Change TC Races

[Redboard]

Simple question. Do you think the triple crown races should be changed?

I know this has been discussed in several threads and many of you have already chimed in with your opinion. But I think an anonymous poll is the best way to show the world just what PA’ers want.

I hope I made my options clear. I voted for the second option because I like the first Saturday in May, first in June, and first in July idea. The third option is what the dump ass partner is campaigning for. And the fourth is both option two and three, i.e., space the races and require them to race in all three.

[Capper Al]

No. The sum is greater than the whole when it comes to the triple crown. It is out of the combination of all three races over the short duration that a horse shows itself as a super horse or not.

[Valuist]

There has been one change in the last 20-25 years for the Belmont; Lasix was not legal in New York until sometime around 1990-ish. I know Alysheba could not run on Lasix in the Belmont. Some of the NY experts probably know the exact year Lasix was legalized.

[Shelby]

No, don't change a thing. It's not supposed to be easy.

[onefast99]

Look at baseball the playoffs were changed to essentially make more money, more teams=more playoff games=more $. The NFL would like to add games why more $ changing the Triple Crown doesn't help the bottom line for racing you are changing history only and it should remain as it was since day 1.

[Bobzilla]

Sir Barton won the quadruple crown in 1919 over a span of 32 days. He won the Derby as a maiden then won the Preakness 4 days later. He would go on to win the Withers and Belmont respectively. I know, it was a different era and the thoroughbred seems to have changed dramatically over the last ten years, never mind over the last 95 years. There was no concept of a triple crown in SB's day.

More recently we have come close. Real Quiet in 1998 loses by a bob in what was almost the steward's worst nightmare if the bob with Victory Gallop had gone the other way. Can't actually remember if it was a bob but it was close.

Some believe Smarty Jones could have accomplished this feat if not for the race tactics of some of his competitor's riders. I thought he ran an awesome Belmont despite losing to a very good Birdstone.

In any event it is an honor and recognition of the true greatness that is exemplified by consistently defeating the best of his contemporaries regardless of any adversity or perceived unfairness that may or may not arise during the sequence.

[mostpost]

Look at baseball the playoffs were changed to essentially make more money, more teams=more playoff games=more $. The NFL would like to add games why more $ changing the Triple Crown doesn't help the bottom line for racing you are changing history only and it should remain as it was since day 1.
But it is not as it was since day 1-unless day one occurred some time in the sixties. Here is a list of Triple Crown winners and the intervals between the three races in their winning years.

1919 Sir Barton 4 days; 4 weeks.
1931 Gallant Fox 8 days; 3 weeks. The Preakness was run first that year.
1935 Omaha 1 week; 4 weeks.
1937 War Admiral 1 week; 3 weeks.
1941 Whirlaway 1 week; 4 weeks.
1943 Count Fleet 1 week; 4 weeks.
1946 Assault 1 week; 3 weeks.
1948 Citation 2 weeks; 4 weeks.
1970's Triple Crown winners All 2 weeks; 3 weeks.

Five of the first eight Triple Crown winners had four weeks between the Preakness and the Belmont Stakes and Citation had two weeks between the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness. Does anyone think that Citation's Triple Crown was tainted because of that? Knowing that, does anyone know question Citation's greatness?

My proposal would be; two weeks between the Derby and Preakness; four weeks between the Preakness and Belmont.

[horses4courses]

No change.
It is what it is, and it's a true test.

To me, it seems pretty sad that public opinion could bring about change in this sport on something that really doesn't need to be fixed. The other problems in horse racing (PEDs, etc.) are far greater, but easily ignored.

[wiffleball whizz]

Leave it alone.....the one thing racing has...

This will die down in a few weeks

[magwell]

Purest and traditionalist have one thing in common, they both oppose change even if its for the better........other sports have evolved but horse racing wont and that's why its getting left behind.

[clocker7]

I voted for a spacing change; one that reflects some flexibility that the Crown had before 1969. It makes all of the sense in the world.

