What no one on this thread has done is address my central point.
All horses must carry the same weight? Why? To make everything even.
IF the schedule is part of the test... then why should some horse get to skip that part?
The schedule ~is~ part of "the test", but the "the test" is not required! Only those horses/trainers that choose to try for the Triple Crown need to run all three races. If you skip a race, you aren't taking "the test".
But the schedule is NOT, which is why you never see the same field of horses in all three races. It's like tennis, only with a tighter scedule. Some players do well at Wimbledon but consistently fail at the US Open. IIRC, Ivan Lendl even skipped Wimbledon one year because he always performed so poorly there. Should that have DQ'd him from the French, where he always kicked ass? What about golfers?
Three distinct races. Not one.
Two reasons:
1. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
2. No one remembers the second reason.
That's ludicrous.
I still think you are missing the point. Each of the three Triple Crown races poses a different kind of challenge. The schedule is the least of it. They are run at different distance over different kinds of tracks. But the challenge is only meaningful if the winner is racing against the 3 year-olds who are best capable of meeting that particular challenge. A souped up sprinter can compete in the Derby and sometimes win. But you wouldn't want to see a Belmont where the lead horses were staggering down the stretch, just trying to hit the finish line. It wouldn't be a good race, and there wouldn't be much glory in winning. So who would care about the Triple Crown then?
It's always exciting when a horse is on a streak. Apart from Secretariat, the most exciting horse I ever saw was Cigar. And he wasn't even in the Triple Crown. But streaks happen when they happen. If the conditions of the race rule out your toughest competitors, then the streak doesn't mean a thing.