Nerud feels that the Preakness should be eliminated from the Triple Crown. "It's never been much of a race," he said.
Nerud didn't think the Preakness was much of a race even after he won one. Against his better judgment, he permitted Wayne Lukas, who was new to the training job that Nerud had given him for the Tartan Stable, to run Codex at Pimlico in 1980. Codex won the race, but there was a foul claim against his jockey, Angel Cordero, on behalf of Genuine Risk, the Kentucky Derby winner, and the result wasn't declared official and the purse wasn't paid until the state racing commission conducted a three-day hearing before the Belmont was run. I sat near Nerud and Lukas for part of the hearing, and watched Nerud yawn when one of the Pimlico stewards took 20 minutes to testify how he had bought his binoculars at an Army surplus store. Even then, lawyers knew how to keep that meter running. Nerud won the race and won the hearing, and still had no love for the Preakness.
The Triple Crown, better off without the Preakness in Nerud's judgment, has a bigger problem, he said. "The Derby's too early," he said.
Nerud's history with the Kentucky Derby is also short and sour. In 1957, while still training, he sent Gallant Man to Churchill Downs, and he was the best horse that day, but Bill Shoemaker misjudged the finish line, stood up for an instant in the irons and Iron Liege beat them by a nose.
The only time Nerud went back was when Tartan's Muttering finished fifth in 1982. "The only reason I don't like the Derby is that it's too soon for the horses," he said the other day. "Some of them aren't even three years old when they run it, and they aren't ready for a mile and a quarter. This year, Lookin at Lucky wasn't three years old until well into May. They ran the Derby on May 1st."
If Nerud had his way, they wouldn't run the Derby until at least May 15. Out of habit, people would still be talking about The First Saturday in May, only the race would be on the third Saturday.
Then, Nerud said, use the Belmont as the second leg of the Triple Crown, and run it when it's run now, in early June. That would usually position it four weeks after the Derby. Going from a mile and a quarter to a mile and a half, no problem. Extra time between the two races would make it easier on the horses.
And the third leg? "The Travers," Nerud said. "When it's always been, in August at Saratoga."
Nerud was the chairman of the Breeders' Cup's first marketing committee, he was partly responsible for getting NBC to televise the whole day, and he's savvy about promoting the sport. A Derby-Belmont winner, awaiting the Travers, would give the horse plenty of shelf life before the third leg is run. Going from a mile and a quarter to a mile and a half and then back to a mile and a quarter is not an obstacle, he said.
Does it sound interesting? Sure. Would there be a rush of Triple Crown winners that would cheapen the accomplishments of champions past? Not likely--the new shooters that would show up for the Belmont and the Travers would take care of that. Will it ever happen? "When was the last time horse racing did the right thing?" Nerud said.



30 May 2010 at 09:17 am | #
Why is the Triple Crown under assault from so many sources?
It was an arbitrary group of races.
If you want to arbitrarily change the group in any way, call it something else.
Leave the Triple Crown alone.
30 May 2010 at 10:32 am | #
Ace,
It would seem you’re in the camp that thinks the Triple Crown is “the last thing racing did right.”
The significance of any series of races is its reward for “recognizing some reality.” The last successful design-your-own championship series exercise was Jess Jackson’s Preakness-Haskell-Woodward triple triumph that resulted in Horse of the Year honors. Maybe Pegram and Baffert will follow suit and it will become the de-facto standard.
30 May 2010 at 11:32 am | #
Hey Bill,
Love John Nerud, miss seeing him around the racetrack. The man always was a visionary.
What a fascinating plan he has. But I won’t comment since my suggestion varies and I’m in enough trouble with a lot of our readers already.
But thanks for giving him a call and getting him on record here.
“When was the last time racing did the right thing?” he asks. Good question. Probably the Breeders’ Cup. Yes, that’s controversial, too, and while not the Triple Crown, it’s puts racing in the front row or sports for a few more days. And that’s never a bad thing.
JP
30 May 2010 at 05:43 pm | #
The two MOST difficult things in sports to accomplish are winning Hockey’s Stanley Cup (a two month long physical grind of game after game usually every other nite plus travel) and the Triple Crown. Do not diminish the greatness of this accomplishment by acquiescing to to the “dumbing down” of the Thoroughbred. Simply breed a better racehorse and run him. Of all people, Nerud knows that!
30 May 2010 at 05:50 pm | #
Hey JP,
Getting gun shy doesn’t become you, HRI has become a center for controversy and civilized contention. We come here for the DOO-DOO (Difference Of Opinions Debated Openly On-line). Where better to get the scoop straightened than from a jury of journalists? Mixing it up with your fellow columnists is no vice, and stifling yourself is no virtue.
31 May 2010 at 04:24 am | #
Indulto,
Was being a bit facetious, as I’ve never ducked controversy here. I’ll will admit to not being as funny or clever as I thought, however.
I love HRI site, too, for what I can learn here. I never thought I’d be excited to be appreciated and as a propenent of Doo-Doo. Remarkable.
Mousse,
Commercial breeders and permissive medication have already dumbed down the thoroughbred. Maybe if we had two generations to breed the drugs out and stamina back in, the TC series again can be more in tune with the state of the medern American thoroughbred.
Thanks folks!
JP
31 May 2010 at 10:46 am | #
There’s never been a Triple Crown winner in my lifetime. Do I want to see one? Yes. Do I want to see one if it takes changing the series into something completely new an less meaningful? No.
31 May 2010 at 11:24 am | #
The Preakness is the one Triple Crown race that, every year, I have the most trouble getting excited about......and it doesn’t matter WHO’s running, Derby winner or otherwise. Unless the Derby winner wins it, it’s always been kind of a throw-away race for me.
That is until I read a rather thought-provoking forum post by a friend of mine. I went and tried to find it so I could quote it directly here but couldn’t, so I’ll just re-create the gist of what he said:
“The list of the best 3yos of the last 10 years has to start with Point Given, Smarty Jones, Afleet Alex, Curlin, and Rachel Alexandra. Among these, only one won the Derby, only two won the Belmont......all five won the Preakness”
Case made, case closed. I’m not sure I’ll ever be able to think about the Preakness in the same way again after reading that post.
By the way, my friend DID add the caveat that Rachel Alexandra didn’t win the Derby or Belmont not because she couldn’t or wasn’t good enough, but because she didn’t run in either, while the other four mentioned ran in all three races. Just wanted to make that clear.
17 Jun 2012 at 10:53 pm | #
That to me would be a BIG mistake!!
I used to think that way myself, but what I think really needs to be done is to follow the lead of Meadowlands owner Jeff Gural (who along with Woodbine Entertainment Group are implementing new policies that require top horses to race through age four), and as I would do it, make it so horses have to race through age five, with horses sired by those who are five or younger at the time of conception being ineligible to all Graded states events at tracks operated by the Triple Crown track operators and The Breeders’ Cup events. That to me would force changes in the way horses are bred that would get away from the precociousness we have seen in recent years back to horses being bred for endurance and stamina. In turn, that might very well end the arguments about the Triple Crown being changes as owners and trainers might very well regain sense on those races.