the better older male and is rewarded the award for older male.... does not make sense!
Phil 10 months ago
One of the worst BC Mile's ever? One more knock against you Mike.
Roger 10 months ago
There are 7 billion of us now which means more dopes than ever. You find them everywhere in greater numbers and I'm not surprised to see them show up in the Eclipse Award tallies. They are certainly not qualified to vote are are probably quite lazy to boot. If it wasn't so sad it would be laughable. Drosselmeyer for male turf?
Sol 10 months ago
Worst BC Mile ever? Wow. Turallure is a game and accomplished animal who nearly pulled off a nice three race win streak starting with the Baruch and then winning up at Woodbine and losing by the slimmest of margins. Watch this horse in 2012.
Geir Stabell 10 months ago
Watchmaker is right here, no doubt about that. Some of these votes actually look like mistakes. Short memories rule in racing, by the way, and perhaps monthly votes or points through the season would be better. Top class performances must always be given credit. What happened to Turbulent Descent? Run the Test in November and she gets votes... then again, why wasn't Wise Dan in the picture, or The Factor for that matter.
Nysteve27 10 months ago
What kind of year is it when I can name 15-20 performances better than our Breeder’s Cup Classic winner? Drosselmeyer ran faster then the horses (and filly) he ran against, but really folks, we all know how slow and ugly that was. The filly by the way just happened to be horse of the year. How bad is the state of our racing when our handicap division produces this? A horse such as Invasor, Ghostzapper, or Tiznow would not have won a grade 1 two turn race by less than 10 lengths this year and I swear by that. So I say to you Mike Watchmaker; why do I have to take this vote “so seriously” when sometimes no one deserves it? Why are we so caught up in having to reward someone EVERY year? It’s not just the eclipse awards; it is also the Hall of Fame inductions as well. We are not the only sporting industry that does this (HOF I mean) but it still does not make it right. I can’t remember the last time a fan cheered or a handicapper singled “best older turf male” on their Eclipse pick 4 ticket. It’s all pretty silly to me, but hey Mike, please continue to scold those writers who didn’t vote for Union Rags or Hansen
Robin 10 months ago
I'm glad you've highlighted this, Mike. I used to be sent a ballot for the Sovereign Awards (Canada) but, when one of the other voters called up and asked me who he should vote for, I decided that this was altogether too bogus a process to be involved in. This past season, with few stand-outs, required voters to actually have some knowledge of the horses and their form. And, as your article confirms, there are sadly few left who really know anymore.
Ron 10 months ago
Its time to take the voting out of the process. We should have a graded stakes point system in place which will not only REWARD horses and their owners for their achievements BUT also encourage them to race more. Triple Crown and Breeders Cup races are worth 15-10-5 pts on WPS. All other GR 1 race pts are worth 10-7-4. Grade 2 races are worth 8-5-3 and Grade 3s are worth 5-3-1. At the end of the season add the points and we have our champions. Fan interest goes all year as DRF keeps the point leaders like standings in all other sports newspapers. This concept is similar to what NASCAR does for their drivers and owner points standings and their post season awards. Do the math that way and we will see who the most deserving horses were this year!
Chuck 10 months ago
For as long as there has been horseracing, the argument as to who is the better horse has always been in fashion. This past year yielded in most divisional races a weak case for most horses. Having been an owner for over fifteen years, I was glad to see REDUX get a special award. Think back to 1957 when the three year olds consisted of BOLD RULER, GALLANT MAN,ROUND TABLE, GENERAL DUKE and IRON LIEGE.Trust me, there was never a more accomplished class of three year olds.I saw them all race in the flesh. By the way, BOLD RULER was declared top in his class.He also was Secretariat's daddy.
Vinny G. 10 months ago
Why is it that so called "experts" in any field, (Sports, Entertainment, News, etc.) always feel to compelled to disagree with year end awards when the winners do not reflect their opinions. When this year's Super Bowl is decided there will be endless complaints that he "Best Team" did not win. There will be criticism of the Oscar winners. After all, I (self declared master judge) decree that so and so was much better and therefore the actual winners are frauds and how dare you disagree with me.
Amy 10 months ago
I agree with Dave B. Plus this is democracy in action, not a perfect system, but a darn good one, and the only plausible one out there. People are "free" to vote for whom they want. Leave it at that. The public did get it right, and usually does.
