The city of Louisville has gotten into the act by stretching out the Derby Festival it started in 1935 into a three-week extravaganza that features everything from fireworks and steamboat races to a marathon and a wine festival.

Despite the seemingly endless appetite of the marketplace for all things Derby, the underpinnings of the historic race are not entirely solid. Because the race depends on other tracks around the country to offer opportunities for horses to earn their way to Louisville, it is only as healthy as the overall horse racing industry. And most analysts see horse racing as in decline, noting that it attracts a declining share of U.S. gambling dollars amid increased competition from lotteries, casino gambling and Internet wagering.

The Derby also is facing a challenge to its historic continuity from within the sport. Numerous tracks around the country have installed artificial racing surfaces in the last several years in an effort to lessen the number of serious injuries to racehorses. While preliminary data suggest that they have had the desired effect, they also have created a situation where several of the contenders in this year’s Derby have never raced on real dirt, as they must on Saturday.

That has drawn loud complaints from horseplayers, who say that the artificial surfaces produce inconsistent times and results that defy prediction, and make it impossible to predict how a horse will run on the dirt. And some are forecasting that betting will decline as horse gamblers vote with their wallets.

Churchill Downs has so far indicated it has no intention of replacing its storied dirt track – where War Admiral, Seattle Slew, Secretariat and many other equine greats raced – with an artificial surface. But if the artificial surfaces are proved safer, can tradition withstand the sort of public outcry that followed  Barbaro’s ultimately fatal injury in the 2006 Preakness Stakes?

Sexton said that the company is continuing to monitor the performance of the synthetic surfaces, but at this point sees no reason to switch.

“We’re not opposed to change,” he said,” … but so far the injury rates we’ve seen from synthetic surfaces are not better than our own.”

While most racing purists grudgingly accept the increasingly corporate culture of the Derby, the basic structure of the race is considered sacrosanct.  Consider how baseball fans would react if Major League Baseball suddenly decided to switch to aluminum bats.

But neither is it clear whether the Derby can continue to be run on the dirt if more tracks switch to synthetic  surfaces. If horseplayers  can’t figure out how a horse is likely to run in a given race, they are certain to lose interest. And as much as television broadcasts emphasize the pageantry and history of the Derby, gambling is the engine that drives the bus.

Sexton said that if, as additional information comes in, it becomes apparent that synthetic surfaces are reducing injuries, management would have to consider switching.

“We’re all about safety,” he said. 

That possibility worries many who make their living racing horses.  Such an important change could affect  the Derby’s unique spot in the American sporting landscape and undermine an event that is critical for a sport that has problems attracting new fans.

“There’s nothing like this anywhere in the world,” said Eoin Harty, an Irish-born trainer who has his first Derby starter this year.

MORE FROM KENTUCKY DERBY

Favored Big Brown wins tragic Kentucky Derby

Favored Big Brown wins tragic Kentucky Derby Celizic: Don't euthanize horse racing just yet Eight Belles' death sparks reaction by readers 2008 Kentucky Derby final chart Brunker: This is not your granddad’s Kentucky Derby From Castro's jails to the Derby owners’ box Jockey comes clean on horse racing’s dark side Special feature: The best traditions in sports Kentucky Derby winners through the years   Add Kentucky Derby headlines to your news reader: