Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dalakhani
Which brings us to the point...how do we define "best"? How does a horse run like a champion? By staggering an extra couple of furlongs less slow than the other staggering horses? If Rachel Alexandra runs in the belmont in two weeks and can't get the final 2 furlongs, does that suddenly mean that she isnt the best three year old in the country?
In the days when you had multiple races beyond 10f on dirt being run, the idea of a 12f belmont made sense. Now, how many dirt races are there beyond 10f on dirt? How many are run even at 10f these days? Regardless of whether it is a good thing or a bad thing, as steve said the business of horse racing has changed.
|
I think that is why it makes sense to keep the Triple Crown the way it is. Some not so great horses have staggered home and won some very "big" races, but it will never happen in the Triple Crown because of the make-up of the series. I think this is a very good thing.
Why do you want to enable inferior horses to stand in the ranks of Affirmed?
Personally, if there is never another Triple Crown winner again, I'll be fine with it. I'm sure there will be more than enough thrilling races to make up for it.
As for your question regarding Rachel Alexandra - I don't think many felt less of Smarty Jones after the Belmont.