Open the Triple Crown to All Ages - Slate Article

[Lori B]

http://www.slate.com/id/2191503

Thoughts? Pros? Cons? I think it's intriguing, but I am merely an interested spectator.

[WhiteCamry]

Better yet, a Triple Crown for each age group and gender.

[LaurieB]

The Triple Crown is what it is, a three race series: the Kentucky Derby, the Preakness, and the Belmont, open to 3YOs. If a change that big were to be made, the Triple Crown as it has been known for 100 years, ceases to exist and becomes something else entirely.

Perhaps a better suggestion might be to designate a series of races for 3YOs and up as an alternate type of prestigious "crown" event: graded stakes with big purses, hopefully with some distance to them. Over time, maybe the newer series could develop a following the way the traditional one has.

[Chester's Mom]

Perhaps a better suggestion might be to designate a series of races for 3YOs and up as an alternate type of prestigious "crown" event: graded stakes with big purses, hopefully with some distance to them. Over time, maybe the newer series could develop a following the way the traditional one has.

Hasn't this been tried several times? I seem to remember a series of stakes races....tho maybe for 4 and up? It seems the public didn't "get into" it since no one horse traveled consistently to make it to the different tracks. IE. West Coast horses only ran on the West Coast. The winner was the one with the most ?points? ?? Or maybe I dreamed it all?~!

[Glimmerglass]

Hasn't this been tried several times? I seem to remember a series of stakes races....tho maybe for 4 and up?

You might be thinking of the Grand Slam of Grass (http://www.colonialdowns.com/grandslam.php) - which is for 3-yr olds:

The $5,000,000 Jacobs Investments Grand Slam of Grass is a four-race series for three-year-olds on the turf. This year is the third opportunity for a special three-year-old to earn a $2,000,000-plus bonus by sweeping all four legs.

As LaurieB said you can call any series of races for a different age groups whatever you want. The point is that "Triple Crown" has to remain (or else its value is ruined) the Derby, Preakness and Belmont.

For the fillies there had been the Triple Tiara ...

[Lori B]

They aren't proposing changing ANYTHING about the races except for saying: horses of all ages may compete. I don't understand how that changes the race. Same distance. Still thoroughbreds. And if a trainer is bringing along a young horse who just isn't maturing as quickly, the young horse still has the potential of competing in that most prestigious and widely watched trio of races. The competition could arguably be better and more challenging. And could that change the incentive structure of racing to provide more incentive to breed horses that mature soundest, not mature the most quickly?

[kcgold]

You The point is that "Triple Crown" has to remain (or else its value is ruined) the Derby, Preakness and Belmont.


I agree it should remain those three races - but what would be the harm in opening it up to older horses? Sports change over time, but those changes don't necessarily diminish the value of the sport. The first Superbowl was played between two leagues that had far fewer teams than today, and the teams played only 14 games each versus the 16 games they play today. So, the competition is much higher today - yet no one says the Superbowl shouldn't be played because it doesn't resemble the game when it orginated.

Didn't the early Triple Crown races sometimes vary when they were held...while they were always for three year olds, wasn't the Preakness sometimes held before the Derby? Hasn't the amount of time between races sometimes varied as well over the years? So it hasn't always been the exact same series of races we have today, anyway. So why would a change to the series be so bad?

[carol_okc]

Excellent ideas, actually... changes for the right reason for once. Make it weight for age, and possibly a once-out-of-the-gate so that it retains the one-chance-only status. The TC part would still be defined as 'in the same year', but I suspect we'd end up with much better RACING if people were encouraged to season and mature their horses. I suspect this thought, coupled with some of the other ideas to discourage overstressing youngsters by bringing them out too young, would go a long way to re-establishing the value of durability and soundness to breeding programs. The breed can only benefit from that, which would include offering the OTTB a better chance to have a second working career if more of them came off sound.

[Glimmerglass]

The author of the article - Ted - actually lived (or perhaps still lives) in my neighborhood and has gone to the same haunts I have for wagering ;) His book Horseplayers - life at the track (http://books.google.com/books?id=nHk1OSgrGh4C) is a book I'd recommend. He captures the good and the bad, those who love it and those who are in so deep that could lifely care less if it was horses or dogs running.

Anyhow if the suggestion is (and I cannot seem to tell if its the case) that the Kentucky Derby, Preakness and Belmont Stakes could be open to not just 3-yr olds but also say 7-yr old horses too (like the Breeders Cup Classic) all I can say is that is idiotic.

