Triple Crown Suggestions

It is as predictable as rain in April (as in April showers bring May flowers). The arrival of articles that question the validity of the Triple Crown contest, as it currently stands and has stood since it was initiated way back when. And of course part of the reason for the onslaught of naysayers is the fact that there is no possibility of a Triple Crown this year.

Add to this, the fact that Lookin at Lucky is not running in the Belmont and neither is Super Saver and the Belmont, in the eyes of a casual observer, the Triple Crown is passe. I don't think so.

Arguments against keeping the Triple Crown as it is include the idea that we can't breed a race horse strong enough to endure the physical challenge that the three race series represents. "Today's thoroughbred is no longer bred for endurance or stamina, but for speed, speed, and speed," writes Bob Ford. "A typical racing career doesn't last five, six or seven years any longer, which, because of the emphasis on breeding for speed, is a self-fulfilling prophecy."

Maybe but it sure looked like Barbaro was going to do it, or even Big Brown, who was certainly big and strong enough--except for the feet. The point is that we can breed big and strong horses if we set out to do so. The other point is that it has never been easy, so why make it easier now?

There are lots of ways to change the Triple Crown and we hear about them every year. stretch out the distance between races; shorten some races; run the Triple Crown for 4 year olds, not three year olds. The list goes on.

But guess what. Nothing is going to change because this is a sport steeped in tradition and even as it it gasping its dying breath, the Triple Crown is going to remain one of the most difficult feats to attain in all of sports.

Is the Tour de France easy? No. Is winning an Olympic Gold medal easy? No. Is winning the Masters or Wimbleton easy? No. And the way to keep it worth winning is not by changing the rules.