Bill Daly 10 months ago
Mike, a vote for a deceased horse is entirely justifiable if the horse warrants the vote {e.g., Ruffian}. I was just using hyperbole to demonstrate how subjective the entire exercise is. Your point about how people need to be accountable for their vote[s] is a good one.
Spendabuck 10 months ago
Rapid Redux should have won HOY, long live the $5,000 Starter Allowance condition!
Kerraine 10 months ago
Kyle frey for apprentice? Curatolo got robbed, Animal Kingdoms one grade 1 win and hes champion 3YO?
blackseabass 10 months ago
It appears there are a lot of people who's qualification for voting is who they are related to. Face it Mike most of the voters can't handicap their way out of a wet paper bag. The day HDG could beat Acclamation at any distance is most likely never. Calebs Posse can't beat Gr III horses around two turns. One poster said he'd bet HDG over Zenyatta !!! LOL. Another guy watches NASCAR !! LOL That in itself DQ's his opinion . LOL
Phil Gleaves 10 months ago
Mike, great piece, this nonsense of people voting " impossible" horses has been going on for years,either by members of the press or racing secretaries doing favors for their local owners. many years ago it happened between Dehere and Brocco for two year old male and it came down to a very close vote but of course some underserving or uninformed voter decided to vote on a midwest horse who had not come close to their accomplishments effectively costing Brocco at least a tie. I spoke with Mike Welsch about my viewpoint on this and he was kind enough to write about my thoughts in the DRF....one of my peers thought I was out of line making commentary about this...anyway, I said then and say now many of the voting bloc do not deserve to vote.The people who make these outlandish choices should have their name published so that their peer group can contact them and listen to them defend their choice
andrew 10 months ago
The only vote I really have a problem with is Drosselmeyer for older turf male...this is a vote system, and I dont think that it should change to a point system...(ex. what if a horse dominates a strong G1 by 10 lengths vs. a horse who won a weak G1 by a head, they should not get the same amount of points) anyways, I dont really think Havre de Grace was HOY. anyways heres my votes for who I think had the best year overall: HOY - Acclamation 3YO Male - Calebs Posse 3YO Female - Royal Delta 2YO Male - Hansen 2YO Female - My Miss Aurelia Older Female - HDG Older Turf Female - Stacelita Older Male - Acclamation Older Turf Male - Cape Blanco
grasslover 10 months ago
Hi Mike - While I agree that this topic should be dissected, you don't mention how one gets the privilege to vote on such an important array of awards. It's almost as if it could sometimes be a "good ol' boy" mentality where someone can say "I'll vote for your horse if...". I'd like to think that being given the ability to vote on the Eclipse Awards is only given to those that are truly in the know, but I think you'll always have occurrences like these, however misguided the opinions of those voters are.
Janice 10 months ago
Good piece. Those who choose to not take their vote seriously by either voting idiotically or abstaining, need to realize their choice to be a voter is a privilege. If they don't respect this right, or hold it to the highest regard, they should turn their vote over to someone else who would appreciate the chance to vote and feel honored to participate in choosing the best equine performers this sport has to offer!
John Best 10 months ago
Court Vision ran a great race. He beat the horse who was arguably the best of all the BC entrants. I say he deserves it too.
Chris Vignoe 10 months ago
John, Court Vision did not even have as good a campaign as Turralure, who was the hard luck loser. I have admired Court Vision's career, but would certainly not even consider giving him an Eclipse this year.
Janet 10 months ago
While I wholeheartedly agree that some of the votes defied credulity, the Eclipse Awards are, by their very lack of well-defined criteria, based largely on a subjective vote. As a lawyer who has often chafed over the single hold-out juror when the other eleven decided a case "my" way, I still have to accept and respect that each voted as they saw fit, applying the law to the evidence as they interpreted it. It is the same with the Eclipse Awards. Perhaps the voter who chose Court Vision truly believed that as the BC Mile was the second most-hyped race of the entire Championships, his denial of the great Goldikova's fourth trophy merited recognition as the greatest accomplishment of the year. (No, I do not know him/her; I am merely speculating.) This is the beauty of the Eclipse Awards: each voter's own opinion of what constitutes "outstanding". Rather than chasing after the perceived offenders with pitchforks, perhaps it might be more helpful to require some specified criteria in addition to "one North American start".
Lady Slew 10 months ago
It is only your opinion that it is absurd four people voted for Rapid Redux. As I have said before, the horse showed up, raced, and won more times in one year than most of the Eclipse winners will race in their entire careers. A vote for Rapid Redux was a vote for breeding to race not racing to breed. See it for what it actually is! A wake up call that racing needs to change. Even the DRF headline article is about the miracle of how many Eclipse winners will return to the track this year.
