Battle of the Contenders

So the heat is on for Horse of the Year and the New York Times is stoking the fire. Sunday's sports pages included 3/4 of a page devoted to the question of who should get the title, Rachel or Zenyatta.

You can weigh in with your vote and read others opinions at The Rail. For what it's worth, both sides make good arguments for their choice and it seems to come down to determining which was the better race, the Woodward or the Breeder's Cup Classic (a subjective decision to be sure), and the fact that Rachel traveled to face the competition while Zenyatta stayed put and let the competition come to her.

Then there is the matter of the record: Rachel at three has run as many races as Zenyatta at five. To be fair, that may have to do with the fact that there simply are more races in existence for a three year old filly than for a five year old mare. As for the travel question, at five, what does Zenyatta have to prove that is worth the potential disruption caused by shipping? It's not like she has to make a name for herself by traveling around the country.

In my book, the title should go to Zenyatta simply because she is still running at five. That, in itself, is a remarkable achievement and the fact that her record remains undefeated over all those racing seasons is nothing short of spectacular.

I seem to be in the minority, however. As of Sunday, the polling favored Rachel with 1,796 votes (69%) vs. Zenyatta with 823 (31%). What do you think?