+1Ali Weasley wrote:Secret Option C:
Use a committee, similar to the Eclipse process.
A secret committee then no one can be blamed unless you let others know you were part of it. Which i doubt would happen.
+1Ali Weasley wrote:Secret Option C:
Use a committee, similar to the Eclipse process.
Nominations aren't recorded anywhere in your barn or the horse's page now, so I imagine it would just be winners.Regina Moore wrote: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?
Julie K. wrote: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.
Which is why it should be a committee of informed trainers voting; ideally made up of a one or two of each of the following enthusiasts/experts: Mixer, Sprint, Mile, Route, AW, 'Chaser; making up a committee of 8-12 trainers/owners who are informed and knowledgeable, headed by the Steward herself. Then it isn't a gold star from the Steward, it is a gold star from those that really follow the SIM most closely and are well informed.Julie Kluesener wrote: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.
This definitely gets my vote.I think the Steward would make it more fair. Maybe there should be the Steward and a pannel of judges like 10 people that change every year and the steward chooses who they are. This will make it more fair i find. The people chosen would have to do there job and maybe the steward can give them GP or like 100k or something for the serves!
It IS a large time commitment, but people would be far more likely to want to put the time in if they know that their vote really will make a difference.A committee might not be a bad idea, if you could get a *committed* group of people - we're still talking about a large time commitment. And then we're back to the hard feelings and "backlash" of the subjective approach.