Poll: Triple Crown - Yes or No

[easysurfer]

The Belmont Stakes is tomorrow with California Chrome's chance for the triple crown.

Think he'll do it?

If I was betting I'd place a bet on him to win, but at the same time a part of me says it won't happen.

But I'll vote yes as I want to see history. Plus, the storyline is a true Cinderella story.

 

[Lcountz]

I sure am hoping he does it....but at Preakness, which is shorter than Belmont, another horse was catching up to him at the end of the race....so I hope he has it in him to run the long course at Belmont tomorrow......

 

[easysurfer]

With the longer course and all, I wonder how will he does if a time during the race he's not the front runner?

 

[pb4uski]

I hope he does. Some of his competitors in the Kentucky Derby skipped the Preakness and have had more rest, so it will be a challenge - that and the longer distance.

 

[Mulligan]

The payout odds on him winning are so poor it isn't worth the bet. A descriptive newspaper article was really detailed in it's analysis that CC doesn't really have a good chance as CC has had all the breaks fall his way in first two races and the longer track will not benefit him. Who knows...But what I found interesting today was a comment made by a local radio sports person that rang true with me. The man must have been about my age as he said said growing up it seemed like a triple crown was no big deal as it happened 3 times in the 70s while I was growing up. I also remember those 3 as a preteen, and to me back then it did seem like it happened "all the time".


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Animorph]

Seems like there has been many horses that have won the first two races. I'd bet against CC.

 

[aja8888]

I'm always wrong in these polls....

 

[Texas Proud]

I sure am hoping he does it....but at Preakness, which is shorter than Belmont, another horse was catching up to him at the end of the race....so I hope he has it in him to run the long course at Belmont tomorrow......

+1.... if that race was the Belmont, he already would have lost...


I also do not think his post position is good... I think I saw where he is in the second slot...

 

[ERD50]

DW & I enjoyed a lunch of Dim Sum there last Fall:

Triple Crown Restaurant, Chicago - Restaurant Reviews - TripAdvisor

That's all I know about any 'Triple Crown'.

-ERD50

 

[splitwdw]

I'm rooting for him.

 

[kcowan]

I noted that in both previous races, a challenger was closing at the finish. I just don't know if the jockey understands that and can compensate, so I voted NO. I will be rooting for him though.

 

[Walt34]

I voted "Other" since I haven't the foggiest idea. It would be a nice ending to the Cinderella story if he won though.

 

[ziggy29]

I think so. I have a gut feeling, though the longer distance of the Belmont would seem to be why in the last 36 years there have been no Triple Crown winners -- they can look good 3/4 of the way through the Belmont, then fade (looking at you, Smarty Jones, among others).

 

[haha]

The odds must always be against any particular horse winning any race, unless it is a very small and unbalanced field. So on purely statistical considerations, I would say likely some other horse will win. I've never been to the Belmont Stakes, though I have attended races at Belmont Park. A very classy environment.

I can't tolerate the TV hypefest but my GF tapes it and I can watch tomorrow. I don't care who wins.

Ha

 

[easysurfer]

Well...so much for that

 

[ronin]

Oh well. As long as the Kings win the Stanley Cup, all will be well in California.

 

[aja8888]

Go Spurs!

 

[ziggy29]

Now the owners of CC are moaning that it isn't fair that other horses can enter the Belmont without having run the Derby or the Preakness. But this is how it has always been, this is no new rule.

Interestingly, these Triple Crowns tend to come in spurts -- there were several in the 1930s and 1940s ending with Citation in 1948 -- then none for 25 years until Secretariat in 1973. Then two more winners in back to back years not long after that (1977 and 1978) and then again, none for 36 years and counting.

 

[eytonxav]

Now the owners of CC are moaning that it isn't fair that other horses can enter the Belmont without having run the Derby or the Preakness. But this is how it has always been, this is no new rule.

While that may be a valid reason for a rules change, it also points to the fact that it takes a true super horse to win the triple crown.

 

[nash031]

If it was easy, it wouldn't be special. Never see the point in adjusting the rules to make it easier for horses to win the TC... Running the same field in all three races seems pretty pointless to me.

