It's 2010. Will they ever change THE DATE of the Preakness?

[Paul Kersey]

Besides ridiculous history & tradition arguments, can anyone make a legit case why The Preakness is run only TWO WEEKS after the Kentucky Derby?

With respect to financial reasons and the fragile nature of today's horses, cheap claimers barely run two weeks apart let alone the Best 3 year-olds in the world.

OK..let the Derby remain the first week of May. But let it go already. Why not change the date to perhaps Memorial Day weekend. It gives the horses more opportunity to train and recover, improves the race plus the television ratings. Mention Barbaro and the debate ends.

Could anyone possibly disagree?

[sharpcat]

Would also have to bump the Belmont back a week, the 2 week layoff helps add a major deciding factor into the triple crown and whether a horse deserves to go down as one of the greatest horses in history.

Why not cut the Belmont down to 1 mile and an eighth while were at it?

[floridagolfer]

If it was good enough for all the other horses that have competed in the same Triple Crown schedule over the last 100 years or so, it's good enough for horses today. I can't stand trainers who run their horses five times over the course of a year and think they've overdone it.

[Reload]

I think we will see it happen at some point. And we could see the location of it change at some point, as well.

[str]

lets hope not.

[3PtShooter]

Never

[Paul Kersey]

Would also have to bump the Belmont back a week, the 2 week layoff helps add a major deciding factor into the triple crown and whether a horse deserves to go down as one of the greatest horses in history.

Why not cut the Belmont down to 1 mile and an eighth while were at it?

Yes..realize you can't convice "traditionalists" on change. Believe it or not there was a day only TWO teams made the playoffs in baseball. So are today's wild cards underserving?

Point here is horses are now bred for speed and more likely to break down vs. 1923. Also..the ratings would go up with definitely bigger fields including the Derby horses competing for both the Preakness and the Belmont.

And yes..why not move the Belmont back to mid or late June? As it stands now..it's unlikely any horse would win the Triple Crown and if they did..they'd be retired the next day.

[sharpcat]

Yes..realize you can't convice "traditionalists" on change. Believe it or not there was a day only TWO teams made the playoffs in baseball. So are today's wild cards underserving?

Point here is horses are now bred for speed and more likely to break down vs. 1923. Also..the ratings would go up with definitely bigger fields including the Derby horses competing for both the Preakness and the Belmont.

And yes..why not move the Belmont back to mid or late June? As it stands now..it's unlikely any horse would win the Triple Crown and if they did..they'd be retired the next day.

I disagree with this theory that horses are bred for speed now, I hear this a lot but the argument is very weak

Secretariat still holds the track time record at the Kentucky Derby and the Belmont stakes from 1973.

At a quick glance of track records from all 3 legs of the triple crown the race winners times are all within 1 second of each other dating back to the 1890's.

There have been 11 triple crown winners dating back to 1920 up until 1978, the speed of these horses has not change in this time period if the breeders are trying to breed for more speed less stamina over the last 30 years than they have failed miserably because the horses are no faster than they were in 1960 and you claim they lack the stamina of horses of old and therefore need an extended break between races.

[Paul Kersey]

I disagree with this theory that horses are bred for speed now, I hear this a lot but the argument is very weak

Secretariat still holds the track time record at the Kentucky Derby and the Belmont stakes from 1973.

At a quick glance of track records from all 3 legs of the triple crown the race winners times are all within 1 second of each other dating back to the 1890's.

There have been 11 triple crown winners dating back to 1920 up until 1978, the speed of these horses has not change in this time period if the breeders are trying to breed for more speed less stamina over the last 30 years than they have failed miserably because the horses are no faster than they were in 1960 and you claim they lack the stamina of horses of old and therefore need an extended break between races.

I respect your opinion but the factors of economics are something anyone can't argue with. The money is not in the purses it's in the BREEDING. The owners are focused on $ not glory. Yeah it's nice to win the Derby but after that it's providing appropriate rest to win the many Grade I races coming down the schedule. Another two weeks of rest would be the extra incentive necessary to accomplish the goal of reality in 2010. That way they can get their money, the glory, the $ and most important...NOT jeopardize their potential future stud value.

[big joe 1212]

I would hate to see it change until another horse does it with this format. After that, they can do what they want, including getting rid of Pimlico (dump)!

[sharpcat]

I respect your opinion but the factors of economics are something anyone can't argue with. The money is not in the purses it's in the BREEDING. The owners are focused on $ not glory. Yeah it's nice to win the Derby but after that it's providing appropriate rest to win the many Grade I races coming down the schedule. Another two weeks of rest would be the extra incentive necessary to accomplish the goal of reality in 2010. That way they can get their money, the glory, the $ and most important...NOT jeopardize their potential future stud value.