Bernard Kroviak 10 months ago
If some one fails to return their ballot, they should be banned for life for ever being part of the process again !!! How do they decide who gets to vote ? These are the ones I have a problem with as well.
Jamie 10 months ago
Drosselmeyer as champion turf male just made me scream at the live feed I was watching. I would ask what that voter was thinking but clearly they weren't.
Derbyman 10 months ago
Mr Watchmaker You are SPOT ON !!
rsdcpa 10 months ago
Mike, loosen up. Every horse won that should have won or had a very good reason to win (except I think CP accomplished more than AK for 3yo male.) It's hard to root out incompetence after the fact. The voters should be deemed thoroughly qualified before they are selected as voters. That's why Supreme Court justices are vetted out so thoroughly before they are confirmed. They can't be removed after that. Heisman Trophy winners are lifetime voters for each year's Heisman Trophy and I think they understand their responsibility but their vote is always their vote. And who would you want to monitor everyone's ballot, the IRS? I don't think so. I can respect the 4 votes for RR. At least he accomplished something that won't probably be replicated in our lifetime. He broke Z's consecutive win record and tied Citation's win record in a year. I have great respect for that in this day and age. And besides, hey it's only 109 days until Derby Day and it's been a mild winter. Let's count our blessings.
Brook Lynn 10 months ago
I totally agree with you. I have a friend who is included in the lucky group of people who get to vote on the Eclipse Awards, and I can't tell you how envious I am of her! I consider (and, I know she does too) this to be such a great honor! She is a professional, and given her position in the sport of horse racing, it's understandable why she is included and why it makes sense that she is. She follows the sport day in and day out, and, I truly believe it takes someone in the "know" to cast an educated vote. This sport is very complicated really, at least it is for a layperson like me and I'm glad there are people like you out there voting for the very prestigious Eclipse awards.
Rob 10 months ago
When you wrote this article did you ever ask yourself, how can I take a shot at anyone when I just voted for Animal Kingdom as 3yo of the year? How could anyone in their right mind vote Animal Kingdom as 3yo of the year shows why this sport is on the decline. Sorry but winning the Grade 3 Spiral, Grade 1 Kentucky Derby, and placing in the Grade 1 Preakness does not earn you an Eclipse award. The key “word” in the award is 3 year old of the “YEAR”, not 3 year old of 2 months. I’m not even a Shackleford fan and I am amazed that he did not win this award. Shackleford raced 10 times in 2011 at seven different racetracks with a record of two wins and four second place finishes. Add to the fact that he was a head and neck away from winning the Grade One Florida Derby and Haskell Stakes. He raced through all three legs of the Triple Crown and even made it to the Breeders Cup where he ran a respectable second in the Grade One Breeders Cup Dirt Mile with the only real clunker coming in the Travers. Also, in the three meetings they went against each other, Shackleford finished ahead of Animal Kingdom all but once. I absolutely love Animal Kingdom and think he is gonna have a super year but he was an undeserving winner.
CarloBlanche 10 months ago
The fact of the matter is this happens every year because people have their own personal favorite horses.That's great,everyone has a horse they are especially attached to. But this is the Eclipse awards and people should be mature enough to know how to vote honestly!
dave 10 months ago
i think more then likely these votes were placed as sort of a statement to the point that no one was deserving of these awards this year. i mean really, havre de grace for hoty? come on, man! its one thing to vote for a filly ot mare for this award if they have a brilliant campaign and DOMINATE THEIR OWN DIVISION, or beat males in a big race. but neither of those two things happened. i like havre de grace and bet her last year in the distaff classic as well. in fact if she would have met zenyatta outside of ca., that is where my money would have been. but she was not undefeated against her own group, an was soundly beaten in the classic against males. yes she no doubt deserved top older mare, but this infatuation with thinking that mares suddenly are better then horses is preposterous. yes it happens on rare occassions, but there is usualy a reason. when zenyatta faced them on flubber, she had a huge home field advantage. when she faced them on dirt, she ran the best race of her life, and still got beat. when rachel beat them, at least it was on a real track. but the fields she beat were not exactly the top horses in training either. there is a reason they have awards for females and awards for males. and im sorry, but havre de grace did not do enough to deserve hoty, just as zenyatta did not deserve it last year. but people want to voy=te with their hearts instead of their brains, and this is what happens.
