Horse of the Year

[thinair]

She ended up in a beautiful rail pocket while he got the classic "best horse" ride and gave up 3-4 lengths of ground. Switch trips and it's hard to see how she finishes better with the additional ground loss, whereas he has literally never run inside horses, so who knows? Maybe he runs even better, maybe they both finish behind Sierra Leone. I don't think To Honor and Serve could have run a 111 going 10f with a head start, but hey, I'm just glad Fierceness has finally beaten the "needs the lead" allegations. Baby steps!

RE: HOTY, I just now think of it as the top-level horse who defined the year. 2010 was a makeup call for 2009, which could have credibly been a shared award, but for better or worse Blame is just not the horse people remember best from that year. Same goes for Justify vs. Accelerate and Cody's Wish vs. White Abarrio. Should the award be based on vibes instead of objective achievements? Eh, I don't know, but reframing it in that way has really helped me stop caring about it so much. I only have so much outrage to spare, and must portion it judiciously.

You think Fierceness would have been comfortable rating behind horses? What in his career suggests that? Ground loss is tricky, and it's certainly not just a question of distance covered. There was a reason his connections were thrilled with his draws in the Jim Dandy and Travers. They sure didn't seem worried about ground loss. They were, however, likely concerned with him taking dirt, or being pressed from the outside. To Honor and Serve beat Mucho Macho Man in the Woodward. When things went his own way, he was capable of very good things, much like Fierceness. I never said he was faster than Fierceness, I just suggested he was a Grade 1 horse when everything went his way...much like Fierceness.

Fierceness is supremely talented. No sane person has ever denied that. However, he has yet to show that talent under anything but his preferred circumstances. It's kind of hard to realistically argue against that.

[Tessablue]

I wouldn't argue that he's proven he can handle rating inside, I just don't think there's enough information to make a definitive call either way. He got strong in the Holy Bull, but that was off a layoff with a jostled break and some quarterhorsing from his jockey, and he was outside horses that day. He was uncomfortable from the start in the Champagne, and although he spent a few strides inside horses in that race he wasn't close to the rail and didn't seem to get strong from it (in fact he might have even come off the bridle a little). In the Derby he was up widest on a very strong pace, and, well, it's the Derby. He's been very handy in his other starts, and while the connections definitely want him wide, couldn't that be because they want to keep him away from any trip nonsense and know he's good enough to compensate for the ground loss? And I know it's not as simple as feet = lengths, but I would argue that for a lot of horses, going 3W3W in a 10f race against very good opponents (while giving one of them weight, which I guess some people think makes a difference) would constitute a less-than-ideal circumstance.

I just think that broadly speaking, he isn't quite getting the credit he deserves for his Travers win, and I don't know if another horse transposed into his trip could run the race that he did. The draw is certainly a huge and interesting question mark in the Classic, but if he draws inside and is consequently overlooked in the betting, does he end up actually offering some value despite being the undisputed most talented (dirt) horse in the race? That's what I'm wondering while rewatching his races... I understand distrusting him, but I just think there's enough ambiguity in his prior efforts to leave the door open, and even if he does end up hating the inside, isn't there still an off chance that he gets some kind of Beholder's Pacific Classic trip behind Arthur's Ride and company? Getting ahead of things here, but I'm already dreaming about how much money City of Troy is going to take

(To Honor and Serve was a neat horse, I liked him, but it never did feel like he lived up to his potential. My immediate thought for a "talented but folds under pressure" horse is Irish War Cry, although at this point I can't honestly remember if it's justified or not)

[Curtis]

We disagree. I am more than confident if you switched the posts, the filly would have won. I'm also confident that if they "went around again" he might have made the super, but he surely would have lost to both the filly and Sierra Leone. I find the "could have gone around again" argument to be nonsensical. It means nothing and surely can never be proven. You're a smart guy, so I'm guessing you know that.

Unfortunately, Fierceness will only have one more chance to show people he is capable of running well when everything doesn't go exactly perfectly for him. Stalking outside in moderate paces is a wonderful trip for the faint hearted. He has had more than his share of those. If pace shows up in the Classic, good luck to him. If he draws inside, with pace in the race, no wishes of good luck can save him. He's a tremendously talented horse who has shown, so far, to not be able to overcome the slightest bit of adversity. To Honor and Serve Part Deux. But at least To Honor and Serve ran as a 4YO.

If I’m smart enough to know the ramifications of stating Fierceness would have won had they gone around again, you’re smart enough to know a head is longer than an inch. Fierceness is still considered green. He’s just now putting two winning races together. We’ll never probably see his best as he’ll become a stallion after the BC. As far as the post position draw? If ifs and buts were candy and nuts……