I do understand your perspective here Paul and agree with a lot of what you say, but to change the time span between races will change the standard of what horses are deserving of the honor of winning the triple crown. Kind of like Barry Bonds topping Hank Aarons home run record while clearly using performance enhancing drugs, it will leave too many questions on whether future triple crown winners are deserving to be listed among Secretariat, Seattle Slew, Affirmed, War Admiral, etc.. Altering any aspect of the triple crown ultimately will destroy the significance it has if money is all it is about there are plenty of other high dollar stakes races. The triple crown is about a horse conquering the near impossible feat of winning 3 completely different style races in a short period of time, eliminate that and you destroy the importance of the title.

[SHADYLANKY]

I think sharpcat is right. I don't see them changing it. I also don't think that it is too hard on the horses. It is tough but that is part of what makes it the triple crown.

[str]

I do understand your perspective here Paul and agree with a lot of what you say, but to change the time span between races will change the standard of what horses are deserving of the honor of winning the triple crown. Kind of like Barry Bonds topping Hank Aarons home run record while clearly using performance enhancing drugs, it will leave too many questions on whether future triple crown winners are deserving to be listed among Secretariat, Seattle Slew, Affirmed, War Admiral, etc.. Altering any aspect of the triple crown ultimately will destroy the significance it has if money is all it is about there are plenty of other high dollar stakes races. The triple crown is about a horse conquering the near impossible feat of winning 3 completely different style races in a short period of time, eliminate that and you destroy the importance of the title.

Spot on Sharpcat.

[Paul Kersey]

I do understand your perspective here Paul and agree with a lot of what you say, but to change the time span between races will change the standard of what horses are deserving of the honor of winning the triple crown. Kind of like Barry Bonds topping Hank Aarons home run record while clearly using performance enhancing drugs, it will leave too many questions on whether future triple crown winners are deserving to be listed among Secretariat, Seattle Slew, Affirmed, War Admiral, etc.. Altering any aspect of the triple crown ultimately will destroy the significance it has if money is all it is about there are plenty of other high dollar stakes races. The triple crown is about a horse conquering the near impossible feat of winning 3 completely different style races in a short period of time, eliminate that and you destroy the importance of the title.

REALITY...I respect War Admiral, Secretariat and Seattle Slew. BUT..if not for slot machines, simulcasting and internet wagering the entire sport would be deader than dead. Purely most over the age of 50 have very little interest let alone give a crap about those horses & tradition. The comparisons to baseball are ridiculous because baseball doesn't purely depend on GAMBLING. Things need to be done to preserve the bottom line $$$ or it's ALL OVER. Improving TV ratings, the handle and bringing in new people to wager is what matter.

I have the photos on my wall too..but it hardly matters if we see headlines of another noted triple crown horse going down..or retiring to stud quicker in December. F Tradition. Move the dates for the good of the sport and financial survival.

[sharpcat]

REALITY...I respect War Admiral, Secretariat and Seattle Slew. BUT..if not for slot machines, simulcasting and internet wagering the entire sport would be deader than dead. Purely most over the age of 50 have very little interest let alone give a crap about those horses & tradition. The comparisons to baseball are ridiculous because baseball doesn't purely depend on GAMBLING. Things need to be done to preserve the bottom line $$$ or it's ALL OVER. Improving TV ratings, the handle and bringing in new people to wager is what matter.

I have the photos on my wall too..but it hardly matters if we see headlines of another noted triple crown horse going down..or retiring to stud quicker in December. F Tradition. Move the dates for the good of the sport and financial survival.

I agree here Paul, but what needs to be done to save the sport has little to do with the triple crown and every thing to do with track takeouts.

With the current 14-20% pot takeouts it is impossible to find any value betting on horses, if the tracks were to lower takeouts to 10% or less it would make a 3-1 horse a 4-1 horse and people will actually stand a chance of making a profit betting and long term will draw more patrons and the tracks would make the same $$$$ with more action coming in despite the lower takeouts.

Greed is what is killing this sport

[Paul Kersey]

Yup..totally agree with the greedy takeout along with making some sense with The Taxman. Nobody is filling out an IRS form for $600 for a winning hand at blackjack, craps tables, etc. We all agree.

But back to the subject...if one of the Preakness horses breaks down again and I pray it doesn't happen, nobody will give a crap about tradition, records, Triple Crowns, etc. I assure you the people with the Power and the $$ will totally agree with me. Move it out a week or two and at least humaninty can say they did something for the horses. And believe me..I'm no PETA member!! If the race was on from another track next Saturday night the handle would be much higher and the casual television audience would be triple. Like records, sometimes traditions are made to be broken!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!