Running At Four

I stumbled across this old column from David Kindred at The Sporting News. In the shadow of Smarty Jones' failure to capture The Belmont Stakes, Mr. Kindred suggests that four year olds be allowed to run in Triple Crown races. He argues the sport needs more stars, like Smarty Jones, and an extra year in front of television cameras would make all the horses more familiar to the general populous.

Like seemingly everyone else, Kindred wishes for a Triple Crown winner and thinks the current drought necessitates drastic action. I disagree with the entire premise on two points.

First, casual sports fans simply are not going to watch any more horse racing than they do now. Our sports calendar is already packed. As much as I enjoy horse racing, it's hard for me to cram the Triple Crown races and the Breeders Cup into my schedule. That's only four races a year and I would classify myself as something slightly more than a casual fan. The average guy just doesn't care enough, or have enough time, to watch more racing no matter how many times Smarty Jones runs.

The most obvious example of this is today's running of the Breeders Cup. In the event's last race, the Classic, a number of horses older than three run. How many casual fans will be watching? Can you name a single horse in the field? Given a choice between the Michigan and Michigan State football game today or the Breeders Cup, ninety-nine percent of the local sports fans I know would choose to watch football everytime. Familiarity is not the sport's biggest issue.

Mr. Kindred actually provides my second point. Here is his quote:

Which is why poor Smarty Jones became the 10th straight good horse in 26 years to win the Derby and Preakness only to lose the Belmont and the Triple Crown.

The problem with the horses that have come close to claiming the Triple Crown recently? They are good. Real good. They have not been Triple Crown caliber talents. A great horse will win the Triple Crown. Problem is great horses don't show up every year. It was twenty-five years between Citation and Secretariat. If it takes a thirty year dry spell to find another horse as good as Seattle Slew or Affirmed, so be it.

All parties interested in horse racing (the NTRA, others in the industry, old sportswriters, etc...) need to re-focus their energy. First, realize the sport will never again be as big as it was in 1900. Boxing and baseball aren't, either. It's no crime for horse racing to follow suit.

Second, make a big deal about your four afternoons in the spotlight. The Kentucky Derby, Preakness Stakes, Belmont Stakes and Breeders Cup are wonderful, historic events. Let some fans know about the parties, the history and the fun horse racing can be even if you don't lose your car at the window.

Third, everyone needs to stop making every horse out to be Secretariat. Winning the first two legs of the Triple Crown makes you Real Quiet or Silver Charm, not the greatest horse ever. Not that being compared to Spectacular Bid or even Point Given is an insult. Winning two-thirds of the Triple Crown is a terrific, horse-of-the-year achievement. You can argue it even makes you a great horse.

However, remember that greatness is relative. It's like the difference between Hall of Fame baseball players. You have Babe Ruth and Pee Wee Reese. Maybe, Ted Williams and Carl Yastrzemski is a better example. Different styles, different eras, different career paths, different stats. Still both are great. Just not on the same level.

Someday another Triple Crown winner, another legendary horse will emerge. We don't need to manufacture one. We just need to be patient.