Is this guy f*ckin’ high?

I don’t know Sports Illustrated’s Tim Layden.  I know his name only because any time he writes an article about horse racing, Horse Racing Twitter goes nuts because the sport we love is finally getting attention from a mainstream publication.  I’m sure Tim Layden is a great guy with lots of friends and a wonderful family and all that jazz.  But what he wrote recently about Justify and the Horse of the Year debate is so laughably absurd that, as someone who disagrees with him, it didn’t offend me in the slightest.  In case you missed it…

What the hell is this dude smoking?  There is no “ginned up” controversy.  Many people, like me, believe that Accelerate should be Horse of the Year because he was the better horse on the racetrack.  Period.  No one is taking anything away from what Justify accomplished.  What he did by winning the Triple Crown, not even considering the brevity of his career or when it began, was outstanding.  And proponents of Accelerate don’t even need to play the “he never faced older” card.  Just put their on-track performances side-by-side, and I think Accelerate should be a hands-down winner.  Layden’s argument seems to imply that those thinking HOY should go to Accelerate are trying to steal the Horse of the Year award from Justify.  As if it’s his by default by virtue of his Triple Crown sweep.  And I think that’s silly.

Tim Layden is free to disagree, and he clearly does.  And I don’t want to turn this post into a debate about who is more deserving.  We’ve done that already.  But his characterization of the debate as being anything other than honest and merit-based is fucking moronic.  I get it.  He doesn’t write for DRF or Blood-Horse of the Lexington Herald-Leader, so his opinions are inherently more pure than anyone who covers racing on the reg.  Blah blah blah.  Bite me.  Maybe Tim Layden doesn’t even know who Accelerate is because he only watches horse racing for five weeks in the spring.