What’s the Trainer of the Year criteria?

[Xander Zone]

Perfect expect 200 claimers and worse yearlings at gallop time lol

[The Harlequins]

I kid you not Xander,early 80s I and 2 close buds were hired to protect .
Linda Lovelace on a 3 day visit to London, on a book promo, never did get the agreed price,or in kind lol lol

[The Steward]

Cleo ALMOST made the cut. I was close.

Lucas was supposed to be on there, he's on the list. I just missed his ID; adding in now.

As much as people say it's a "popularity' contest, it seems to me people just blindly vote Laura (who I love, nothing against Laura) nearly every year. It's almost like a game now. ETA - just looked, she's dominating the voting AGAIN at this moment.

[Andrew Chillin]

Why

[Mr. Lord Rich]

Laura lead in ZERO TB categories this season and her only major TB win was a 2yo SC race.
No pegasus wins, no saudi wins, no desert wins, no arc, no triple crown wins, no chimbo
Yes it is 100% a popularity contest.

[Dylan Christensen]

No offense to Laura but like Andrew said, why? I’m sure Laura realizes she had nowhere near as good of a thoroughbred year as a lot of these people. Didn’t come very close to leading most categories and only had one semi-major TB win.

Again, no offense to Laura but maybe there’s a better way to do this so it isn’t a popularity contest...

[Art K Stables]

Well, I was going to vote for Pete, but after Xander comments I think he should get it.. Tough choice...

[Mr. Lord Rich]

Also when are chasers going to have their own voting category and removed from TB voting like mixers were.
Chasers are not the same as TB. They don't run in the same races, they are not trained the same.

[The Harlequins]

Lucas Davenport not to be in the frame......just plain not right.

[Danny Derby]

If Lucas should have been on there then it’s probably only fair to restart voting on the category. Anyone who already voted wouldn’t even have had the chance to vote for him, and I can guarantee you no one is going to take the time to message and change their vote - if they even are aware of the addition.

[David Faulkner]

I think it is fair that people vote according to their desire.

but I think it is fairer for the system to have its own vote, by division

In other words, the winnings entries can be used, Gr. 1,2,3 as winning factors, and OTB

In each one, and separately, it is not the same to win Gr. in chase, than in plane in reference to TB

also with an automated system, which can say the best man player, OTB, Gr. Money etc, is a valid recognition

I think there are great players in each division, and with great results, who pass under the table, nothing is recognized of what they have done throughout the year, and that in my opinion should be corrected

a fair balance for all, in each division, separately

maybe in a very difficult job, to achieve this but it would be great if it could be implemented

And so the award would be according to the desire of each player, and the results according to what was achieved in the year

If I am sincere, I vote according to the owner of the horse when I do not know the horse, and if there is a horse that I like, I vote for him if I see further

If in the system of this moment Everyone wants Laura to be the winner, that's fine, since you prohibit people from voting against their liking, this is fair. Now if this voting has an automated system that considers the achievements of each player in each division, and says who was the best according to their achievements, it is also FAIR

Since here I would talk about the numbers, and their results, and it is also fair, because as someone who has achieved merit is denied

and I think there are players who deserve to be recognized

eye is my point of view, I think that being able to place the 2 award pages, the one for people's voting, and the one for the system would be a good solution

I just hope that no one is bothered by my point of view, at no point am I saying that the winners are not the correct ones, I just think that there are people who are left out every year

[Lucas Davenport]

It doesn't matter to me, leave it as is, please.

If any one of the players under consideration had a GREAT year, in their own opinion, then they should probably get it. I know I did OK, like I normally do, but not a GREAT year. Other than with chasers, I had no real BIG horse. That is how it is most years for me. I'm OK with that.

If you take a close look at how the players play the game, its like comparing apples and oranges and pineapples and coconuts and maybe even corn and lettuce. Or like The Westminster Dog show: my Beagle is better than your Great Dane. (Beagles will always win that one!).

We will all wake up tomorrow morning (or whenever this is over) and this won't change anything in our lives. No use giving it more attention than that. I told my wife, Candace, once that I got elected into The Hall Of Fame, and I got a "Virtual Congratulations" back. I still laugh about that.

[David Howard]

This meme is doing the rounds and it seems apt.

Me showing my wife my SIMMY when she returns from working nights at the hospital:

[The Steward]

If Lucas should have been on there then it’s probably only fair to restart voting on the category. Anyone who already voted wouldn’t even have had the chance to vote for him, and I can guarantee you no one is going to take the time to message and change their vote - if they even are aware of the addition.

In the past this actually is a thing people have done, and already received one request in the last hour, so guarantee thwarted.

[Danny Derby]

If Lucas should have been on there then it’s probably only fair to restart voting on the category. Anyone who already voted wouldn’t even have had the chance to vote for him, and I can guarantee you no one is going to take the time to message and change their vote - if they even are aware of the addition.

In the past this actually is a thing people have done, and already received one request in the last hour, so guarantee thwarted.

Okay, maybe not literally nobody, but far fewer than would have just voted for him normally. Either way if he's cool with it how it is I'll defer to him in this case. I just think it's a general best practice that if there's something missing from a poll that you start the poll over. Late additions are at an inherent unfair disadvantage.