Hangin' With Haskin : Big Brown

Out With the Old

Blood-Horse Staff — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 06:53:00 GMT

So ends arguably the most tumultuous, controversial year in the annals of Thoroughbred racing. The sport no doubt is on the brink – of what we don’t quite know yet. But when PETA protests, congressional hearings, synthetic surface studies, steroids, and anti-horse slaughter bills, infiltrate our normally cloistered world and dim our kaleidoscope of vibrant colors you know change is in the air.

Most of the sport’s problems in 2008 were initiated within a five-week span, beginning only seconds after the Kentucky Derby and lasting until the final strides of the Belmont Stakes. Eight Belles’ horrific and freakish demise while pulling up after the Kentucky Derby started the firestorm that led to the unfortunate events that followed. A blink of an eye prior to that tragedy, the racing world was prepared to hoist Big Brown onto its most lofty throne. This was the hero, the unconquerable titan everyone had been waiting for. The Preakness put Big Brown on the threshold of history and made us forget about the PETA protests and its preposterous attacks directed at the sport and Eight Belles’ connections. Big Brown’s brilliant victory at least restored some of the sport’s tarnished image and had everyone now talking Triple Crown. Surely, there was no foe even in the same universe as Big Brown.

Then it all went wrong during the three weeks leading up to and including the Belmont Stakes, beginning with Big Brown’s untimely quarter crack. The media, mainly those outside the sport, went after Big Brown’s connections like sharks to blood. When they were finished digging through every trash heap they could find, they had made Mike Iavarone and Rick Dutrow look like the James gang. To have it all end in such an ignominious manner with the stretch run from hell put an unsavory end to what had started off as a journey to greatness.

Despite the farcical congressional hearings that followed, there were many memorable and passionate moments, with Curlin, Zenyatta, and Peppers Pride all gathering large fan bases across the country. Even though Big Brown returned to win two stakes before his untimely retirement, many fans just couldn’t see past his Belmont calamity and their perceived view of his connections.

Now, here we are about to embark on what promises to be another turbulent year. Racing did make great strides as a result of the events of 2008, and we can only hope it continues to move forward – both from a fan’s and a bettor’s standpoint. The sport has lost the majority of its print journalists, but perhaps we can get many of them back if we can find people who know how to sell and market the product effectively. So, here is one goal: find a way to get Sports Illustrated to actually write a positive article on racing. If we can do that, then perhaps the newspapers will follow.

That certainly isn’t going to happen with more quotes like this from Santa Anita president Ron Charles that appeared in DRF in response to the three fatal injuries in the first five days of the meet on the Pro-Ride surface:

“This track has been very safe for three months,” Charles said, referring to the successful Breeders’ Cup held here in October, “but the last week has been different from what we had. We want it back to the safe track we’ve had. It’s been so well received for three months. The last week has been difficult. It’s so hard to explain.”

Isn’t it about time we CAN explain it (better still not have anything to explain), just so we can inform the rest of the world we know what we’re doing, especially when we wind up re-living the same problems as last year at this time on the Cushion Track? Did we perhaps act too quickly in rushing into synthetic surfaces without knowing as much about their complexities and idiosyncrasies as we should have? I loved watching horses run in safety in the Breeders’ Cup, but there apparently is an instability and quirkiness to some of these surfaces we know little about. This is what the horsemen voted for, so let’s make our first New Year’s wish that the Pro-Ride surface return to the way it was last fall and that the maintenance people discover what went wrong and fix it…for good.

**********

Last week I conducted a poll of who the fans would vote for for Owner of the Year in order to see how that Eclipse category is perceived by the public. There are so many variables to this award, especially this year. Would the fans vote for accomplishment or would they vote from their heart and gut and take a more personal approach? The results were quite revealing:

1—Jess Jackson………………….28 votes
2—Joe Allen……………………....19 votes
3—Jerry and Ann Moss………….15.5 votes
4—IEAH Stables………………....15 votes
5—Rick Porter (Fox Hill)………....4 votes
6—Darley Stable……………….....3.5 votes

Also receiving votes were Zayat Stables, Hal Earnhardt, Roy and Gretchen Jackson, Marylou Whitney, Gary Tanaka, Tommy Kelly and Joe Grant, and Ken and Sarah Ramsey. Even Old Friends’ Michael Blowen, who doesn’t own horses, received a vote. Oddly enough, to demonstrate the fans’ perception of what an Eclipse Award-winning owner should be, Frank Stronach, the leading owner in the country by money won, did not receive a single vote.

