From the Trackside Bar: Profit Over Tradition the Factor in Preakness Decision

If I am at the races, you will typically find me near a trackside bar. These are views on the real-world industry from a fan and handicapper. Thank you for reading and please discuss in our various channels.

Early last week, Churchill Downs, Inc and the New York Racing Association jointly announced plans for a new six race series with races from May to September to crown a three old champion. One of the key changes in this announcement is that the Preakness Stakes would not be part of this championship series. Shockwaves rolled through the horse racing community especially in the Mid-Atlantic region where the middle jewel of horse racing’s Triple Crown is held every year in Mid-May. A move upsetting close to 150 years of tradition and throwing the sport into the unknown an at what potential gain.

At times, this is a sport where its various stakeholders seem resistant to evolution and change. Now there is a proposal on the table that might evolve horse racing right out of it’s most popular championship. The Triple Crown is easily the most recognizable brand to the extremely casual and most knowledgeable fans alike. A championship that draws the highest television ratings and most interest in the lead-up to the first Saturday in May, and is a catalyst to drawing new fans to the ever-shrinking sport. This is a formula that is not hard to understand; that people are drawn to tradition and spectacle over the day-to-day grind, which only the most dedicated fans and gamblers will appreciate and continue to patronize.

Sometimes tradition is worth keeping in order to retain the status quo, no matter how unexciting the status quo seemed on paper.  However, one can argue the Triple Crown is an entity that outperforms the norm – with the television ratings being the primary indicator of it’s popularity. The Triple Crown draws substantially more interest than some of the biggest races in the summer and fall, which the later season events shape up as arguably bigger and more impactful in the sphere of well-studied fans and bettors. I have always felt the Triple Crown drew more attention from the broader audience while the Breeders Cup should be seen as the marquee event for the industry and it’s loyal fanbase. To utilize an analogy, the Triple Crown is the New Years Eve party of horse racing. Also, the Breeders Cup will never be a draw to the causal sports fan given it’s unfortunate spot on the calendar right in the high leverage portion of the college football season.

It had been argued a minor tweak to the calendar seemed like the necessary move to keep up with times in order to give horses more rest during races. The increasing lack of attempts at running both the Derby and the Preakness by trainers was quite evident. However, CDI and NYRA turned a needed minor tweak into a controversial shift and possible detonation of the sport’s most historic tradition. The reasons are unclear as to why, but one can read in between the lines the past few weeks to see the negotiations over the Preakness and arrive at a conclusion that this was a response to CDI losing out on a profitable venture by failing to obtain the intellectual property of the Preakness,

Dropping a proverbial nuclear bomb on an over 150 year old sporting event would not seem like a tangible idea under any circumstances. Events like The Masters, the Indianapolis 500, and the Boston Marathon come to mind as events in non-major sports immersed in so much tradition, they transcend the usual popularity of their respective discipline. The Preakness is older than all of those pillars of American sport, and is attached to the state where some of the first horse races were held in the history of the country. To take away one of the classic horse races from Maryland would be comparable to taking away the British Open from Great Britain – a non-starter, and possibly criminal action, in the eyes of any reasonable golf fan. While it’s not the event that generates the most buzz and attention, it is there as a celebration of the past honoring the land where documented competition in the sport was first held. Not much difference between that and the Maryland and Preakness relationship to horse racing in the US.

This all seems to be the direction sports are heading. The corporate interests have taken over and now value profit over anything that may seem sacred in the realm of the sport in which they are involved. This move certainly looks more bottom-line driven in the short term than any reasonable long-term growth strategy. Simply cutting out a key event in one of your sport’s greatest traditions that has stood the test of time looks more like a money grab than it does a thoughtful change to a series of racing events.  They will tell you this is a step in the right direction and progress was needed. I would argue it accomplishes exactly the opposite of what it sets out to achieve, and I am not alone.