There used to be the Triple Crown Challenge, sponsored by Chrysler, that among other things gave a million-dollar bonus to the horse that finished all three Triple Crown races with the most points based on placing in each of the three races.
It was stated here that breeding has gone more for speed rather than endurance. Would bringing back a challenge like this help to encourage breeding/training for the long haul? Or would there have to be many such challenges to make a difference?
maybe it would have made California Chrome’s connections feel better to have won the challenge this year if it had been held.
I think the Triple Crown Challenge is a great idea. It emphasizes the notion of doing the best that you can in ALL the races, regardless of placing. So often people feel like not winning is a tragedy when in fact sometimes coming in 2nd or 3rd is a great accomplishment.
What would it help? Would help a new Coburn from running their mouth off?
There is nothing that needs to be helped.
[QUOTE=Drvmb1ggl3;7614407]
What would it help? Would help a new Coburn from running their mouth off?
There is nothing that needs to be helped.[/QUOTE]
When was the old Triple Crown challenge active? If it started after 1978, it certainly didn’t help back then. I just checked. It was sponsored by Chrysler and was started in 1987. So it didn’t help create a TC winner when it was going.
Chrysler Triple Crown Bonus
In 1986 Triple Crown Productions in an effort to get more publicity for the three race series sought a sponsor. The very next year, beginning in 1987, Chrysler Motors agreed to offer a three tiered bonus called the “Chrysler Triple Crown Challenge” and a “Triple Crown Bonus.” The first two phases of the bonus would have two distinct payouts to the owners of horses running in the Triple Crown series.
The first part of the bonus would be paid out to any horse that could sweep all three legs of the Triple Crown. That bonus brought the combined purse winnings of all three race purses and the extra series bonus to equal $5,000,000 to the winner along with the special Triple Crown Trophy commissioned by the Thoroughbred Racing Association. A second phase of the bonus was to be paid out as a flat $1,000,000. to any horse that started and finished in all three races and had the highest combined total finish. The requirement to “finish all three races” affected the 1993 result, as Sea Hero was declared the winner in 1993 despite Prairie Bayou ending up with more points, as Prairie Bayou broke down during the Belmont Stakes and failed to finish.
Chrysler also offered a third phase to the “Triple Crown Challenge.” The automobile company offered a bonus and showcased its vehicles in track infields and on network television, and gave away a new Chrysler vehicle to the winning jockey of every Triple Crown race. If the same jockey won a second race during the same annual series than the Chrysler vehicle would be given to the winning trainer. The $5,000,000 Triple Crown bonus was never paid; the last Triple Crown winner was Affirmed in 1978.
Triple Crown Challenge Points
An enduring feature of the Challenge was the establishment of a point system to determine which horse had the highest combined Triple Crown total finish. Points were awarded equally in all three Triple Crown races. Ten points were earned by a win. Five points were earned by a place finish, three points were earned for a show finish and one point was awarded to a fourth place finish[1]. The horse that earned the highest number of points and started in all three races was awarded the million dollars. See table below for Highest combined Triple Crown finish in each year since 1987. The $1,000,000 bonus was discontinued after seven years.
In the first year of the challenge, a win was worth five points, second was worth three, third was worth one, and no points were awarded for fourth. Had the system used in later years been in effect, Alysheba’s two firsts and a fourth (21 points) would have been enough to beat Bet Twice’s two seconds and a first (20 points), but under the originsl system, Bet Twice had 11 points to Alysheba’s 10.
Highest combined Triple Crown finish
This is a listing of the horses that finished in either first, second, third or fourth in the Triple Crown Challenge, based on finishes in all three legs of the United States Triple Crown of Thoroughbred Racing.
The $5,000,000 Triple Crown prize was never won.
Breeders try to breed the best horses they can. Offering more money–for races that only a tiny fraction of them will ever have horses compete in–won’t change that.
It was started sometime in the mid 80s.
The reason the $5m bonus was introduced was because of Spend A Buck, who skipped the Preakness in 1985 to run in the Jersey Derby for a $2m bonus. It caused a bit of controversy at the time… as you can imagine, a horse skipping a chance to win the TC to run in the Jersey Derby.
So a $5m bonus was offered to make sure that didn’t happen again. But the bonus is more or less pointless now, as winning the TC is such a huge achievement, is so coveted, and adds a huge amount to a colts’s stud value, that there is no need for a bonus. It’s not like someone is going to skip it.
The $1m bonus to the horse with the most “points” in the three races was meant to encourage horses that didn’t win the Derby from sitting the Preakness and/or the Belmont.
I thought The Challenge certainly made things interesting - and perhaps kept more centered on the entire campaign, if the horse with the best overall record grabbed a bonus.
Answering your question with a question of my own. Help what? Bigger fields for the three races? Create more fans? Create a consolation prize to appease the owners of the close but no cigar club?
