Tom Chuckas on Preakness/TC Spacing

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You don't think the current spacing of those races is one of the things that makes it so difficult to win the TC?

no.

was it the current spacing that cost everyone for 25 years between cy and secretariat?

was it spacing that cost real quiet, smarty, spectacular bid, sunday silence for starters?

you could put them three months apart, doesn't mean more horses would win it.
chuckas needs to focus on his tracks product, instead of an 'easy' fix for what ails him.
he doesn't want a tc winner, he wants more receipts this weekend.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

no.

was it the current spacing that cost everyone for 25 years between cy and secretariat?

was it spacing that cost real quiet, smarty, spectacular bid, sunday silence for starters?

you could put them three months apart, doesn't mean more horses would win it.
chuckas needs to focus on his tracks product, instead of an 'easy' fix for what ails him.
he doesn't want a tc winner, he wants more receipts this weekend.

You are being a little harsh on Tommy boy. From HIS vantage point, yeah the 2 week turn around hurts HIS product, especially the undercard races. However the rest of us are looking at the timing from a different vantage point and our jobs arent being impacted

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You are being a little harsh on Tommy boy. From HIS vantage point, yeah the 2 week turn around hurts HIS product, especially the undercard races. However the rest of us are looking at the timing from a different vantage point and our jobs arent being impacted

I don't think I am being harsh. If you want business you offer a good product. And if it weren't for the tc tradition he wouldn't draw anyone.

[Dunbar]

Does anyone know when the last change was made in either the spacing or the length of the races? I tried to track it down, but for once Google failed me.

Good thread, btw. I particularly liked Indian Charlie's rundown of the Belmont 'fails'. And I totally agree with Cannon's "As a matter of fact a TC winner wont have any lasting impact on racing anyway."

My own opinion on whether the spacing should be changed is obvious from my avatar.

--Dunbar

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Cardus

Here is the last bit that I have: in 1957, the Belmont was 28 days after the Preakness (which was two weeks after the Derby, which didn't stop Bold Ruler from running in a Pimlico allowance race five days before the Preakness), so maybe 1958 was the first year of the current spacing.

Without looking back at the winners before Whirlaway, I'd say that Secretariat was the first Triple Crown winner to run on the current schedule.

With all of this historical reporting, I am starting to feel like DrugS.

Enjoy the Preakness.

(DRF's "Champions" is a great instant tool for a question like Dunbar's.)

Thanks for doing the research! I would have guessed that the current spacing was in place for Citation and Whirlaway. Did either of them have a race in between the Preakness and the Belmont?

--Dunbar

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Thanks for doing the research! I would have guessed that the current spacing was in place for Citation and Whirlaway. Did either of them have a race in between the Preakness and the Belmont?

--Dunbar

citation ran between preakness/belmont. not sure of whirlaway.

[Aly-Sheba]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You are being a little harsh on Tommy boy. From HIS vantage point, yeah the 2 week turn around hurts HIS product, especially the undercard races. However the rest of us are looking at the timing from a different vantage point and our jobs arent being impacted

Anyone working for Stronrach is always looking over their shoulder. :-)

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

no.

was it the current spacing that cost everyone for 25 years between cy and secretariat?

was it spacing that cost real quiet, smarty, spectacular bid, sunday silence for starters?

you could put them three months apart, doesn't mean more horses would win it.
chuckas needs to focus on his tracks product, instead of an 'easy' fix for what ails him.
he doesn't want a tc winner, he wants more receipts this weekend.

I never claimed that the spacing was the only thing that makes it so tough to win the TC. I do believe it is one of the toughest things but not the only thing. Most trainers would agree with that. If you asked guys like Pletcher and Baffert, I guarantee you that they would tell you that the spacing is one of the most challenging things and that it makes it all that much tougher to win all three. It's not rocket science to know that it's asking a lot of a 3 year old (or even an older horse) to run 3 times in 5 weeks, including a 1 1/2 mile race.

[Danzig]

Most would? Show me.

If most wanted it changed,it would. Look at poly going away for example. And of course its tough, else anyone could do it.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

Most would? Show me.

If most wanted it changed,it would. Look at poly going away for example. And of course its tough, else anyone could do it.

I couldn't tell you whether most want it changed or not. That wasn't what I said. I said that most trainers would tell you that the spacing is one of the most challenging things about the TC.

[Danzig]

The spacing is known, it is no mystery. I would think the challenges are mainly things you cannot control.
Weather, pace, post, health/well being of the horse, managing him to bring him into the three races in peak form, racing luck, the ride, temperament, etc.
The only thing you know for sure is when the races are.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

The spacing is known, it is no mystery. I would think the challenges are mainly things you cannot control.
Weather, pace, post, health/well being of the horse, managing him to bring him into the three races in peak form, racing luck, the ride, temperament, etc.
The only thing you know for sure is when the races are.

Yes, as you said what is so challenging is for a horse to be able to run close to his best 3 races in a row in a 5 weeks stretch. If you have the best horse, it's not that hard to win 3 races in a row against horses that you are better than. But one of the main reasons it is so tough to win these 3 races in 5 weeks is that most of these horses are knocked out after the first two legs. To come back and run 1 1/2 miles just 3 weeks later is insane. That is the main reason why no horse has done it in 36 years.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

What is so challenging is for a horse to be able to run close to his best 3 races in a row in a 5 weeks stretch. If you have the best horse, it's not that hard to win 3 races in a row against horses that you are better than. But one of the main reasons it is so tough to win these 3 races in 5 weeks is that most of these horses are knocked out after the first two legs. To come back and run 1 1/2 miles just 3 weeks later is insane. That is the main reason why no horse has done it in 36 years.

Well, since a portion of the thirty six years included horses who had no shot to win the tc because they lost the derby or Preakness, I cannot agree. A variety of things can cause the best horse to lose a race. I cannot believe you think it is not that hard to lose. Weather, track conditions, a shoe, a bad break, jockey error...hell, the bid was one of the best ever, he lost because of a bad ride. Riva ridge lost the tc in a sloppy Preakness. Risen star, third in the derb, won the latter two...afleet Alex did the same. Then there's the more recent years with three different winners, and faces scratching mornings of the race.
To blame lack of a crown on spacing is oversimplifying the whole thing. If you had horses most years winning the first two and losing the third, you might have a point.
Horses go to the Belmont about one third of the time with a tc shot. That means two thirds of the time, it was already a done deal and no tc on the line. For as many as you could find who say its spacing, you'd probably find as many wanting to shorten the Belmont...or more.