Stumble for the RosesI have had a long-standing ambivalence to horse racing, but Saturday's Run for the Roses confirmed it: the Kentucky Derby is the nation's most overrated sporting event.
First, this is a sport where the atheletes are not human. I could see how the horse population might be riveted by the Derby, but I would much rather pay attention to the athletic exploits of my own species. Secondly, how big could an event be in which nobody is familiar with any of the participants even a week beforehand? During the week of the Derby, the sports media decides it must do its duty to educate the public about the race. Storylines are manufactured, trainers are spotlighted, and horses with fanciful names are hyped. It's never a good sign when spectators only care because they have been told why they should care 48 hours beforehand.
Thirdly, the stakes of the Kentucky Derby are actually quite low. The Derby winner is only important because if that same horse wins the Preakness, then there is a big tease leading up to the Belmont (for the triple crown "threat" that will inevitably fizzle). For triple crown purposes, it makes no difference which of the twenty horses wins the Derby. Fourthly, the televised event itself has more filler than an American Idol finale. God only knows why NBC began broadcasting the Derby at 2:00, when the race actually started around 3:15. The race was over by 3:18.
Finally, the Derby is overrated because nobody, not even horse racing experts, can make an intelligent guess about the winner. As the old Jerry Seinfeld bit goes, it's hard to evaluate competitors who aren't even aware that they're compteting. The fact that a 50-1 longshot won the Derby is evidence of what folly it is to pay attention every May.
