Forde and the Ragozin guys weigh in on changing the Triple Crown

[Merlinsky]

Forgive me for seeming a broken record on this, but, in my defense, they're the ones writing about it all the time.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/colum...sportCat=horse

Here's Pat Forde's take on....guess what...changing the Triple Crown...and here is the Len Ragozin and Len Friedman article in the NY Times that he references. http://therail.blogs.nytimes.com/200...-major-reform/

Has anyone at ESPN.com not written about this now? Would bringing back the Triple Crown challenge revive the number of repeaters more than moving the races? And do the other prestigious races available on the first Saturday in June and on July 4th come up full generally? I haven't tried to keep track of it.

[SniperSB23]

Ratings up 7.4% for the Derby, up 27.4% for the Preakness, up 24.0% for the Belmont since the last TC year. Let's now change anything right now. Let's market our little gelding Derby winner who might not be that good but will be around for hopefully years and draw in some of the extra TC audience this year or years to come.

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Ratings up 7.4% for the Derby, up 27.4% for the Preakness, up 24.0% for the Belmont since the last TC year. Let's now change anything right now. Let's market our little gelding Derby winner who might not be that good but will be around for hopefully years and draw in some of the extra TC audience this year or years to come.

Yeah one thing to think about is evidence of how things work out in the ratings when there's an effort to advertise during May sweeps. I saw ads in primetime. Move the Preakness and it's harder to capitalize on that. If the Belmont were on NBC, I bet it would've been higher from sheer momentum. It should be a package like with the Olympics or Monday Night Football. When does that contract expire and why is the Belmont separate from the first two?

[King Glorious]

I don't think that a one year reprieve should take away from the obvious need for change. Some people thought that 2007 with Curlin and Hard Spun racing in all three races and still finishing the year strong was proof that it can be done. Of course it CAN be done but the question is IS it being done? More often than not, it's not. And even in that year, Rags ran in the Belmont and only ran once more. Then we got last year and Big Brown wasn't able to finish out the year and another maiden winner won a classic for his only career stakes win. This year, I Want Revenge, Dunkirk, the Pamplemousse, and Old Fashioned (arguably four of the top six contenders going into April) didn't even get a chance to make it through the series and keep going. Another horse with just a maiden win has won the Belmont (that's four times in the past nine years). It is broke. It needs fixing.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't think that a one year reprieve should take away from the obvious need for change. Some people thought that 2007 with Curlin and Hard Spun racing in all three races and still finishing the year strong was proof that it can be done. Of course it CAN be done but the question is IS it being done? More often than not, it's not. And even in that year, Rags ran in the Belmont and only ran once more. Then we got last year and Big Brown wasn't able to finish out the year and another maiden winner won a classic for his only career stakes win. This year, I Want Revenge, Dunkirk, the Pamplemousse, and Old Fashioned (arguably four of the top six contenders going into April) didn't even get a chance to make it through the series and keep going. Another horse with just a maiden win has won the Belmont (that's four times in the past nine years). It is broke. It needs fixing.

You made your own counterpoint. I Want Revenge, Quality Road, Old Fashioned, and The Pamplemousse all represent top horses that were knocked off the trail before the TC, not because of it.

Change the breeding and you fix the problem.

Change the TC and you cheapen the breed.

[Indian Charlie]

Can you imagine if King Glorious ran racing 40 years ago?
I can just see it now.

After the 1948 triple crown was earned by Citation a long time passed without another one. Say KG has his way around 1970 with changing the triple crown. Some of the greatest racing in this country might not have happened.

Shecky Greene wins the 1973 derby blitzing six furlongs in 109.1.

Sham wins the Preakness setting a new track record in 134.3 whole holding off a desperate late challenge from Secretariat.

Finally, we have the true test of champions three months later in the Belmont. Secretariat, not as sharp as he might have been otherwise, nevertheless runs Sham off his feet as he wins the Belmont in spectacular fashion, stopping the timer in an amazing 147.3.

