Why three motors?

I have never listened to any of these 3-motor tables, but the configuration shown, where the belt contacts the platter on only one side of the "triangle" would seem to be a worst-case set-up for "belt creep", as first described (to me) by Mark Kelly on Vinyl Asylum. In fact, to minimize belt creep, the belt should contact the platter over as much of its circumference as possible, e.g., the pulley of a single motor should be snug up as close as possible to the edge of the platter. Or you can use a capstan-like extra pulley to keep the belt in contact with the platter a la the Artemis turntable. (I think that's the one with the capstan. Could be wrong.) Other solutions or ways to at least ameliorate belt creep have been proposed but are not commercially available. But 3 motors makes no sense to me.

I am completely ignorant of the engineering principles that govern "poise, serenity, and composure". In particular, I am weak on the subject of serenity.

Seriously, the tables in question are probably superb sounding. I mean to cast no aspersions. Here we are talking about the why of it.

As I understand it, you are better off with the motor pulley as close as possible to the platter, so the belt contacts as much as possible of the circumference of the platter, to minimize the phenomenon of "belt creep". I don't know why these and many other very expensive high end turntables place the motor at such a great distance from the platter, unless it is to minimize the transmission of motor vibration to the platter via the belt. It's yet another Catch-22.