California Chrome's owner just blew any goodwill.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by richard burch

i think what needs to change is that we tie all three races together as the name "triple crown" implies. it does seem strange that we only care about how many points a horse has for the derby and then totally disregard the other 2 races. by have designated horses for the triple crown it becomes more of a playoff type scenario.

what about nominating 23-25 horses that are eligible to run in any or all of the 3 races. start with 20 for he derby. there are always defections for the preakness and the next 5 can get in if they want or wait for the belmont. this would give the reserve horses rest but they also may have not run for 6 weeks so they dont get a clear fitness edge. you can still keep the weeks between them and the distances the same.

and if it ends up being a 6 horse field in the belmont so be it. secretariat and affirmed didn't have big fields to beat either.

Sorry, I disagree. Leave the races alone.

The derby just found a different way to decide the 20 starters. If pimlico and Belmont get too many entrants, they have ways to decide who gets in. As for requiring a horse has to run in one to move on to the next...I find that ridiculous.

People spend far too much time worrying about producing a tc winner. It is not the sole arbiter of what makes a good horse. Its an interesting sideline to some good races.
One thing I would like to see, is a bonus format like they used to have. Nothing encourages people to start a horse more than money