First lets appease the party poopers: Yes, I know this will never ever happen as the odds are mind numbingly astronomical against it. :rolleyes:
Anyway, what happens if all 3 races of the Triple Crown (Kentucky Derby, Preakness, Belmont Stakes) result in a dead heat between the same 2 horses?
Would both horses be considered Triple Crown winners? Or would both horse decidedly NOT be considered Triple Crown winners?
Pretty sure they are not going to call the three biggest events in horse racing a tie, no matter what. It may be a photo-finish with controversy, but they are going to pick a winner.
And there is likely to be a big money challenge race between the two horses to [del]line the pockets of the owners and sponsors[/del] settle the issue.
If a track declares that a race is a tie, both horses are considered to be winners. The win and place pools will be combined, the track and government will take its cut, and the remainder paid out to the winning ticket holders.
If the same two horses tied for 1st at all three of the Triple Crown races, both horses would be considered Triple Crown winners.
If one of those horses was male and the other female, their bred colts would be like a license to print money.
What are you basing this on? Thoroughbred horse racing in the USA is a strictly regulated event. I can’t imagine a racing steward is going to risk serious legal trouble and declare a winner on a dead heat just to appease owners, gamblers, etc…
It happens more often then I would have thought. And in some fairly big races.
Here’s a list:
Three times in a row, for the horse racing equivalent of the World Heavyweight Title? I just don’t see that happening. One of the three, sure. Two, maybe but unlikely. Three? Not happening.
The OP said it was never going to happen but your first post insinuated that the stewards would pick a winner anyway despite the fact that there is a published photofinish shot of every deadheat. Your scenario is even less likely.
If anything photographs increased the number of dead heats in horse racing; note that very few of those on the list were in the pre-photography age. Prior to photos, judges were reluctant to call a dead heat, especially since the bobbing of the heads would make it hard to judge.
If the photos showed a dead heat, it would be treated as one, no matter what the race. If by some miracle all three triple crown races were dead heats, they would be treated as dead heats. If two horses dead heated in all three, they’d both be declared triple crown winners. There might be some debate if one horse dead heated with more than one other horse, but most likely that horse will be declared a triple crown champion, too.
I don’t know if there’s an “official” Triple Crown; I think it’s something that the horse racing fans invented. It reminds me of the controversy back in the mid-1980s over whether or not Martina Navratilova “won the Grand Slam” for winning all four major tennis events in a row, but not all in the same year. (Eventually, even though WTA gave her some sort of “grand slam bonus,” the fans said, “No,” and repeated this when Tiger Woods (golf) and Serena Williams (tennis) - and again if Rory McIlroy wins next year’s Masters - did the same thing.)
I say, both would be Triple Crown winners - they’re both winners of all three races, in the same way that Johar is considered a Breeders Cup Turf Classic winner even though he finished in a dead heat with High Chaparral (who won in a different year as well) in 2003, and just as California Chrome would be considered a Triple Crown winner had Tonalist, Commissioner, and Medal Count had all slowed down and the dead heat with Wicked Strong would have been for first instead of fourth.