What then would stop a horse like Curlin [or other big runner] entering every single year this revised Triple Crown? Please don't tell me adding extra weight as US racing hasn't had a recent handicap in eons. Wake me up when 136-lbs is tagged to any horse in US racing again. No, if this suggestion came to being then the TC would quickly be a defacto series for older horses.

If you will notice the BCC generally only has a few top 3-yr olds and then 4 and 5 yr olds. It would be idiotic (yes, I'll say it again) to have a horse that hasn't gone 1 1/4 mi up against a seasoned 4-yr old who has multiple times, regardless of saddling an extra 10-lbs on the older runner. You want to see broken hearts? There you go - it would kill the spirit of some excellent 3-yr olds forced to take on older horses that soon in their career.

[Chester's Mom]

You might be thinking of the Grand Slam of Grass (http://www.colonialdowns.com/grandslam.php) - which is for 3-yr olds:



As LaurieB said you can call any series of races for a different age groups whatever you want. The point is that "Triple Crown" has to remain (or else its value is ruined) the Derby, Preakness and Belmont.

For the fillies there had been the Triple Tiara ...

Nope, not that one. Sort of after the Cigar era.... but obviously dating myself. I'll keep wracking my brain.

And for the record, I do NOT think they should open the Triple Crown races to other ages. Nor change the timing. Nor the distances. Want TC winners? BREED SOUND, WELL ROUNDED HORSES. Then hope for Lady Luck to smile on you. :)

[Lori B]

Did you see the reply that added the suggestion that it could simply be stipulated that a horse can only start each of the races once ever?

I still think it's a good idea. If the triple crown races became races that were regularly run and won by 4 - 6 year olds, what would be so terrible about that? Maybe a lot of nice horses would start their serious careers at 3 instead of 2, maybe some great horses would be bred to mature and stay sound instead of starting fast and being done young. I'm not clear on why this is a terrible idea. It is CHANGE, and we know that CHANGE is bad (sarcasm here).

[Drvmb1ggl3]

It's a stupid idea.
Classic races are for 3yos. There are other WFA races that are open to all comers, like the JCGC, the BC Classic etc. If they want to increase the profile and purses of those races, I'm all for it, though the BCC is already worth $5m.
I wouldn't mind seeing US 3yos go against older horses in WFA races a bit sooner in the year, like summer time, like you see in Europe. But the Triple Crown is for 3yos. Create something new if they want to create something new. But even something new would need whooping huge purses to keep horses out of the shed and on the track. Even if Curlin adds the Arc ($6m) and the BC Classic($5m) to his haul of Dubai WC ($6m), total purses of $17, so winner's take of ~$10m (which would be an amazing unprecedented feat), he still won't make as much racing this year as he will at stud next year.
That's the incentive, or lack thereof, right there.

[Glimmerglass]

Did you see the reply that added the suggestion that it could simply be stipulated that a horse can only start each of the races once ever?

Missed that.

But look at re-running last year's Kentucky Derby.

You'd have Invasor against Street Sense and Hard Spun. He was a monster when he was unleashed last year he was deserving of being a wow horse full of steam and grit. Invasor crushed them in Dubai during the Classic, then crushed them in the Pimlico Special. There wouldn't have been a buzz around Street Sense after that nor Hard Spun.

This year, you would've had Curlin up against Big Brown and Eight Belles. Again, why would that be sporting fun to watch? I don't see the thrill in it. We already know Curlin is wonderful and the chatter about Big Brown wouldn't be there or at least it would be a fraction of what it is.

[dressagetraks]

What if Little Current had been able to run again? Or Native Dancer? Or Spectacular Bid? Or Tim Tam? Risen Star? Without the extenuating circs that denied them their TC victory?

But they could not. Nor could many others throughout history. To give horses now a chance that those in the past did not have, many of those in the past deserving of one and having lost the TC through no fault of their own, cannot be called the same Triple Crown that past horses dealt with. If this were done, I would never consider a winner of this TC alongside TC winners of the past. I don't care what they called it; it would not be equivalent to the test passed successfully by Gallant Fox, Count Fleet, et al.

[Lady Counselor]

Make it for four year olds only. Same races, same timeframe. They'd have to either skip a year or open it to 4-year olds who didn't run in the 3-year old classics. It might be one way to get horses to come in a bit older and hang around longer...

(of course, we all know there will never be any significant changes to the classic races....)

[GreenMachine]

Why not change the handicap Triple instead? I know it would be difficult, but finding a corporate sponsor to pay a hefty bonus and perhaps changing it to include three G1s at three different tracks could entice owners to keep their horses in the game for at least their four-year-old year and pull in horses from both coasts.

