Changing the Triple Crown rules

[JustRalph]

I am wondering how everybody feels about changing the rules for the triple crown races.

[kenwoodall]

No, Bailey and Day should continue to be allowed to box Santos in on a dead rail since Santos willingly moved to the part that was dead all week!!LOL!!
Or do you mean a rule against an ex-cocaine jock from Colombia on the favorite after being intimidated by people from Miami? Or Baley being barred from lying on national tv saying "There is no track bias at Belmont" and "1:13+ 6f proved FC was rank?

[Suff]

Originally posted by kenwoodall
No, Bailey and Day should continue to be allowed to box Santos in on a dead rail since Santos willingly moved to the part that was dead all week!!LOL!!
Or do you mean a rule against an ex-cocaine jock from Colombia on the favorite after being intimidated by people from Miami? Or Baley being barred from lying on national tv saying "There is no track bias at Belmont" and "1:13+ 6f proved FC was rank?

Ken.......I saw another Post where you stated the Grounds Crew Conspired to rig the surfaces so the same horses don't constantly win. Now your adding more conspiracy and "Drugs: and "People in Miami" to the Race.

I also saw where it seemed you took some personal Pride in Doing some Public Handicapping. Which is great. But for someone with a taste for public Handicapping you sure have a Twisted view of the Game. Do you use all these Conspiracies in your selection process?

The Race was run. Empire Maker won. Game over.


I don't think its good for the game and its a lil bit of sour grapes to start tossing Cocaine and Wise Guys into the equation.

[Bubbles]

If you're gonna change the Crown AT ALL, move the Belmont back a week. Gives trainers more time to prepare for a distance the horse will run only once in its life. Not that that would have helped FC, who was fighting Santos, beat EM and Ten Most Wanted (was anyone else surprised at how big he ran?). But it might help racing, and with more time between races, Visa might reduce the bonus, giving the economy a boost, lol. Later!

[GameTheory]

All of the suggestions here would make it easier to achieve. Why cheapen it? It should be damn hard to do...

[spotwinshow]

I'm writing a novel! Of course Santos was joking about his Colombia Coke taking! And Bailey did not say there is no bias at Belmont then cut FC off!! And EM really did get a bullet work! And No one accused Santos of "cheating with an empty hand! And there really is results on Equibase! And the big one was not the slowest of all 12 races!
Seriously, why do I see only results of races 1-9 only on Equibase?

[PaceAdvantage]

I just went to Equibase and pulled up the charts for all 13 races. You are talking about Belmont Stakes day, right? If so, they are all there.

[pic6vic]

The answer is simple to get more horses to run in the triple crown races. Increase the purse to 2 million each. Then they can't afford to wait. They should be that big so everyone points for them. The Haskell is worth as much as the Preakness. (not anymore but I believe it carries a 500,000 purse.)

[Observer]

Originally posted by GameTheory
All of the suggestions here would make it easier to achieve. Why cheapen it? It should be damn hard to do...

I totally agree. If the series was made easier to win, would the horses that conquer the series be held in the same regard as Secretariat, Affirmed and Seattle Slew .. I don't think so .. because it will always be mentioned how the rules/format were changed .. and how special would it be if we saw it happen every couple of years??

The series is what it is because it is a demanding one .. and it's not like it's totally impossible .. we've seen some horses come real close in recent years.

Stop and think .. how many horses do you know that can string together three straight wins .. no matter how much time is given, and even under totally ideal conditions??? Most horses have a hard time with it .. now with the Triple Crown, you're talking about the best the crop has to offer for each of the given races .. that makes it even tougher .. not to mention the changes in distances, and tracks and relatively quick time frame.

It can be done .. but it takes an exceptional runner with human connections that can manage to keep a clear head and deliver their very best as well during that time period.

[Tom]

It is a test of greatness - of the horse, the trainer, and the rider.
The team must function together to pull it off. All three must do their part. Only the really great ones earn it. I am still talking about Secretariat after 30 years.
I really liked EM this year, but I never thought he was deserving or capable of a triple crown. Same with Point Given. Good horses, but not the ones you use as a benchmark for greatness.

[Valuist]

Make the Belmont 1 1/4 miles or run the Travers as the last leg. 1 1/2 miles on the dirt is a completely meaningless distance. If these horses ever run 12 furlongs again, it will likely be on the turf.

[Observer]

Originally posted by Valuist
Make the Belmont 1 1/4 miles or run the Travers as the last leg. 1 1/2 miles on the dirt is a completely meaningless distance. If these horses ever run 12 furlongs again, it will likely be on the turf.

Change the last leg to 1 1/4 miles?? The Kentucky Derby is already 1 1/4 miles .. so you're suggesting the horses run the same distance twice in the 3-leg series??

Again, I stand by what I and several others have said here .. making any kind of change to the Triple Crown in an effort to make it "easier" would be taking away it's specialness. Besides, even if a change was implemented .. that doesn't guarantee it'll make it better.

The fact still remains, it is difficult for the average horse under the most ideal of circumstances to notch three consecutive wins.

Just because we're all eager to see a Triple Crown won again, that doesn't mean you start tampering with the design in an effort to speed-up the process.

[Valuist]

I do not necessarily want it easier; I was not pulling for Funny Cide to win the Belmont because I felt he didn't belong in the same exclusive club as the Secretariats and Affirmeds of the world. I just felt that a 12 furlong dirt race is totally impractical. If we want to see how difficult we could make it, put the Belmont on the turf and make the Preakness a sprint. If somebody could win under those circumstances, nobody could say they weren't worthy.

[Observer]

Originally posted by Valuist
I do not necessarily want it easier; I was not pulling for Funny Cide to win the Belmont because I felt he didn't belong in the same exclusive club as the Secretariats and Affirmeds of the world. I just felt that a 12 furlong dirt race is totally impractical. If we want to see how difficult we could make it, put the Belmont on the turf and make the Preakness a sprint. If somebody could win under those circumstances, nobody could say they weren't worthy.

Excuse the traditionalist in me, but I say leave the "Triple Crown" as is .. but your idea for making a triple crown to include a turf and a sprint is an interesting idea .. however, you don't really get many horses adept enough to handle all those variables.

As for 12 furlongs being impractical .. this is horse racing .. to see whose horse is best. So, they'll all likely never run 12 furlongs ever again .. that's not what matters .. what matters is the Belmont is at 12 furlongs, and it's the Test of the Champion .. it's the culmination of a series so unique, the horses will never see anything ever again like it in their careers .. and will most likely never again be sent through such a grind through the rest of their racing days because the "in" thing these days is giving the horses plenty of time between races. (We all saw how well that worked going into last year's Breeders' Cup Classic.)

Everyone hopes for the "Classic-distance" horses when those horses actually show talent early in their career .. because that's where the big money is in the game .. however, the breeders keep breeding for speed and precocity, and have shown a great disinterest in breeding for stamina and durability.

Heck, even the 3yo fillies have a 12 furlong race on dirt in the Coaching Club American Oaks. Some call that race pointless, because those gals will likely never again go that far in their career .. but it's about the race itself .. not whether or not the horses will ever be asked to do it again. And maybe it's best, and more significant, if they never be asked to do it again.

[Tom]

Derby - 1-1/4 as is.
Preakness - 5 furlongs
Belmont - 2 miles, on turf, over hurdles.

Now THAT would be champion!

[Valuist]

I bet Secretariat would've still won the Triple Crown, under Tom's conditions. Seeing how Affirmed's offspring handle turf and he also had more early speed than Alydar, he probably would've been a TC winner also. Funny Cide will not beat Empire Maker on turf, if they ever run on it.