More on Weights and wear and tear

[Thehoarsehorseplayer]

It\'s amazing how one can get so comfortable looking out the wrong end of a telescope.

A few days ago I posted an entry stating basically that I thought the weight assignments for the Triple Crown Races were inherently unfair.  Suggested, as I have for years, that horses should be subjected to a two pound impost for every leg of the Crown they skip.  I might have used the word penalized. But my point wasn\'t that these runners should be penalized for skipping races in the same way a jaywalker is fined for violating the law; rather it was that the cumulative enervation experienced by the horses who have already run two legs under 126 makes the onus of the weight they are carrying in the Belmont more equivalent to 130.  And, therefore, forcing fresh horses to carry more weight would actually level the playing field.

But I knew my argument was at best theoretical, that the idea of a three year old carrying an actual 130 over a mile and a half was not only a no go, but  irresponsible.  And then it dawned upon me, why not reward horses for running in prior legs of the Triple Crown by reducing their weight assignments by two pounds for the next leg they enter?  And in fact, if you aren\'t going to increase the spacing between the races, this seems the easiest way to somewhat reduce the wear and tear the road to the Triple Crown puts on its participants.

To those of you who think that weight doesn\'t matter, my answer would be then it doesn\'t matter if they reduce it.  To those who would argue that such a change would cheapen the traditions of the Triple Crown by making the accomplishment easier, I can only use the tradition of not allowing football players to drink water during the August two-a-days as an analogy.  The problem is not that the present day Triple Crown format is too hard for the horses, it\'s that it\'s too hard on the horses.  Ultimately, the cost is too great.  Probably not drinking liquids during the heat in August did toughen up a lot of players, but when a few died the cost of sustaining the tradition became too great.

At some point something has to give. And as a relatively painless first step I would suggest rewarding starters in previous legs of the Triple Crown series a weight reduction in the subsequent legs they enter.  Think of it as, kind of like, a weight rebate.  What does racing have to lose by experimenting with such a concept for a few years?  Maybe more horses run in all three legs; maybe more horses win the Triple Crown. Maybe more horses survive the ordeal intact.

[richiebee]

Hoarsehorse:

Good thoughts, very imaginative.

If your weight rebate idea comes to pass, just do not call the series the Triple
Crown.

The Triple Crown is three races. The races are run at Churchill at one and one
quarter miles, Pimlico two weeks later at one and three sixteenths miles, and at
Belmont at one and one half miles three weeks after the Pimlico race. All
contestants carry 126 pounds, with fillies allowed 5 pounds.

The three Triple Crown winners of the 1970s (and add near misses Alydar and
Spectacular Bid) were proven great by their performances as older horses, against
older horses or at stud or in some cases a combination of all of the above. I
think the Crown in its current format is not impossible and identifies runners of
exceptional quality. Also, Secretariat, Affirmed, Alydar and Spectacular Bid all
excelled as juveniles.

Weight is fascinating. While watching this years Indianapolis 500, I learned that
the car driven by the diminutive Danica Patrick had ballast added in order that
the playing field might be leveled; on the other hand a look at a harness racing
program reveals that drivers may vary in weight by up to 50 pounds.

I think the major change which needs to be made to the Triple Crown series is that
the Kentucky Derby is not the most prominent jewel in the crown. In my opinion
too many horses are rushed into the Derby who might have been more effective if
held out for the Preakness or the Belmont.

I believe at one juncture there was an award proposed for colts who ran in all 3
races in the series and had the best overall finish in the 3 events, which also
might fix the problem of the Derby being by far the shiniest jewel in the crown.

Just some thoughts from an old curmudgeon. Racing has a traditional aspect to it
which separates it from all other spectator sports:this traditional aspect comes
from the longevity of trainers and jockeys (compared to the relatively short
careers of players in the major team sports) and the perpetuation of equine
greatness over generations of breeding.

[fkach]

Personally, I think people are overreacting to the fact that it has been so long since we\'ve had a Tripe Crown winner. It\'s not that easy to win three races in a row of any type no matter what the spacing.

Assume a horse is 33% to win each of three races. That means his odds of winning three in a row are .33 x .33 x .33 = 3.6%  

When something has a 3.6% probability of happening, there are going to be some extraordinary dry periods by chance alone.  

Granted, the probabilities are never as neat 33% three times in a row. Sometimes a specific horse appears less likely than that in the first of the series and more likely as the series progresses, but I think you can see the point.

I recently saw a chart of the number of horses in each race for each of the Triple Crown winners. I was shocked to see that many of the early ones faced very few horses over the series of three races. In fact, it was fewer than modern horses face. Aside from the demands of keeping a horse fresh for three races, it\'s tougher now because the Derby is such a large field (bad trips and naturally lower probabilities). We have seen a number of modern horses get terrible trips in the Derby and then win the next two. Then the horses are still facing solid sized fields in the Preakness/Belmont relative to the distant past which opens the door to shocking performances and more bad trips.  

There are a variety of factors contributing to the lack of success of the modern horses. It\'s not just the demands of the Triple Crown/spacing. Some of it is just plain random.