The Triple Crown has always been one of the most compelling storylines in American horse racing. Every spring, fans follow the Kentucky Derby, Preakness Stakes and Belmont Stakes, hoping to see a horse attempt something that has become extraordinarily difficult: winning all three races.
But the Triple Crown has been changing, and not necessarily for the better.
The latest developments surrounding the Kentucky Derby, Preakness Stakes and Belmont Stakes have created even more questions about where the series is headed. Instead of fixing the problems that have fractured the Triple Crown, Churchill Downs and the New York Racing Association (NYRA) have now announced an entirely new six-race series for three-year-olds.
In my opinion, that’s the wrong solution.
The Biggest Problem: Trainers Don’t Want to Run Back in Two Weeks
The fundamental problem with the modern Triple Crown is pretty simple: many trainers no longer want to run their horses back just two weeks after the Kentucky Derby.
That wasn’t nearly as much of an issue in the past, but it has become increasingly important in today’s racing environment.
We’ve already seen recent Kentucky Derby winners skip the Preakness and then win the Belmont Stakes. That’s a major indication that the traditional spacing of the Triple Crown races isn’t working the way it once did.
And it’s not just the Derby winner. Fewer Kentucky Derby horses that finish behind the winner are coming back for the Preakness.
The result is a Triple Crown series that has been increasingly fragmented.
Read more at The Runaway Horse
No comments:
Post a Comment