Cherie DeVaux helps explain trend of Kentucky Derby winners skipping Preakness

Golden Tempo won the Kentucky Derby, but will not run in the Preakness, which is an emerging trend in horse racing's Triple Crown. Michael Reaves / Getty Images Share articleThe Triple Crown is the most prestigious accomplishment in American horse racing. And yet, for the sixth time in the last eight years, no Triple Crown contender will spring forward from the gates when the 2026 Preakness Stakes begins Saturday. This year’s Kentucky Derby winner, Golden Tempo, is not running. It is the latest instance of a notable trend. From 1997-2018, every Derby winner ran in the Preakness. Going further back, from 1960-2018, only three Derby winners did not run in the Preakness. Since 2019, however, Kentucky Derby winners have skipped the Preakness more often than not. And one of the instances in which the Derby winner did race in the Preakness came in 2020 when the Triple Crown races were run in a different order and the Preakness was held a month after the Derby. Cherie DeVaux, trainer of Golden Tempo, was the latest to face this decision. The Athletic’s horse racing contributor Teresa Genaro sat down along with DeVaux this week to explain the trend and detail what goes into the decision to attempt or forgo a chance at capturing racing’s most prestigious achievement. Their comments have been lightly edited for clarity. The most common explanation seems to be that the two weeks between the Derby and the Preakness is too tight. You can find reports about 1959 Derby winner Tomy Lee not running the Preakness due to concerns from his trainer about the timeline so it’s not a modern concern. How detrimental is a two-week turnaround for horses? DeVaux: Two weeks is definitely a quick turnaround, and it takes a special horse to perform again at their peak to be able to do that off of two weeks rest. In my career, I have never started a horse back on that short of rest. So Golden Tempo would have had to be doing much better, basically coming out of the race of his life. Genaro: I don’t know that I’d characterize it as detrimental, rather that horses might not be at their best on what is now considered short rest. Over the last couple of decades, it’s become the practice to race horses once a month, roughly. Last year, Sovereignty’s connections decided that they didn’t want to test him again so quickly so that the horse would be in better shape for other races later in the year. For the trainers of the horses that ran in the Derby and didn’t win, there’s not a lot of incentive to come back in two weeks. That said, Ocelli, Robusta and Incredibolt all ran in the Derby and are going to run this Saturday, too. With the exception of 2020, the Triple Crown schedule hasn’t changed for several decades, so is it something about the horses that has changed in the last several years? Are they bred any differently? DeVaux: The calendar has always been this way, and I am appreciative of the historic significance of winning the Triple Crown. It is truly the test of champions. Now, every horse is going to be different, and how they are approached is different. Genaro: Conventional wisdom says that U.S. dirt horses are now bred for speed rather than stamina. If you look at the first winner of the Triple Crown (before it was even called that), Sir Barton won the Derby and the Preakness when they were run four days apart. Triple Crown winners Gallant Fox, Omaha, Assault, Count Fleet and Whirlaway all won the Derby and the Preakness when they were a week apart. That would be unheard of today. Dirt racing in the States rewards speed, and the prospect of speed brings big prices at auctions. Races in general in this country are also run at shorter distances than they used to be, so it’s reasonable to think that breeding has changed to accommodate that. What about health oversight? Has there been a shift in how regulatory veterinarians are looking at the horses? Has that affected how and when trainers run horses? DeVaux: We definitely have a lot more oversight now, and things that could [have gotten] a horse who came out of a race a little sore could have been done in the past within the rules, now we don’t have that. We are not allowed to do that. The oversight is definitely more strenuous and I’m not faulting anyone for their decisions. However, it is definitely much harder now to help a horse that might need some in that short amount of time to run. Oversight with the veterinarians has gotten quite strict. The pendulum was all the way one way, and we’ve swung the complete opposite to where it can be frustrating to trainers with the decisions that the regulatory vets are making. With that being said, there’s a lot more leniency that we can have within that conversation prior to race day and try to come up with a plan on diagnostics, perhaps on making the regulatory vets feel more comfortable with the horse that is not 100 percent presenting normal. There are many instances of horses that have deviated from that but are sound. I can confidently say that there are horses that were very good horses and great horses in the past that would not be able to run in the current regulatory climate that we have now. Genaro: In 2022, state-led oversight of racehorse was moved to the federal government, when the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority was established. At the recent Keeneland meet, veterinarian scratches before races were unusually high, so it seems likely that regulators and vets are proceeding with more caution. I don’t think, though, that HISA is a major factor in the Derby-Preakness pipeline. Breeding and stud fees come up a lot, too. Derby-winning horses can earn millions in breeding. This isn’t a new concept, though. Has the money changed enough to shift the thought process away from the Triple Crown being the most important thing? DeVaux: In our decision making, breeding and stud fees and losing that if the horse didn’t perform well was not part of our discussion. With that being said, this is my first Derby horse, and the conversation shifted to, do we want to focus on the Triple Crown series, or do we want to focus on the horse’s career for the entire year? That is why we decided to skip the Preakness and instead go to the Belmont, knowing that if you do compete in three legs of the Triple Crown, it will make the horse tired for the rest of the foreseeable future. Genaro: A Triple Crown winner would almost certainly be more valuable than a Kentucky Derby winner. Horses that win only the Derby and not the other legs aren’t going to bring nearly the stud fees that a Triple Crown winner would. Speaking of money, there is no explicit bonus for winning the Triple Crown anymore. There was from 1987-2005 (ironically when no horse actually won the Triple Crown). Is there simply not enough benefit to winning the Triple Crown, especially since two horses won it in a four-year span after a 37-year gap? DeVaux: The bonus of the Triple Crown, or the lack of bonus, is not something that we factored into our conversations about running in the Preakness. We really wanted to look at the horse as a whole and do what is best for him for the rest of the year. Money or prestige was not part of any decision-making. Genaro: The Triple Crown is still what drives interest in horse racing. You can see by the public reactions last year and this that fans and the casual viewer want to see a Triple Crown winner, even though there have been two in recent memory. There were three Triple Crown winners in the 1930s and 1970s, and four in the 1940s. The frequency of those winners didn’t diminish the glory and significance of the achievement. Is this year’s Triple Crown too much of an outlier to make it worth going for? The Preakness will have a crowd of 4,800 at Laurel Park and the Belmont will be at Saratoga while both Pimlico and Belmont undergo construction. The Belmont is at a shorter length (1 1/4 miles instead of 1 1/2 miles) while it has been held at Saratoga from 2024-2026. Could the asterisk of it all have factored in to the decision to hold out Golden Tempo (and Sovereignty last year)? DeVaux: This year’s Triple Crown is a difficult one. The asterisk, again, not a factor in our conversation. But I do think that having the Preakness at Laurel is definitely anti-climatic. It’s so historic at Pimlico, and although you have the Preakness, it just doesn’t feel like it would be the same. I’m not going to be there, so it’s hard for me to say, but I look forward to when it does go back to Pimlico. I wouldn’t say that every horse that I train, God willing, I make it to the Derby again and we’re in the position to win and make that decision, it’s just as I approach all of my training, we take it horse by horse and how they respond to training. Golden Tempo is a horse that’s done a lot. He has done a lot of improving, and we wanted to give him time to catch up from his effort in the Derby. Genaro: The asterisk may have something to do with it, though I think that’s silly: only the last five winners of the Triple Crown have won it as it’s currently configured. More likely, the shorter distance of the Belmont is going to make it a more viable option than a 12-furlong Belmont, which many fewer trainers would find appealing and for which many fewer horses are suited. Spot the pattern. Connect the terms Find the hidden link between sports terms