[Drvmb1ggl3]

Why not change the handicap Triple instead? I know it would be difficult, but finding a corporate sponsor to pay a hefty bonus and perhaps changing it to include three G1s at three different tracks could entice owners to keep their horses in the game for at least their four-year-old year and pull in horses from both coasts.

There are already two huge paydays on offer for a horse to stay in training as a 4yo. The Dubai WC is worth $6m and only open to older horses, and the the $5m BC Classic and the end of the year. If there was another $5-6m race in midsummer it would be enticing, but still probably wouldn't be enough to outweigh the windfall of going to stud.

A horse that gets a $100k studfee x 120-150 mares is pulling in around $12-15m a year. To win that on the track would require total purses of $20-25 million. Actually it would be several million more, as you'd have to factor in the cost of insurance.
The Dubai WC will be increased to $10m in the next couple of years, but unless some other purses get raised to a similar level then there is going to be no way to compete with the breeding shed.

[bobbybobby]

everyone has a new idea on how to reinvent the wheel !!!!!some really stupid ideas....think before you type !!!!!!!!!!!

[gholem]

This year, you would've had Curlin up against Big Brown and Eight Belles. Again, why would that be sporting fun to watch? I don't see the thrill in it. We already know Curlin is wonderful and the chatter about Big Brown wouldn't be there or at least it would be a fraction of what it is.

Wouldn't that be the fun part? Watching Curlin against Big Brown? Seeing if the new up and comer can take on the previous champions? Not to mention it would add a lot more continuity for the vast majority of people that only watch the triple crown races...people could actually become "fans" of a horse for more than 5 weeks from may through june.

[Drvmb1ggl3]

Wouldn't that be the fun part? Watching Curlin against Big Brown? Seeing if the new up and comer can take on the previous champions?

That's what WFA races are for, they already exist.

Btw, you want 3yos running against older horses in May?

[gholem]

That's what WFA races are for, they already exist.

Btw, you want 3yos running against older horses in May?

I believe the (correct) point of the original article is that nobody watches those races.

[JER]

Wouldn't that be the fun part? Watching Curlin against Big Brown? Seeing if the new up and comer can take on the previous champions? Not to mention it would add a lot more continuity for the vast majority of people that only watch the triple crown races...people could actually become "fans" of a horse for more than 5 weeks from may through june.

Yes, it would be fun to see Curlin vs. Big Brown. Can we wait till at least the late summer/fall for that? Perhaps the Breeders Cup?

With all this talk about protecting young horses by bringing them along carefully, why do you think it would be a good idea to pit very young, barely 3 year-olds against older horses?

If you like racing, you can follow it all year. All over the world. Over jumps and on the flat. On turf and on dirt and on polytrack. On an oval or a on a racecourse. Online, on TV and on YouTube. There's a lot of racing out there to enjoy, most of it much better than the Triple Crown drama and it's not hard to find.

[kcmel]

I like the idea of making it for 4 year olds. That way you remove a lot of the pressure on pushing the babies. I'm not sure why some of you are so resistant to DISCUSSING this. (It's not like it will ever happen, anyway, or maybe I am just cynical).

[Lori B]

The idea isn't to push 3 yr. olds against seasoned horses. the idea is to shift the focus for the only races that non-race people ever freaking watch from being only for 3 yr. olds to open to any age horse, one time out of the gate.

Or, since nothing in how racing is run or organized or breeding or anything is anything other than god intended, we can change nothing, cuz clearly, that's working so well for you all. No need for slots subsidies for racetracks in MD, either.

[WhiteCamry]

Hasn't this been tried several times? I seem to remember a series of stakes races....tho maybe for 4 and up? It seems the public didn't "get into" it since no one horse traveled consistently to make it to the different tracks. IE. West Coast horses only ran on the West Coast. The winner was the one with the most ?points? ?? Or maybe I dreamed it all?~!

I believe you're thinking of the Strub Series (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_H._Strub) - the Malibu S. (7f), the San Fernando S. (8.5f) and the Strub Stakes (currently at 8.5f) - run in California over the change-of-year for 3-4yos. It's timed so that they don't conflict with any important races back east. OTOH, they're all G2s so they don't get much media attention, anyway.

[WhiteCamry]

Yes, it would be fun to see Curlin vs. Big Brown. Can we wait till at least the late summer/fall for that? Perhaps the Breeders Cup?

Sure, if Iavarone keeps him running that long. With that $50M stud deal in place, he has no real incentive to run BB in the BS, let alone the BCC.