|
I think the Triple Crown races are setup OK as it is, for now. The main purpose of these races is to bring in new fans (and therefore bettors, owners) to the sport. It’s not for the longtime, rabid, gambling-degenerated oldtimers like us.
We've already had a Triple Crown winner this century, so getting another one is not that big of a deal anymore IMO. If we don't have another TC winner in a while, that may be a good thing and add to the mystique. The Belmont is more exciting when there’s a TC on the line and there’s been a drought for a while. If this only happens once every few years, so be it. Between 1979 and 2015, 13 horses have gone on to win both the Derby and the Preakness, with 12 of those running in the Belmont. So, that’s roughly one every three years that we have a super-exciting Belmont, which is OK by me.
As far as "new generations giving a crap" , I'm not sure if they would give more of a crap if the races were spaced and setup so the best 3-year-olds did compete in all three races and were well-rested. The three races are currently over five weeks; if we spaced them out more than that, the young fans might lose interest given their propensity for short attention spans. However, if we go for decades without someone winning the first two legs, that’s a problem.
|