Based on their explanations, voters determined that Jess Jackson deserved the award for keeping Curlin in training as a 4-year-old; Joe Allen deserved it for his handling of his homebred sensation Pepper’s Pride; Jerry and Moss for their class and all they’ve done for the sport, not to mention their handling of Zenyatta and Tiago; and Rick Porter mainly for the way he dealt with the Eight Belles tragedy and stormy aftermath. So, four of the top five finishers were based mostly on the owners themselves and their contributions to the sport rather than their actual accomplishments over the course of the year.

Perhaps the most revealing was the fourth-place finish of IEAH Stables, despite owning an amazing eight individual grade I winners who won 11 grade I stakes, including the Kentucky Derby and Preakness. Some acknowledged their great year, the building of a veterinary hospital outside Belmont Park, their charitable donations, and becoming the first owners to institute a no-drug policy, but still they looked elsewhere. Perhaps many couldn’t look past Iavarone’s bad press prior to the Belmont, or IEAH’s overall corporate image, or even their failure to put a leash on their outspoken and controversial trainer, Rick Dutrow. That last point apparently overshadowed the fact that IEAH won their eight grade I stakes with five different trainers – the others being Bill Mott, Bobby Frankel, Bob Holthus, and John Terranova. To reverse a line from the Godfather: It’s personal, Sonny, not business.”

One note about the actual Eclipse voting: The new online format has to change, because it shortchanged IEAH, and could very well cost them any shot at winning the award. The only listing for them on the drop-down part of the ballot is for IEAH Stables and Paul Pompa, meaning that it is strictly a vote for Big Brown’s owners, which many will be reluctant to do based on one horse. This ignores all the other horses IEAH owned with different partners. Not many are going to take it upon themselves to “write in” just IEAH Stables. Unless the NTRA combines IEAH and Pompa and IEAH as a write-in, they will have a split vote. The listing of IEAH and Pompa is based solely on the fact that they are the only ones who made the top 20 list of money-winning owners, and they were at No. 20.

As for Jess Jackson, the vast majority of voters said it was his keeping Curlin in training at 4 that earned him their vote. In today’s racing world, with its fans starving for some semblance of longevity from its heroes, that explanation certainly is acceptable. Those who have been around for a while remember not too long ago when it was unthinkable not to keep a horse in training at 4. But times have changed, due mostly to the obscene offers from breeders and a different class of owner. Gone are the private stables run by sportsmen who bred their own horses and took great pride and pleasure in seeing them race for several years. They have been replaced by mostly businessmen with a profit-first mentality. You can’t criticize someone for wanting to make money, so you just have to accept the new order of things. Jackson’s decision also was magnified by the early retirements of Street Sense, Hard Spun, and Any Given Saturday, and Curlin’s retirement would have totally decimated the 2008 4-year-old crop. Just try to imagine the older horse division without Curlin. In fact, try to imagine what the 2009 older horse division will be like without a star of his magnitude.

Some stated they did not vote for Jackson in the belief that his motives were not done in the nature of sportsmanship, but being in a precarious legal situation surrounding ownership of the horse. No one can get into Jackson’s head, so you either believe that or you don’t. Whatever the real reason, he did keep him in training and plotted an ambitious and uncharted course for Curlin. And when that didn’t work out, he went against his initial instincts and ran him in the Breeders’ Cup Classic on a synthetic surface, something he vowed all year he would not do. To say he did it for the good of the sport and for the fans sounds trite, but what other reason can there be? When Big Brown was injured it was left to Curlin to carry the entire load on his shoulders. Despite the way it turned out, try once again to imagine the Classic without Curlin. It would have been an awfully dark sky over Santa Anita with both those stars missing. And Jackson sent him there a month in advance, giving the Santa Anita fans plenty of opportunities to see the horse, especially when he worked in company between races.

