The reason why is that all the horses are so similar to each other. I believe if Barbaro didn't fall in last year's Preakness he wouldh've been a triple crown winner. I hope that 2 million and some thousand dollars they raised to help prevent horse deaths in races goes to good use. Another horse died today. Anyways the Triple Crown is nearly impossible these days b/c the horses are so similar in my mind.
2007-05-19 12:59:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Many people would argue that the horses are being bred differently.
Back in the 70's, many of the horses running and winning were "homebreds," meaning that the owner had bred the horse and owned either the dam or sire, or both. Therefor, the owner had a vested interset in seeing the horse win on the track. Some would say that more time was put into these matings because owner/breeders have a (generally) smaller budget to work on.
Today, many yearlings are sent through auctions by their breeders. The breeder wants the best possible price on their yearling, so the horse has to be big and impressive looking. Sometimes that means that the horse began training before it was physically or mentally ready to, or that the horse was bred to be big at an early age. Some horses, like the $16 million paid for Green Monkey as a two year old, just don't ever become the speed demons that the owner hopes for.
With this push for more impressive yearlings, mares and stallions that should have been eliminated from the breeding stock have been allowed to breed. Unsoundness issues have been linked to certian bloodlines, like gentically weak bones or conformation that is less than ideal for racing.
Beyond the horse, there has been a push for more racing at younger ages without enough rest between races. It's physically exhausting for race horses to run full out and then travel across the country for the next race.
The size of the fields for the each of the three legs of the Triple Crown are also a lot bigger than they were back in the 70's. All races are becoming more populated, so even the up-and-coming stars have a hard time standing out. More horses means more traffic, which means a lesser chance of having a winning trip.
There are so many factors that go into why, but I think it boils down the fact that the right horse just hasn't come along (and made it through) yet.
2007-05-19 22:58:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by slequestrian 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
The closest one has ever gotten to the Triple Crown this generation is Real Quiet in 1998. He was beaten by a nose by Victory gallop! Also Smarty Jones was pretty close!!!
2007-05-19 22:19:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by streetsensefan07 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Afleet Alex sure came close two years ago, but I believe the missjudgement of jockey Jeremy Rose prevented that from happening. I think in this present age there are too many good contenders, especially with the Kentucky Derby starting off the event with a twenty horse field.
2007-05-19 21:19:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by thecoochieman 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
it takes a great horse and luck.
also the purses are big.
trainers now point their horses to preakness and the belmont..
they run three races in six weeks. it takes a lot out a horse.
now he runs against fresh horses.
2007-05-19 23:31:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by MR TADS 4
·
0⤊
0⤋