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

[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.

[Cannon Shell]

Pat Forde is a dope.

[Dunbar]

I was almost ready to change my avatar, but I think I'll go with it a little longer. Some people need the reminder.

--Dunbar

[HaloWishingwell]

To blame The Triple Crown is ridiculously. It's a chain reaction that takes place. The sound breeding has gone downhill as it surrendered to speed at all costs. It has produced brittle runners. Training methods of yesteryear has given way to just keeping them in one piece. In turn they run less races at 2. They run less Triple Crown preps at 3. By the time the Triple Crown series is done those that were brittle begin to breakdown some even before that. The Triple Crown is not the problem. Past winners had the talent and the right foundation that is lacked today.

[King Glorious]

I don't understand why everyone can't understand that nobody is blaming the TC. We, at least I, would love for people to breed and train them different and to keep the TC the way it is. That would be my first choice. But I also know that they aren't going to do that. I'm saying that if they are going to change the ways it's done, then it only makes sense to change what you are asking them to do to adapt to what you have. It would be like baseball coming up with bats and balls that allow players to routinely hit 600-700 foot home runs but leaving the stadiums at the same size they are now. You have to adapt the playing conditions to the athletes and equipment being used to play. If they start breeding guys to be 8ft tall, would it make sense to leave the basket at 10ft?

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't understand why everyone can't understand that nobody is blaming the TC. We, at least I, would love for people to breed and train them different and to keep the TC the way it is. That would be my first choice. But I also know that they aren't going to do that. I'm saying that if they are going to change the ways it's done, then it only makes sense to change what you are asking them to do to adapt to what you have. It would be like baseball coming up with bats and balls that allow players to routinely hit 600-700 foot home runs but leaving the stadiums at the same size they are now. You have to adapt the playing conditions to the athletes and equipment being used to play. If they start breeding guys to be 8ft tall, would it make sense to leave the basket at 10ft?

First of all:

Tfds thek sdfioio sdafkljljk. I dsafkj asfdj ewiofd dfas, dje tw eioru dsljk!!

Furthermore:

Wdfjk eiof erwjkl ewiousfkewp quifslk eiouf, 34 fdsie thpe! Prsfjk, sfduios sfdiouew.

[Port Conway Lane]

I would think that the longer the span in between races the less likely it is that a horse would be able to win all three races.How often does the Derby winner run a poor race in the Preakness?Not often and form cycle has alot to do with that.After two grueling races the winner is tested in the Belmont by fresh horses. Can he do it? They don't call the Belmont the test of champions for nothing.The best have proven they can in a five week time span.

Breeding hasn't changed as much as everyone believes.Bold Ruler was the dominant sire of sires in the late 60's-late 70's.His progeny were bred for speed yet two of the last three triple crown winners are from his sire line.The other comes from the Raise A Native line.The fact is that there are two parents.Secretariat got his stamina from his dam.Breeding today is no different.The Mr. Prospector line has been dominant in american breeding in the last twenty years but there is plenty of stamina through a number of his sons and grandsons.There are large numbers of horses who are bred to sprint,they don't show up for the Derby.The ones who show up are bred for stamina as well as speed.I don't buy the breeding argument.

Fragility is another issue.Fragile horses are subject to injury anytime they step onto a racetrack.Spacing out the races would help their chances but why would one want to make it beneficial for horses that can't withstand the rigors of the triple crown? I would think that would make it more likely that breeders wouldn't be concerned about fragility knowing that the races are spread apart to give their fragile horse a better chance of winning.

Leave the triple crown alone.