Help keep horses from skipping races in the Triple Crown, and help encourage people to breed/train for endurance as well as speed. Maybe encourage looking at keeping horses sound/racing for the long term, not just go as fast as you can and risk a breakdown. And yes, because the TC is so hard to win, a sort of “thanks for trying to go for it” prize.
I think it may help get owners whose horses did not win the Kentucky Derby but came out of the race sound choose to go in the Preakness. It wouldn’t do anything to stop connections like those of Tonalist and Commissioner, whose horses, for some reason or other, did not enter the Derby from taking the easy path to the Belmont with a rested horse–especially if they think their horse won’t do well in the Derby or the Preakness.
Perhaps a supplementary entry fee for horses skipping any of the Triple Crown races might help slow the flow of owners who choose the easier Peter Pan route to the Belmont.
Let’s say horses that don’t run in the Kentucky Derby get socked with a $10,000 surcharge in the Preakness. Add to that a larger, let’s say $30,000 surcharge for Belmont entries that did not run in either the Derby or the Preakness. This way you preserve the ‘new shooters’ aspect but you also make it in the owner’s interest to run his horse in the big game instead of swooping in at the end to beat a horse that’s run, as Steve Coburn put it, his guts out, in a brutal schedule.
As a trainer albeit never on the level of the triple crown, I have a different take on this than most of us. Keep in mind that our job is to make our owners the most money possible while keeping the horse sound so that they can continue to make the most money possible. Our job is not to advance the sport or appease the public.
We choose the “easiest” race possible that will maximize the amount of purse won. That said, every owner who has ever had a race horse dreams of winning the derby. If you are one of the few who has a horse who realistically has a shot of running (whether or not he actually has a legit shot to win it) mapping out the path to the derby becomes the goal even if it violates the easiest race possible to maximize the earnings mantra.
So you actually make it to the gate on the first Saturday in May, the dream comes true. Two minutes later, reality sets in! The pretenders go back where they belong and the cream carries on. Only one horse has a chance for the triple crown now. But there are still some dreamers and close but no cigars on the first Saturday in May club who didn’t make it into the gate waiting. Some of those will think the Preakness is better than nothing and take their shot in there. Some who did race in the Derby but thought they had a legit excuse and want to take another shot at it will run in the Preakness. Some will rest up and wait for the Belmont. Some had the Belmont in mind the whole time. If a horse comes along that can rise above all that we will have a triple crown winner. If we don’t, life will go on.
i don’t know why people keep thinking that you have to run in all 3 races. If your horse wins the Derby and is nominated for the TC then yes YOU have to win all 3 in order to get the TC. Remember it’s only 1 horse that can win the TC not anyone else who entered after the Derby or lost in the Derby.
@laurieace: yes, you are right.
and then in the meantime, the media will try to stir the pot to sell copy and ad space. Well, as long as Bob Costas is covering the event for NBC.
Didn’t Tonalist get hurt and had to skip races? Did not have enough points to enter the Derby as they had been aiming for? And didn’t he win the Peter Pan last month?
Thats not carefully sitting out and planning on just The Belmont and sure does not deserve the “cowards way” insults.
Thinking back, was it Summer Squall who skipped the Derby and trailered in the day of the Preakness and won?
Nothing new and nothing that should be discouraged. IIRC back when they had that TC bonus, there was talk it encouraged starting those that should not have in the name of greed.
No. He ran second in the Derby. He skipped the Belmont (which Cot Campbell says was a hard decision because all they had to do was finish ahead of Unbridled and they’d take the million dollars, even if they lost) because at the time, New York didn’t allow race day Lasix and they decided it just was not fair to Summer Squall to ask him to run and potentially bleed just to get the money. So Unbridled walked away with the Challenge money (no one else could get enough points) just by showing up.
I wonder if it would by increasing the number of ‘repeaters’ not scare off horses with legitimate resumes, like Tonalist, Social Inclusion, etc. who showed up for the Preakness and Belmont this year, but might DIScourage dumb stunts like Ria Antonia and Matuzsak–if you know you weren’t good enough for the Derby, do you want to go against multiple horses who were who are still in to get the points. I don’t see the point of going in just to say you did it (though I grant Ria Antonia’s owners are crazy enough they might have actually thought she could win.)
[QUOTE=Brooklyncowgirl;7614915]
It wouldn’t do anything to stop connections like those of Tonalist and Commissioner, whose horses, for some reason or other, did not enter the Derby from taking the easy path to the Belmont with a rested horse[/QUOTE]
I’m under the impression that Tonalist didn’t qualify for the derby but he did win the Peter Pan Stakes a week later. I don’t understand why people don’t accept the fact that these are three separate races and that owners and trainers can pick and choose what races to put their horses in to maximize their potential winnings and (hopefully) will be best for their horses.
Racing doesn’t owe the general public a TC winner.
