I will let TGJB respond himself but I am pretty sure his suggested "well thought out system of allowance conditions" was not the current scale weights. I am pretty sure he was thinking of wins at different levels and dates and maybe even something more sophisticated including money earned (not necessarily just for races won).

I agree that sometimes you can find "loopholes" in such conditions but if they are "well thought out" and evolve over time as shortcomings are identified, I think this could work.

I also like the idea of having some sort of "impartial" weighting of horses such as they regularly do in Europe based on the consensus subjective opinions of a panel of experts. It would have to be updated regularly (probably weekly or bi-weekly) but that approach could work as well and the weightings could even be used for other purposes such as ranking BC entrants and for Eclipse awards at year end to replace the current voting method (i.e., the highest weighted horse wins in each category). You could still use the current voting method for HOY and the non-equine awards.

Either one would be a big improvement over what we have today.

Chris