Replies

It’s about preparations. Obviously a horse CAN win at Belmont without having won at Belmont before basic rules of logic require it. But if you’re going for the TC without having run the horse at Belmont before then you probably were preparing your horse for the Derby, which is a shorter easier track. Belmont is generally considered the hardest of the 3, and last few decades show that horses trained for the Derby can’t cut it at the Belmont, especially not with the short rest the TC requires. And the time before then when the TC got won multiple times shows that horses prepped for the Belmont CAN win the Derby, and the Preakness, and come back to Belmont and win on short rest.

It’s not nearly all it’s ALL, and it’s not prior starts it’s prior WINS. All TC winning horses won at Belmont before the TC.

I don’t think it’s the tradition, it’s the prep. Owing to the length and overall track differences the Derby and the Stakes are very different races. And putting Derby prepped horses at Belmont is like throwing a 300m sprinter into a 400m with no time to train up. But owners currently are aiming for the Derby and then if they win that hoping for the other two. If owners actually WANT to win the TC they need to train their horses for Belmont, and then prove the horse was successfully trained for it by winning at Belmont before the Derby, then go to the Derby knowing that if they pull that one off (which they might not owing to field size and the randomness that causes) the horse is in good shape to complete the TC.

Thanks for an interesting post.
Explains a lot to this novice.

If the folks that run horse racing want a triple crown winner, they may need to change the rules, and require participation in all or 2 of 3 races.

Of course then any triple crown winner will be judged by different criteria.

I did read that the Belmont winning time was >4 seconds slower than Secretariat, so we’re a long way from legendary performance, assuming track conditions were similar.

It’s about preparations. Obviously a horse CAN win at Belmont without having won at Belmont before basic rules of logic require it. But if you’re going for the TC without having run the horse at Belmont before then you probably were preparing your horse for the Derby, which is a shorter easier track. Belmont is generally considered the hardest of the 3, and last few decades show that horses trained for the Derby can’t cut it at the Belmont, especially not with the short rest the TC requires. And the time before then when the TC got won multiple times shows that horses prepped for the Belmont CAN win the Derby, and the Preakness, and come back to Belmont and win on short rest. It’s not nearly all it’s ALL, and it’s not prior starts it’s prior WINS. All TC winning horses won at Belmont before the TC. I don’t think it’s the tradition, it’s the prep. Owing to the length and overall track differences the Derby and the Stakes are very different races. And putting Derby prepped horses at Belmont is like throwing a 300m sprinter into a 400m with no time to train up. But owners currently are aiming for the Derby and then if they win that hoping for the other two. If owners actually WANT to win the TC they need to train their horses for Belmont, and then prove the horse was successfully trained for it by winning at Belmont before the Derby, then go to the Derby knowing that if they pull that one off (which they might not owing to field size and the randomness that causes) the horse is in good shape to complete the TC. The mile circumference of Churchill Downs (and Pimlico) does NOT make them inherently "easier" courses compared to Belmont Park. Things just don't work that way.

What does happen is that the turns at Belmont at so sweeping that a long-striding horse is favored there more than at a track with sharper turns.

A 5 furlong dirt sprint at Belmont is much the same as a 5 furlong sprint at Aqueduct or Belterra or Santa Anita.

Thoroughbred horses used to actually be
trained. They aren't much trained any longer in America. They used to run a LOT more, even the very best of them. Consider the records of Count Fleet, Assault, Citation, and Secretariat:

Secretariat foaled 1970

Belmont Park ………..6/9/1973 8 ……….Belmont Stakes - Gr. 1 1
Pimlico …………………5/19/1973 8 ……..Preakness Stakes - Gr. 1 1
Churchill Downs ……5/5/1973 9 ………Kentucky Derby - Gr. 1 1
Aqueduct ………………4/21/1973 7 …….Wood Memorial Stakes - Gr. 1 3
Aqueduct ………………4/7/1973 7……… Gotham Stakes - Gr. 2 1
Aqueduct…………….. 3/17/1973 7 ……..Bay Shore Stakes - Gr. 3 1
Note that Secretariat raced twice in the month before the Kentucky Derby

Citation foaled 1945

Belmont Park …….…6/12/1948 6 …….Belmont Stakes 1
Garden State …….….5/29/1948 6 …….Jersey Stakes 1
Pimlico …………….….5/15/1948 6 ……..Preakness Stakes 1
Churchill Downs …..5/1/1948 7 ………..Kentucky Derby 1
Churchill Downs….. 4/27/1948 5 ……..Derby Trial 1
Havre De Grace …….4/17/1948 6……..Chesapeake Stakes 1
Havre De Grace …….4/12/1948 6 …….Chesapeake Trial 2
Hialeah Park ………..2/28/1948 6……..Flamingo Stakes 1
Hialeah Park ………..2/18/1948 6……. Everglades Handicap 1
Hialeah Park ………..2/11/1948 6 ……..Seminole Handicap
Note that Citation raced in the Derby Trial, the Tuesday prior to the Kentucky Derby, and between the Preakness and Belmont, he raced in something called the Jersey Stakes.

Assault foaled 1943

Belmont Park ……….6/1/1946 6 ……….Belmont Stakes 1
Pimlico ………………..5/11/1946 6 ………Preakness Stakes 1
Churchill Downs ……5/4/1946 7 ………Kentucky Derby 1
Jamaica ………………..4/20/1946 5 …….Wood Memorial Stakes 1
Jamaica ……………….4/9/1946 5 ……….Experimental Free H. No. 1 1
Note the one-week space between the Kentucky Derby and Preakness Stakes.

Count Fleet foaled 1940

Belmont Park ………..6/5/1943 6 ……….Belmont Stakes 1
Belmont Park ………..5/22/1943 6 ……..Withers Stakes 1
Pimlico …………………5/8/1943 6 ………Preakness Stakes 1
Churchill Downs ……5/1/1943 7 ……….Kentucky Derby 1
Jamaica ……………….4/17/1943 5 ……..Wood Memorial Stakes 1
Note the one-week space between the Kentucky Derby and Preakness Stakes.

When horses were fitter, they were trained to go short or go long by guys who really used to put fast works into their horses, as needed to prime them for a short or long effort.

Nothing mysterious is going on. Eventually, someone with deep pockets and a solid understanding of equine exercise physiology will prep some prospect and make the guys who give their animals 4 furlong "works" every now and them look silly.