The Eclipse Awards, once the premier annual honors in North American horse racing, have seen their prestige decline as critics argue they have become more like “participation trophies” that emphasize simple statistics—such as wins and earnings—over nuanced assessments of true excellence. Historically, winning an Eclipse Award significantly boosted a horse’s breeding value, but today, market valuations rely more on transparent data like Grade 1 victories and pedigree, making many division awards feel redundant. The voting body, composed of members from major racing organizations and media, is criticized for being a homogenous group influenced by media narratives and recency bias, often neglecting deeper analysis of competition quality, consistency, and adversity.

A notable example of the awards’ shortcomings was the 2016 vote giving California Chrome a Champion Turf Male vote despite his limited turf racing that year, highlighting how popularity can overshadow performance criteria. While the Eclipse Awards remain a major media event, their influence and credibility are waning. To restore their significance as a true measure of equine greatness and a meaningful enhancer of breeding value, the awards need a more knowledgeable and committed electorate willing to look beyond surface-level statistics and recognize genuine champions.