Or wait, since the Preakness was originally a half furlong shorter than the derby, maybe the Preakness would have been run at 5.5 furlongs. Shecky Greene and Mr. Prospector duke it out in a duel for the ages, astonishing the crowd with their incredible combination of both speed and stamina!

Or was that Affirmed and Alydar in the Belmont I'm thinking of? I guess we wouldn't have known that race either, so it doesn't really matter.

While we are at it, I think we should add a two year old turf sprint to the Breeders Cup.

[hockey2315]

"It has been years since we had older gelding stars like Kelso, Forego and John Henry who raced year after year and developed tremendous public followings because they were not thrown to the wolves in their early years."

Really? What about Lava Man, The Tin Man, Evening Attire, Better Talk Now, etc.? (Minus the "tremendous public followings," of course, since that's impossible in this era).

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

You made your own counterpoint. I Want Revenge, Quality Road, Old Fashioned, and The Pamplemousse all represent top horses that were knocked off the trail before the TC, not because of it.

Change the breeding and you fix the problem.

Change the TC and you cheapen the breed.

I wouldn't stop with the TC. I'd change the way 2yos and 3yos are raced from the start. I don't think the TC races themselves are what needs to be changed. I don't know where Indian Charlie comes up with me wanting the Derby at 6f or any of that other nonsense though. And perhaps he didn't see Secretariat's Gotham or his Marlboro Cup. Sham wasn't going to beat Secretariat at either of those distances. And as I keep saying, I agree with changing the breed. But I also know that's NOT going to happen. So since that's not going to happen, we have to make the changes elsewhere. You say that changing the TC would cheapen the breed. Have you not noticed how the breed has become weaker and weaker over the years without the TC races being touched? In this country, over 70% of the races are run at one mile or less. It's probably over 90% at 9f or less. There is huge money running less than 10f. The TC races are but three races on the calender. If you were breeding a horse, which would you try to do? Try to breed a horse that's going to excel at the distances of those three races, one of which you'll likely only run once in you life, or try to breed a horse that can fit in the majority of the races that they run during the year? The breed is different because the racing is different. Changing up the way they breed them, the way they train them, the way they race them, the way they medicate them.....and then asking them to do the same thing as horses of 50 and 60 years ago doesn't make sense.

[Suffolk Shippers]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

You made your own counterpoint. I Want Revenge, Quality Road, Old Fashioned, and The Pamplemousse all represent top horses that were knocked off the trail before the TC, not because of it.

Change the breeding and you fix the problem.

Change the TC and you cheapen the breed.

And we have a winner.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

This year, I Want Revenge, Dunkirk, the Pamplemousse, and Old Fashioned (arguably four of the top six contenders going into April) didn't even get a chance to make it through the series and keep going.

The Grapefruit had one leg that went in a different direction than the rest and was a blowout waiting to happen. Dunkirk and Old Fashioned's fates may have arguably been pre-determined by their sire's dubious reliability. I Want Revenge, the son of a modest $7,500 sire, went 'off' and should be back. It happens. Your response to this topic borders on hysteria and your reasoning is 100% faulty.

[letswastemoney]

In terms of marketability, Mine That Bird could have the starpower of Funny Cide, whether or not MTB wins that much.

[cowgirlintexas]

Originally Posted by Kasept

The Grapefruit had one leg that went in a different direction than the rest and was a blowout waiting to happen. Dunkirk and Old Fashioned's fates may have arguably been pre-determined by their sire's dubious reliability. I Want Revenge, the son of a modest $7,500 sire, went 'off' and should be back. It happens. Your response to this topic borders on hysteria and your reasoning is 100% faulty.

