ESPN Horse Racing

After watching the Belmont Stakes reward another victor by attrition more than talent, it's time to face reality and fix the Triple Crown.

I know change and thoroughbred racing go together like Lane Kiffin and rules compliance. And I know we're talking about the most tradition-laden aspect of the most tradition-laden sport in existence. I know the Kentucky Derby, Preakness and Belmont all have been around since Ulysses S. Grant was president. (The Belmont actually predates the Grant presidency, going all the way back to 1867. If you want to win a bar bet, Ruthless won the first running.)

I also know a broken race series when I see one. And the Triple Crown is broken.

We have to accept the reality that modern 3-year-old horses, trained for speed and built for brief windows of brilliance, cannot withstand the rigors of three long races in five weeks at an early stage of their development. Forget finding a horse who can win all three legs -- that hasn't been done since 1978. It's hard enough finding horses who can even start all three legs.

This year there were two: Flying Private, unplaced in all three races, and Kentucky Derby winner/Preakness runner-up Mine That Bird. Last year there was one: Big Brown, who won the first two legs before bombing in the Belmont. In 2007 there were two: Preakness winner Curlin and Hard Spun. In 2006 there were none.

The last time there were more than two horses to contest all three legs was 2002.

There always has been a gradual winnowing of the Triple Crown contestants from the Derby on the first Saturday in May to the Belmont in early June. But not usually this much.

Ten years ago, four horses contested all three races. Twenty years ago there were three. And 30 years ago, when you'd think Spectacular Bid would have scared off all comers, four horses went the distance.

Today, the best way to win the Belmont is to avoid either the Derby or the Preakness, or both. Seven of the last eight Belmonts have been won by a horse that skipped at least one leg of the Crown.

This year's winner, Summer Bird, sat out the Preakness and arrived at the 1½-mile marathon Belmont more rested than Mine That Bird, the Derby champ and Preakness runner-up. And there was no Rachel Alexandra to contend with; the brilliant filly that won the Preakness was not physically ready to run again three weeks later.

If you're Summer Bird's owners and trainer, it's smart to skip a race along the way to New York, thereby catching the more accomplished competition when it is more fatigued. It's just not very sporting -- but that's what we've been reduced to in recent years.

There are plenty of others who see a flawed Triple Crown setup. Len Friedman and Len Ragozin, authors of the influential Ragozin Sheets, had a column in The New York Times Sunday also calling for change. An excerpt:

"In our view, thoroughbred racing's Triple Crown is a tradition that was fine 50 years ago when, as horse people say with rare irony, horses ran on hay and oats. It is a dangerous grind in this era of chemically high-tech, high-powered training. ...

"With the heavy weight of evidence in our 50-year data base of thoroughbred performance to back us up we want to state the blunt truth: The Triple Crown is good for neither the horses nor the sport of racing.

"Our mathematically generated historical records of thoroughbred performance show that horses that run extremely well during the Triple Crown almost never get back to their peak ability again. ...

"The underlying reason is that thoroughbreds put out bigger efforts these days than their muscles, ligaments, suspension systems and bones can easily sustain. Their physical structure is tested to the utmost to maintain the speed they can now achieve with modern training methods."

Friedman and Ragozin sound like they'd prefer pitching the Triple Crown altogether. I don't think that's necessary. A better idea would be to space out the three races across two months' time.

Keep the Kentucky Derby on the first Saturday in May. Move the Preakness to the first Saturday in June. Then hold the Belmont on the Fourth of July. It's not a new idea -- people have been bandying it about for a few years -- but it's an idea whose time has come.

Not only would the sport have a better chance of keeping its star animals fresh enough to contest all three legs, but it would also have a longer run in the American sporting consciousness. Right now, the Fourth of July generally belongs to nondescript midseason baseball and hot dog-eating contests. Can you imagine the buzz of a horse trying to win the Triple Crown on a midsummer national holiday, with no NBA Finals or Stanley Cup to compete with for headlines and airtime?

At this juncture, anything that enhances the racing careers of the best horses should be considered. If you saw the ratings for the Derby and the Preakness, you know that America still has a taste for engaging racing. But it's engaging only if the best horses are in the biggest races.

Pat Forde is a senior writer for ESPN.com. He can be reached at ESPN4D@aol.com.