 

[W2R]

If it was easy, it wouldn't be special.

+1000 The whole reason the world takes note when a horse wins the Triple Crown, is that is ISN'T easy and a horse that wins this trophy is extraordinary.

I thought that the California Chrome owner's complaint was graceless and spoiled. "Waaah!! It was too hard! They should have given me the Triple Crown despite the fact that my horse did not actually EARN this special trophy. After all, my Mommy told me I was special, and that's that!".

He probably parks in front of the door at convenience stores, rather than in a designated parking place, too.

 

[easysurfer]

+1000 The whole reason the world takes note when a horse wins the Triple Crown, is that is ISN'T easy and a horse that wins this trophy is extraordinary.

I thought that the California Chrome owner's complaint was graceless and spoiled. "Waaah!! It was too hard! They should have given me the Triple Crown despite the fact that my horse did not actually EARN this special trophy. After all, my Mommy told me I was special, and that's that!".

He probably parks in front of the door at convenience stores, rather than in a designated parking place, too.

I don't know if California Chrome (CC)'s jockey had bad strategy (when CC is not the front runner, that's not a good thing) or CC simply ran out of gas he was on the outside not boxed in at the home stretch. After the race when interviewed, the jockey said CC just didn't have the finishing kick like in the past.

The co-owner's sour grapes reminds me a bit like Nancy Kerrigan after only getting the silver instead of gold. It's tough when the country is cheering for you and you start to believe all the hype when things don't turn out like that fairy tale ending.

 

[ERhoosier]

Now the owners of CC are moaning that it isn't fair that other horses can enter the Belmont without having run the Derby or the Preakness. But this is how it has always been, this is no new rule. ....

IMHO- CC's owners (and others for some time) have a point. Not a strictly speaking a new "rule", but there certainly have been changes in the system likely making it more difficult to win a Triple Crown. Horses traditionally have had to qualify for the Derby, but now this includes participating in points races over the prior 10+ weeks. Horses running Belmont (or Preakness) 'merely' have to qualify as for other Grade 1 stakes races. So true Triple Crown contenders have a longer, tougher racing season than horses entered into 'only' the Preakness or Belmont.
2014 Road to the Kentucky Derby
Interestingly- There has been a trainer to win the TC during the latest 'drought', but with 2 different horses (D Wayne Lukas, '95).

BTW- I've always found it odd that thoroughbred racing touts the 'Triple Crown Series' yet few horses actually race the full series any more. This year only 3 horses ran all 3 races. Not much of a 'Series' if ya ask me.

That said, CC was (is) no Secretariat. That horse not only took the TC but set time records for each race that still stand today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_Crown_of_Thoroughbred_Racing_%28United_States%29

 

[nash031]

+1000 The whole reason the world takes note when a horse wins the Triple Crown, is that is ISN'T easy and a horse that wins this trophy is extraordinary.

I thought that the California Chrome owner's complaint was graceless and spoiled. "Waaah!! It was too hard! They should have given me the Triple Crown despite the fact that my horse did not actually EARN this special trophy. After all, my Mommy told me I was special, and that's that!".

He probably parks in front of the door at convenience stores, rather than in a designated parking place, too.

That was my thought, but one of my friends who follows horse racing agrees with CC's owner that it's not fair. Seems awfully whiny to me. Chrome wasn't destroying fields before the TC, and he was fading (in that second was closing at the line) in both the KD and Preakness. I didn't think he'd win Belmont, fresh or not, and it worked out about like I thought - he faded down the stretch regardless of who was in front of him. That he lost Belmont had more to do with distance, IMO. Had either of the first two been a shade longer, chances are we aren't even talking about this.

A good horse, but not a great horse. That's what his owner should be celebrating, instead of advertising an apparent sense of entitlement.

 

[easysurfer]

So, now I'm wondering, how much $$ did CC lose on the Belmont? I'm sure a lot of folks thought CC was a sure bet, or at the very least end up third place. Had I bet (but I don't gamble ), I would have placed a bet for him to win, then another to at least show (3rd place?) and lost both bets.