[RacingFan1992]

I think you should change the spacing. Kentucky Derby 1 week Preakness Stakes 4 weeks. If you run back in one week you get one months rest. Also get rid of that damn point system. I was wondering how did horses qualify for the Derby before 1985? I know it was based on graded earnings from 1986 to 2012.

[ultracapper]

Do to the extraordinary greatness of Big Red, all must do it the way he did it. If Belmont and NYRA were to schedule the Belmont out another week, the defense that this is the schedule that Citation did it on would be overwhelmed by the retorts of Secretariat's admirers. This is the price of having a larger than life legacy being the benchmark for the whole entire sport. It would be asterisk city.

[clocker7]

Do to the extraordinary greatness of Big Red, all must do it the way he did it. If Belmont and NYRA were to schedule the Belmont out another week, the defense that this is the schedule that Citation did it on would be overwhelmed by the retorts of Secretariat's admirers. This is the price of having a larger than life legacy being the benchmark for the whole entire sport. It would be asterisk city.

Since Citation won another derby in between at Joisey, he should be considered to be at the peak of the heap.

[ultracapper]

Many do consider him there.

[LottaKash]

I voted "no"...

With one caveat tho, that perhaps the eligibility requirements for The Derby, should be changed back to what it used to be....

Otherwise, the TC is the TC, and it should remain a "timeless tradition"...

[The WindfallAngler]

Simple question. Do you think the triple crown races should be changed?

I know this has been discussed in several threads and many of you have already chimed in with your opinion. But I think an anonymous poll is the best way to show the world just what PA’ers want.

I hope I made my options clear. I voted for the second option because I like the first Saturday in May, first in June, and first in July idea. The third option is what the dump ass partner is campaigning for. And the fourth is both option two and three, i.e., space the races and require them to race in all three.I saw no point in participating in this poll, as you did not provide an option 5). to Reduce (by about HALF) the number of Belmont Stakes starters.

For this is what's changed during the course of our 36-year drought! And it is this unheralded, unreasonable & almost imperceptible building-up of Field Size, that has approximately doubled the number of Jewel Three's starters.

It is all that that needs to be modified. ...so as to bring an artificially increased difficulty in line with that which confronted the Triple Crown Winners.

You can keep letting the cherry pickers pick their spots, adhering to the letter, if not the spirit of The Rules--to the obvious detriment of a decreasing number of Kentucky Derby starters (who then enter, honorably, subsequent Preakness and Belmont Stakes). The Belmont Stakes race is the ONE place where small fields are not only welcome, but necessary--if we are ever to see another Triple Crown Champion.

[mostpost]

Since Citation won another derby in between at Joisey, he should be considered to be at the peak of the heap.
In fact five of the eight first Triple Crown winners had a race between the Preakness and the Belmont. It was my error to not consider that fact in my analysis.

Never the less I would not object to moving the Belmont back one week.

[Redboard]

I saw no point in participating in this poll, as you did not provide an option 5). to Reduce (by about HALF) the number of Belmont Stakes starters..

Two executives from NYRA just fainted when they read your post.

You are correct in saying that the past TC winners did not have to face that many Belmont starters, but, let's face it, these races are for the horseplayers first. I thought the field of 11 in last Saturday's race was perfect. With record handles like last Saturday, I don't think there's much chance your suggestion would fly very far.

[Redboard]

Spacing the races further apart could actually make it harder to win a TC, but from a fan/horseplayer perspective, I’d like to see the best athletes line up for all three races. The best athletes compete in the big games in the other pro sports.

[ILovetheInner]

Spacing the races further apart could actually make it harder to win a TC, but from a fan/horseplayer perspective, I’d like to see the best athletes line up for all three races. The best athletes compete in the big games in the other pro sports.

Smart statement! People don't think of that opposite end. If a horse is peaking when the TC comes, as long as he is good enough, gritty enough and durable, the horse only need maintain his perfect peak for five weeks, while those behind the bar have but five weeks to develop and get ready.

