SIMMY Poll

[Brian Leavitt]

I actually like the idea of closed voting. I think the best way to do it would be the Steward with the help of a small committee of game experts (and by small I mean 3 max).

[Bryan Doolittle]

If it is easier for you, than you should do it. It is impossible for the Simmy's to be free of backlash. Also, we won't have to read complaining or whining forum posts about why horse X didn't win. Now you can just get the pm (and not read it). Go Us!

[Melissa Mae]

I feel like there will be a lot less "The sim is stupid because they didn't vote for my horse and omg, how could they vote for the winner" drama if the Steward does it. In the long run, I think that will cause less stress/anger for the Steward because other than a few people that would complain even if their horses won, there really wouldn't be anything to complain about.

[Paul Heinrich]

Honestly, if it were up to me it would be solely on points. Highest point total in given category wins, period. If it goes to the Steward, I hope it's something very simple and objective like that, because the last thing I would vote for is more stress/responsibility for the Steward.

Having helped with tallying points before I agree with Paul and I actually think that is why the Steward (or a panel) should be the final call. Popularity or non-popularity doesn't always properly credit accomplishment.

Unfortunately just points doesn't always work in some categories. All two year old's in every region are lumped together, sprinters can have 3 or 4 more races than routers. Also we have the old, "my horse beat your horse twice but left the region to run in the SC" argument. Horse "A" runs twice in the Islands beats horse "B" both times ("B" finishes 2nd both times), "A" leaves the region. Horse "B" stays runs two more races and wins and has more in region points.

I'm a "fly by the seat of your pants" kinda guy and sometimes data needs a bit of human interaction to get the "right" results. Either way, Em or us, just numbers doesn't do it justice.

If we were talking about a few dozen awards, I'd agree. But it's simply too much work to expect people to draw distinctions between horses like that for all the categories we have. That's the big reason the simmys, as they currently exist, are essentially meaningless. The real accomplishment is getting your horse nominated at all, and that's based solely on points.

Will juvenile sprinters have an advantage? Sure. That's true now. Juvenile miler/router horses basically have to win the Steward's Cup to get enough points for nomination. Routers have an advantage every other year, because there are more options for them. I'm ok with sprinters having the advantage as juveniles.

As far as the A vs B horse, I have no problem with the B horse getting the regional Simmy. The idea here is that you can go for the Simmy, or you can take a shot at the Steward's Cup, but going for the SC may cost you a Simmy. This is true now, especially when you consider the mid-season Dubai races also factor in. Basing the Simmy's completely on points will have the effect of saying that the award is for the horse who accomplishes the most in that category.

[Friedrich Barbarossa]

If it is easier for you, than you should do it. It is impossible for the Simmy's to be free of backlash. Also, we won't have to read complaining or whining forum posts about why horse X didn't win. Now you can just get the pm (and not read it). Go Us!

Come on Bryan, you know better than that. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth regardless. And frankly that's become an annual sim tradition that I really enjoy immensely.

I'd say do it by points as well. Easy.

[Kenneth Prater]

Just out of curiosity, how many of the SIM's participants actually vote in the Simmy Poll?

[Chris Ould]

i dont know whts wht so am happy with what ever

[Chris Everett]

Not many of the population does, most i think is shy of 300 people. Might be more or less, Em knows

[The Steward]

Not many of the population does, most i think is shy of 300 people. Might be more or less, Em knows

Correct, it used to be about 300 a year but it is down closer to 200 ish.

[Westurf Nursery]

i want to vote! its one of the things i enjoy most about this game and the people who don't want to vote don't have to anyways.

[Jennifer Klebsch]

I'd normally be all about exercising my right to vote, but I've admittedly had little time to keep up with any horses outside my own stable or research all the candidates and divisions...so in this case I'd feel much more comfortable giving my vote over to the Steward (minus the backlash) or a panel of experts to make a much more informed decision.

[Gigi Gofaster]

I'm happy with either option, although I think a panel might ease the workload if we went that way, and prevent the poor Steward from having to wade through all those mixers. The trick would be finding panels that had the expertise, time, and interest, but didn't have a whole load of nominated horses themselves.

[J K Rowling]

If the people can't vote, I don't see much of a point of having them at all. The SIMMYs will just become a gold star from the Steward; it doesn't mean anything if one person is responsible for the results. Besides, what criteria will be put in place for selecting the winner? Will the GI horse who spent two races in Africa get the SIMMY over a horse that's run consistently in listed stakes all year long?

Maybe we've reached a point where we should just disband the SIMMYs altogether.

[Ali Weasley]

Secret Option C:

Use a committee, similar to the Eclipse process.

[Regina Moore]

I overall lean toward the Steward choosing.

But does that mean there would be a winner for each category, end of story?

Or would there still be a list of nominees, or Honorable Mentions, or something of that nature?