Our views
Stick to your guns, Tom Chuckas.
The head of the Maryland Jockey Club is getting second-guessed plenty after Saturday's subpar attendance at the Preakness, with most people blaming his new policy against BYOB alcohol in the infield. Attendance was the lowest in more than 25 years and was down by about a third from last year.
But let's focus for a second on what's really important here. With the bankruptcy of the Preakness' parent company, Magna Entertainment Corp., Marylanders have been fretting for weeks about how to save Baltimore's stake in the second jewel of the Triple Crown. Are we trying to save horse racing, or the chance for a bunch of drunk people to throw beer cans at each other?
Turning the Preakness into a more stately event - and granted, banning outside alcohol was only a small step in that direction - might actually get more people interested in horse racing, and that would be a good thing.
Moreover, even if attendance is down, it's not altogether clear that the smaller crowd was terrible for the race's bottom line. The handle was up this year, and the jockey club had to make some bucks off all that $3.50 beer. If we want to save the Preakness, isn't that the important thing?
Andrew A. Green
I find the rules against BYOB at Preakness ridiculous not because they do too much to discourage the ginormous frat party Pimlico becomes on race day; the rules don't do enough.
While limiting spectators' choices in beverages, people were still encouraged to drink to excess with $1 beer specials in the morning and $3.50 beers throughout the day.
People still fought. Bikini contests, a rock band with lewd hit singles to perform and a video game that relives the glory days of the running of the Port-a-Potties don't scream, "Look at the pretty horsies."
So even with a third fewer people, the debauchery continues.
If officials were serious about toning down the rowdy behavior at Preakness, they should beef up security, offer family-friendly activities and promote racing to younger generations all year round.
Instead, it's pretty clear to me that the Maryland Jockey Club simply wanted to make money by being the only alcohol game in town.
Nancy Johnston
Readers respond
Word! I've never had as enjoyable of a Preakness experience as I did this year. It might make sense to lower the price of infield tix though.
Are they trying to market to 21-year-olds who may come once or twice more? Or to those who aren't screaming bloody murder over having to pay $3.50 for a beer and might enjoy a day at the track for years to come?
Unbelievaboh
What does it say about "the people's race" and the need to save it when 33 percent fewer people decided to "save" it? I don't know if those people were ever there for the horse racing anyway, but even that could be considered a fairly big statement: One-third of your attendance not there for the main event??
Pete
I really enjoyed the Preakness this year without the beer. I think it made for a better time. I think in the long term the crowds will come back. $3.50 is a bargain for a beer. It cost $5-6 in the Grandstand for a beer and around that much at Camden Yards.
Tom S