Whatever the case, I think we lose sight of what TC winners are cut from. They take no excuses. Secretariat was put in a speed duel in the Belmont. Who does that? Slew had a start that would have upended most. Affirmed was dogged by Alydar throughout. If you are meant to win the Belmont, you have a good long way to sort out your position. That doesn't mean larger fields won't upend some, but if you are meant to win the Belmont, you will get it done if you are worthy of the TC. All the ones I saw were machine like and very serious about their business.

[BettinBilly]

In the immortal words sung by Paul McCartney;

"Let it Be"

[clocker7]

I voted "no"...

With one caveat tho, that perhaps the eligibility requirements for The Derby, should be changed back to what it used to be....

Otherwise, the TC is the TC, and it should remain a "timeless tradition"...

As I demonstrated in another thread, there has been no "timeless tradition." For most of the TC winners, it has been all over the block. He11, even the KD went about a half century before adopting the first Saturday in May.

Now, if your sweep of history spans from the day your were born, then I can see where you are coming from.

[BlueChip@DRF]

It's the "hard" that makes it great. Why doesn't anybody understand that anymore?
The breed changed but not the conditions. So why not bred a horse to meet those conditions?

[HUSKER55]

JMHO, but I think there are a lot of people who don't understand the TC. The contenders get 3 bites at "the apple". The one left standing gets the crown and the well deserved glory that goes with it.

Without ample challengers then what would be the point? If any changes are made I think that the runners that lost at the derby can not compete further in the TC. Same for the Preakness. Which horse is justifiably the king of the hill?

Should change occur then there will be no more TC. It is what it is. Three races to find the top horse of the year. It is a grueling test and not for the faint of heart as they say.

[RaceBookJoe]

I voted NO, but the only change I could live with would be 3 weeks between each race.

[Mr_Ed]

Current Derby weight 126 lbs.

Go to Preakness 121 lbs........newcomers 126 lbs.

Go to Belmont 121 lbs...........newcomers 126 lbs. (including Preakness dodgers).

[The WindfallAngler]

It's the "hard" that makes it great. Why doesn't anybody understand that anymore?
The breed changed but not the conditions. So why not bred a horse to meet those conditions?Was it really so "great," besting 4.4 starters, on average? Maybe so. But defeating an average Belmont Stakes field of 9.2. ...that is what's hard.

This increase has worked a distortion on triple crown difficulty ...more so, in the Belmont Stakes than in prior jewels. It's one thing, respecting tradition by preserving difficulty. But it's roughly twice as hard, now, to bag a triple. And this is what has to be reversed.

[RaceBookJoe]

Add 1 more thing to the TC change poll : 3 days after the Belmont , all of these whiny new posters with their hardons for the next superhorse extolling how they wont lose, and whiny excuses for their TC failures have to stop posting until the following May when they can come up with a new login name :bang:

[mannyberrios]

No

[burnsy]

Add 1 more thing to the TC change poll : 3 days after the Belmont , all of these whiny new posters with their hardons for the next superhorse extolling how they wont lose, and whiny excuses for their TC failures have to stop posting until the following May when they can come up with a new login name :bang:

Yeah, those types disappear and re-surface for sure. Or get the boot...Like that Mad scientist guy. The one that said this horse could not miss the board....in his "reality." I like this horse but those types make it hard. My buddy calls him California Crickets.....because after Saturday.......that's all you hear from these types.....crickets.......

[iceknight]

Fillies get a 5 lb allowance. Maybe they should seriously train a filly to win the TC

[gillenr]

NO!
Half the KD field is garbage entered by egomaniacal connections. Has anyone done the stats on post derby performance?
The Preakness almost always seems a fair field.
The Belmont should attract starters whose breeding suggests the distance suits.
Comparing other sports changes ignores the fact that those changes are all about the money - the quality has diminished.

[OntheRail]

Simply... A Big Fat NO.

