ascot aug08
This is a single article. Click HERE to go to the main page.

Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Words on a different track bias

Comments from "anonymous" yesterday (look under Welcome to Day 164 and Sovereign Voting Begins) addresses an issue that media must consider often when writing about racing or anything for that matter.
The reader said this corner has a bias towards Reade Baker, a top trainer at Woodbine who has appeared in notes on these pages frequently. Perhaps Baker gets more mention than other people but when someone or some horse, does a lot of different things and is in the news such as the Daily Racing Form on a regular basis, they often make other publications too. Like this Blog.
Not sure where the anonymous person (who may have a name?) got the idea that I am "supposed to be neutral" in this space, a Blog is a personal website, a "web log", and frankly, I believe this blog has been a lot more neutral than it could be.
The anonymous person also has critical comments on the Sovereign Awards, suggesting that trainers buy votes. Hmmm, I must have missed out on this, I have never received anything in 18 years of voting! Indeed, there are certain areas of the Awards that could use some tweaking to avoid the same people winning year after year, perhaps with the way the information is presented to the 70 voters across Canada, but all in all, one can be sure, it's reasonably fair.
Just a few comments to "anonymous" on this rainy Tuesday morning - thanks for reading and writing.


  • At 12:44 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I would like to add that I have noticed a definite bias towards thoroughbreds at this blogsite, from which we might infer a lack of equine neutrality. I, for one, would like to see more fair and balanced coverage of, for example, the Clydesdale. Where, we might ask, is the Sovereign category for the draft horse?
    I smell a conspiracy at the highest levels.

  • At 7:45 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    ya, more quarterhorses too! and cart horses. on second thought, you went over that latter category with the plate winner.

  • At 7:50 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Hi Jen,

    First I want to say that it is NOT your favorite Seahawk-area denizen who was the 'anonymous' in question, just for the record.

    And from what you wrote here, that 'anonymous' sounds a lot like the racing types who like to mumble about why it is that "it's always the favorites whose odds plummet by half at the quarter pole", or why "it's always the favorites you see stumbling badly at the start, or being 'restrained' somehow".

    The ONLY reason for that is because a random person is more likely to be watching the favorites (and their odds) at any given point than they are the 70-1 shots who, if capable of racing anywhere near the pack, have equal amounts of trouble.

    Jen, you don't have to be neutral at all here (as you're well aware)... but, um, neutrality would have been a relatively good thing given last night's game.

    P.S. - I survived the terrible storm!


Post a Comment