Steeplestakes 10 months ago
Thank you Dave, I agree completely with your statements about HdG. She was exposed as a fraud in the BCC, but people voted for her anyway because they vote with their hearts instead of their brians as you posted. Acclamation had a better record than HdG since he won more unrestricted Grade I races and he won repeatedly at Classic distances, while HdG has never won beyond 9 furlongs. HdG as HoY made no sense to me whatsoever.
John Merriweather 10 months ago
This is nothing new ... every year there are a few wacky votes. Last year, for instance, a writer who is occasionally published in DRF actually cast the lone vote for Juan Carlos Guerrero as top trainer. It was ridiculous then, and - since hindsight is always 20-20 - it's really ridiculous now. Do you still feel that the three voting blocs should "weed out voters who show signs of impropriety, or who prove to be simply unqualified" ??
Steeplestakes 10 months ago
Excellent article, Mike. Those who voted for Uncle Mo, Drosselmeyer & Court Vision should lose their voting privileges. As you point out, the vote for Uncle Mo was particularly egregious given how close that voting was in that division. Another aspect of the voting that didn’t make sense to me was the lack of votes cast for The Factor. On paper, The Factor’s record of two Grade 1 wins, one of which was against older horses, and four Grades Stakes wins was identical to the record posted by Caleb’s Posse. Perhaps the fact that The Factor threw in a couple of clunkers, including one in the BC Sprint, is what hurt him. Still, if you lined Caleb’s Posse up on the race track against The Factor, there would be little difference in their odds at post time.
Jennifer M 10 months ago
The Eclipse Awards have often followed the Sovereign awards with its style of ceremony etc. It should do the same when it comes to this topic. Our Jockey Club of Canada shrewdly cut down the number of voters, getting rid of people who didn't vote, forgot to vote and those who also put down silly answers. We half almost half the voters nowadays as we did 5 years ago . I have an Eclipse vote and take it very seriously, as I do the Sovereigns. I spend a lot of time on it. Certainly that is not the case with many Eclipse voters. Follow Canada's lead again Eclipse people!
Ange 10 months ago
I still believe that the Eclipse as well as our Canadian Sovereign awards need to be chosen in a points system. Points to be awarded for each win from Grade 1 down through maiden claiming races. These points would be awarded to horses, owners, breeders, trainers & jockeys (personally I'd like to see some grooms winning awards as well, but that's a whole other issue). Obvy the people would have a much higher points total than the horses at the end of the year, but, this would make it fair. Base it on actual success, not on votes or money earned. Ties would be broken based on number of Grade 1 wins, Grade 2 wins, etc etc.
Niall Dalton 10 months ago
It's about time this recurring problem received attention. There are obviously those with ballots that need to lose the the privilege carried with the responsibility to use fair and impartial judgement along with a dose of common sense when casting their votes.
todd saunders 10 months ago
way to go Mike! i think you hit the nail right on the head, and it is high time it is taken seriously. it should be a privilege to vote in the Eclipse Awards, and while i might not agree with Zenyatta getting the nod last year over Blame, art least it had a modicum of fact based upon it. the idea that people would cast some of the votes they did both this year and last (there were some idiotic votes last year as well) begs the notion that all votes should be cast openly, and the credentials of those empowered with the vote be reviewed from time to time. there is a great deal at stake, none the least of which is the money and prestige that goes with championships, and they should not be left in the hands of people who either do not care about their vote or who seek to make "statements" by voting absurdly. good for you for writing this piece, and i hope it prompts people to either re-consider the process as it now stands, or at least weed out those that are not taking the job serious
Chuck Kedl 10 months ago
Excellent article. I was talking to my good friend, a former jockey agent about the same thing. His comment was the person was "either drunk, stupid, retarded or all of the above." Unfortunately, people who voted in the 3 year old for Uncle Mo, Stay Thirsty and Ruler On Ice should be stripped of their voting priveleges and made to get a real job. Either that, or I'll give them each a buck to pay the toll from fantasy land into reality land.
Dave B. 10 months ago
Mike -- Unfortunately imbecilic voting that you highlight in your article is par for the course in most polls/voting. Just look at college football/basketball where both reporters and coaches make some of the most egregious errors in their voting. Unfortunately, I really don't think there's much that can be done about it. Fortunately, the "masses" tend to get it right. So relax and let's hope to see an Awesome Feather-Royal Delta showdown sometime this year!