[HuggingTheRail]

Run the Belmont first....problem solved :lol:

[Mr_Ed]

Run the Belmont first....problem solved :lol:

There ya go.......that's the ticket!

Even better, run all 3 at one time. The leader at each TC pole will be crowned at one sitting.

Lead at all 3....................hey! hey!

[porkchop]

They are three different races at three different tracks at three different distances the only thing they have in common are the conditions that allows entry into the race . I have a feeling that it was not designed as a (Triple Crown) event , I think that somewhere along the line they were connected by a sharp turf writer or track official to increase interest in the sport. After the first horse to win all three races the idea was hatched and here we are .

[KingChas]

Sure, change it so we can get the number of TC winners to up over 30.

Just think we could debate who was the greatest of all for years and years to come. :jump:

OOps, we do that now........... :eek:


WRONG!

[Lemon Drop Husker]

What is there to change? In the last 36 years, 12 horses have gone in the gate at Belmont for a chance at racing immortality. In the last decade, Smarty Jones, California Chrome, and Afleet Alex have all been within mere feet of completing this amazing triple.

Obviously it isn't over the top difficult that it will never again will happen in our lifetime hard to be in a position to make history, but it does take a special horse to get it done.

I could see spacing the races out, but to be honest I think that would make it more difficult as we would likely have more challengers in the Preakness and Belmont. I also think the current 5 week format gives a hot horse a better chance in such a small window to complete the task. Would an extra couple of weeks have really given California Chrome a better chance of getting it done?

[iceknight]

What is there to change? I also think the current 5 week format gives a hot horse a better chance in such a small window to complete the task. Would an extra couple of weeks have really given California Chrome a better chance of getting it done? it is a horse race, you have to run it to see it. Tonalist is a good horse and got it done. Besides that two other horses did better than Chrome and Wicked Strong was closing hard. If Chrome was really meant to have won against this field, he should have had a performance like Alex making a move at the turn. But no, that didnt happen - due to un-pinpointable reasons.

[clocker7]

Spacing the races further apart could actually make it harder to win a TC, but from a fan/horseplayer perspective, I’d like to see the best athletes line up for all three races. The best athletes compete in the big games in the other pro sports.
Do you think that the lineups for the Preakness and Belmont would have been that much different, with an extra week before Pimlico?

I think that it would have helped the ones that actually ran (a good thing), but I'm at a loss over naming any other KD losers that might have joined them.

[Redboard]

Do you think that the lineups for the Preakness and Belmont would have been that much different, with an extra week before Pimlico?



I don't think one extra week would matter. Trainers want at least four weeks between races, I believe. Say the sequence was 1st Saturday in May, June, & July, then Commanding Curve and Wicked Strong would not have skipped the Preakness because their trainers would not have rested them eight weeks, that's too much. They would have ran the Preakness. Again, this might make it harder to win the Preakness and therefore the TC, but if it doesn’t work after 10 years, they could always go back. I just would like to see them try something.

And while we’re at it, run the Haskell in the first Saturday of August; the Travers , the first Saturday of September. The Quintuple Crown! Offer a $100 million dollar bonus for winning all five(consolation: $10 million for four of five).

[ronsmac]

I don't really care if we get a triple crown winner or not, but all I hear from trainers all year is "he needs more time between races " or " I chose this spot because it fits better with the spacing ." That's for older horses that are supposedly more mature. Today's horses do seem less durable, for whatever reason. So increased spacing seems more logical if we're taking the horse's welfare and peak performance into consideration. With that said, If they leave it alone it won't bother me, if they increase the spacing it won't bother me. If they breed more durable horses that would be good also. In a way things have all ready changed. The Wood used to be 2 weeks before the Derby, at one time the Blue Grass was 11 days before the Derby, the Hollywood Derby was after the Santa Anita Derby and was a prep for the Derby also. So in that sense, tracks and trainers realized they needed much more time between their final prep and the Derby.