I laughed

[sumitas]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't think that a one year reprieve should take away from the obvious need for change. Some people thought that 2007 with Curlin and Hard Spun racing in all three races and still finishing the year strong was proof that it can be done. Of course it CAN be done but the question is IS it being done? More often than not, it's not. And even in that year, Rags ran in the Belmont and only ran once more. Then we got last year and Big Brown wasn't able to finish out the year and another maiden winner won a classic for his only career stakes win. This year, I Want Revenge, Dunkirk, the Pamplemousse, and Old Fashioned (arguably four of the top six contenders going into April) didn't even get a chance to make it through the series and keep going. Another horse with just a maiden win has won the Belmont (that's four times in the past nine years). It is broke. It needs fixing.

Quite simply. I agree. Let's get away from the 100+ year old tunnel vision and improve the series.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

According to Mountaineer's track handicapper - Mine That Bird will run next in the West Virgina Derby.

[Danzig]

you're agreeing with a point that includes the statement that big brown didn't finish out the year? he raced how many more times after the belmont? now it's the t.c. series' fault that he took a chunk out of his hoof that forced him to miss the bc? exactly how many times after mid june does a horse have to run to be considered as having finished a year?

the racing isn't at fault. early retirements have far more to do with the value of the horse than the injury. they acknowledged rags could have come back, they chose to breed her instead. big brown wasn't forced into retirement, they wanted the easier money to be had from stud fees.
success in these races is what's causing retirements, not too much or too gruelling racing.
the only one of the four that's officially retired in that list of 'top contenders' is old fashioned. i want revenge and pamplemousse are on the shelf, and they say dunkirk will return-we'll see.

[Travis Stone]

I think turf writers draw straws as to who has to write about changing the Triple Crown. Next year, it will be somebody else.

It's funny... racing has changed the weights, the distances and heck, even the surfaces. Now we want to change the timing of races. At what point does someone have the lightbulb go off where they say, "Hey, it's not the races, the surfaces, the distance or the weights. It's the horse."

[the_fat_man]

Yeah, I think Brown and Ragozin are the Galileo of the present era. Just as Galileo had to combat the Jesuit supporters of the Aristotelian world view, Ragozin and Brown have to deal with the old racing paradigm. Look how much they've contributed to the game. I mean their 'catch' phrases alone have armed an entire generation of otherwise clueless horseplayers. They've emboldened them the way ALL IN has inspired a generation of amateur poker players.

BOUNCE

NEW TOP

etc.



All for $30 (or whatever) a day.

ha ha ha

Only in ****in' America.

[sumitas]

There can always be a competing Triple Crown estalished for 3 year olds. Time will tell if this 2 weeks between the KD and Preakness survives.

[Linny]

Part of the issue is that TRAINERS have changed. Most of today's trainers have no idea how to race a horse every 2 weeks.

As for 2yo racing and the TC all the TC winners ran at 2, some of the alot. There was a time when 2yo's meant for the classics were started in June or so. They would then be ready to run in the stakes at Saratoga. Now the classic type colt is held out to break his maiden at Saratoga, run back in the Champagne and then the BCJ. The Hopeful is a glorified NW1x and the Futurity is the same. I remember when Seattle Slew's late start and 3 race juvie campaign was considered radical and many people disagreed with his getting the 2yo championship, not because he wasn't the best but because of his record of a maiden, allowance and (G1) Champagne. The belief was that he didn't "prove" himself in stakes. (Keep in mind that in that era the Champagne was the equivalent of the BCJ.)

Affirmed and Alydar began their rivalry in June of their 2yo season and Secretariat debuted on July 4th. After that start, he still ran a nice race juvie campaign. Today, Laurin would be considered a butcher!

In light of the fact that we have had several close misses (Smarty Jones, Real Quiet) in recent years, I don't think a dramatic shift is needed. If Real Quiet was a hair's breadth away, can it be impossible?

[eajinabi]

The whole idea of the triple crown is to prove the horses ability to win three gruelling races in 1 month. Maybe instead of changing the triple crown to suit modern training and breeding, they should modify the training and breeding to suit the triple crown.