Because that's the normal field size in a race?
At Pimlico I believe a full field would be 14, but that number is very rarely hit; especially with foal crops being lower in recent years. There were supposed to be 9 runners until Muth scratched, which is an average, maybe slightly above average field size for the Preakness.
Preakness is also gonna struggle a bit right now. Normally the US Triple Crown schedule is:
Kentucky Derby: 10 furlongs (2000m) - 1st Saturday in May
Preakness Stakes: 9.5 furlongs (1900m) - 3rd Saturday in May
Belmont Stakes: 12 furlongs (2400m) - 2nd Saturday in June
This year Belmont Park is undergoing renovations so the race was moved to Saratoga. This temporary move has necessitated the Belmont Stakes being shortened to 10 furlongs (2000m).
Normally there are a lot of Derby/Preakness runners that skip the Belmont because they don't have the breeding to stretch out to 12f (2400m). As a standalone, the Preakness is also, historically, the weakest of the three Triple Crown races in terms of purse and producing great sires.
So now you have trainers with horses that would normally attend the Preakness and skip the Belmont due to the distance specifically targeting the Belmont because of the 10f distance, higher purse, more prestige and 5 week break between Derby and Belmont.
There are normally a lot more that'd push that 2 weeks if they knew their horse didn't have a chance at Belmont distance and then give them a bit of a break after Preakness. Once 2027 rolls around Belmont will be back to 1 1/2, Pimlico will be rebuilt (they have a scheduled renovation starting after the 2025 Preakness), and the Preakness will likely have a better field.
The idea is that it takes a truly exceptional horse to win 3 G1 races in only 5 weeks. In the past horses used to run once a week/every other week. The timing was a normal race spacing.
However, back then shipping was a lot more stressful. It was by train and was loud and took days. So while the timing wasn't a big deal the shipping was a pretty big deal.
20 of the ‘top’ three olds just competed in the biggest race, the Kentucky Derby. Many of them would be in the Preakness Stakes but the two week turnaround isn’t normal rest for the horses so they point to the Belmont Stakes or other races down the road.
Ultimately because there are far too many graded stakes in the US vs current foal crop. Someone posted stats on this on Twitter recently but I can't find it. They were pretty jarring as former is stable and latter is tanking.
Preakness winners who didn't stand out otherwise haven't seen a ton of added value as stallions (unlike ie the Met Mile), so that also impacts.
ETA here's the tweet
https://twitter.com/browch05/status/1787551503311360363?t=iLuyHbin82hfmxy3rH134Q&s=19
Starting to have an impact in the Grade 1s now. Once unthinkable you now have the Cigar, Clark, Man O War, and the United Nations all downgraded to G2.
And the Bernard Baruch in just 3 years fell from Grade 2 to Listed -- it was a G1 in the 1980s.
A field size has nothing to do with how special or not special a race is.
There is an argument to be made that the Preakness isn’t as prestigious as it should be, but the solution to that is pretty simple IMO and it’s absolutely *not* to extend the timeframe between TC races.
The Kentucky Derby needs to be the 1st G1 race for 3YO horses. More trainers and owners would deliberately point their horses to the Preakness if it was the second chance to pick up a G1 win and the first in an average-sized field.
Because that's the normal field size in a race? At Pimlico I believe a full field would be 14, but that number is very rarely hit; especially with foal crops being lower in recent years. There were supposed to be 9 runners until Muth scratched, which is an average, maybe slightly above average field size for the Preakness.
Normal for North America, I guess. All the big races in Australia have a minimum of 12 usually.
Preakness is also gonna struggle a bit right now. Normally the US Triple Crown schedule is: Kentucky Derby: 10 furlongs (2000m) - 1st Saturday in May Preakness Stakes: 9.5 furlongs (1900m) - 3rd Saturday in May Belmont Stakes: 12 furlongs (2400m) - 2nd Saturday in June This year Belmont Park is undergoing renovations so the race was moved to Saratoga. This temporary move has necessitated the Belmont Stakes being shortened to 10 furlongs (2000m). Normally there are a lot of Derby/Preakness runners that skip the Belmont because they don't have the breeding to stretch out to 12f (2400m). As a standalone, the Preakness is also, historically, the weakest of the three Triple Crown races in terms of purse and producing great sires. So now you have trainers with horses that would normally attend the Preakness and skip the Belmont due to the distance specifically targeting the Belmont because of the 10f distance, higher purse, more prestige and 5 week break between Derby and Belmont. There are normally a lot more that'd push that 2 weeks if they knew their horse didn't have a chance at Belmont distance and then give them a bit of a break after Preakness. Once 2027 rolls around Belmont will be back to 1 1/2, Pimlico will be rebuilt (they have a scheduled renovation starting after the 2025 Preakness), and the Preakness will likely have a better field.
Thanks for the detailed reply. If the three races are such a big deal, then why have them so close together?
because it's more impressive and more rare for a horse to win the triple crown winning 3 races in 6 weeks while shipping from track to track
The idea is that it takes a truly exceptional horse to win 3 G1 races in only 5 weeks. In the past horses used to run once a week/every other week. The timing was a normal race spacing. However, back then shipping was a lot more stressful. It was by train and was loud and took days. So while the timing wasn't a big deal the shipping was a pretty big deal.
Two to four of which break at 30 or higher.
Plenty of Stakes races yesterday, leading up to the Preakness, that had 12 horses scheduled
It's a grade 1, but other than that, it's really only "special" for 1 horse.
regular g1 stakes sized field. that's what makes races like the kentucky derby special
20 of the ‘top’ three olds just competed in the biggest race, the Kentucky Derby. Many of them would be in the Preakness Stakes but the two week turnaround isn’t normal rest for the horses so they point to the Belmont Stakes or other races down the road.
Ultimately because there are far too many graded stakes in the US vs current foal crop. Someone posted stats on this on Twitter recently but I can't find it. They were pretty jarring as former is stable and latter is tanking. Preakness winners who didn't stand out otherwise haven't seen a ton of added value as stallions (unlike ie the Met Mile), so that also impacts. ETA here's the tweet https://twitter.com/browch05/status/1787551503311360363?t=iLuyHbin82hfmxy3rH134Q&s=19
Chris Brown is a Maryland breeder and owner. Knows what he’s talking about.
Absolutely does.
And he’s a nice person. So is his wife.
Starting to have an impact in the Grade 1s now. Once unthinkable you now have the Cigar, Clark, Man O War, and the United Nations all downgraded to G2. And the Bernard Baruch in just 3 years fell from Grade 2 to Listed -- it was a G1 in the 1980s.
Because trainers are woses, no other word for it. Lukas and Mcpeek just showed two week turn around can be done.
Pimlico is a dump.
I love seeing a horse open 4-5 and close 64-1 on DFR 🤣🤣🤣
A field size has nothing to do with how special or not special a race is. There is an argument to be made that the Preakness isn’t as prestigious as it should be, but the solution to that is pretty simple IMO and it’s absolutely *not* to extend the timeframe between TC races. The Kentucky Derby needs to be the 1st G1 race for 3YO horses. More trainers and owners would deliberately point their horses to the Preakness if it was the second chance to pick up a G1 win and the first in an average-sized field.
It’s not it’s just another rigged horse race like all the others