Therefore, Curlin’s impact on the Breeders’ Cup transcended his fourth-place finish, and that was because of Jackson.

As for Joe Allen, it doesn’t seem as if his votes were directed at anything specific he did other than his handling of Peppers Pride over the course of her career and racing her after she had broken the unbeaten record held jointly by Cigar, Citation, and Hallowed Dreams, and Mister Frisky in Puerto Rico and the United States. Allen’s second-place finish appears to be the voters’ way of recognizing the filly’s extraordinary feat, which was accomplished over several years, not just 2008. She is not going to win any Eclipse Awards, nor is her trainer. So why not honor her through her owner? I could be wrong, but that’s just the way I interpreted the large number of votes he received. Again, in this day and age, you can’t find fault with that reasoning.

Jerry and Ann Moss? In the world of owners and breeders they are gods, so no reasons are necessary. To have someone as high-profiled in the outside world as Jerry Moss be as passionate about racing as he and Ann are is a major boost to the sport, and we should just bow in their presence. They are the epitome of the word class. And they hired a trainer and racing manager just as classy. When was the last time you saw a trainer and racing manager so compatible they married each other?

Again, I wish to thank everyone who voted. It made for some fascinating and lively discussion, and showed just where the mindset of the racing fan is these days.

**************

I must for the last time bring up the subject of Big Brown, who was caught in a maelstrom and swept away from the hearts and minds of many of his fans. Only in his two trips to Monmouth Park did he receive the love that had been lavished upon him earlier in the year.

I am not going to tread over the same ground I have in earlier blogs, nor am I going to repeat Big Brown’s extraordinary feats that seem to have been forgotten for the most part. I will say only this:

Having been involved in Thoroughbred racing for 40 years, I can count on my two hands the number of horses that had what the old-timers used to call “The Look of Eagles.” It is something indefinable, but you know it when you see it. It’s the stuff of movies and books…and legend. For whatever it’s worth, Big Brown was one of those rare Thoroughbreds that had the look of eagles. Forget about the Belmont Stakes and the supposedly inferior competition he faced all year (although five horses did come out of the Kentucky Derby to win grade I stakes last year, and the two older horses he defeated on the grass came back to win the grade II San Gabriel Handicap and finish second in the grade I Shadwell Mile).

This is strictly about the horse’s presence and the aura around him. There was true greatness in Big Brown. But unfortunately, his script was never completed, due mostly to bad feet and one inexplicable, nightmarish afternoon in early June. And make of his connections what you wish. That has no bearing on any of this. Who knows how differently the story would have played out had it not been for Eight Belles’ death. For the first time in history, the lustrous glow of the Kentucky Derby spotlight was dimmed by tragedy.

Some of the feats Big Brown accomplished likely will never be duplicated. And it is those feats that should be remembered above all else. This is not meant to convert his detractors or make a case for him as Horse of the Year. Curlin and Zenyatta are both worthy recipients of the honor. The only point I’m trying to make is that you had to be around Big Brown to fully appreciate just how special he was. Only then could you witness for yourself the look of eagles.

Happy New Year to all.

Debunking the Myths

Blood-Horse Staff — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:55:00 GMT

The Europeans whipped our butts in the Breeders’ Cup and are superior to American horses:

Winning 5 of 14 races does not constitute a butt-whipping. Granted, winning five of the 10 races in which they competed was impressive, but still not exactly a butt-whipping. Why shouldn’t the European horses win half their races? Isn’t that was international competition is all about, especially when we leveled the playing field for them? Did anyone really feel good seeing the Euros go 0-for-11 last year? That doesn’t make for good racing.

Let’s take them one at a time. The Europeans should beat us in the Juvenile Turf, at least for now. It may be our track, but it’s still their surface. Our 2-year-old turf horses are still evolving, and you’ll no doubt see better quality horses on the turf now that there is a Breeders’ Cup race for them, which will result in more enticing preps. Right now, they are still second and third-tier horses in the grand scheme of the 2-year-old picture. Remember, we did beat the Euros in the Juvenile Fillies Turf, defeating an Aidan O’Brien-trained filly who was coming off Group I and Group II Stakes. You also have to remember that Juvenile Turf winner Donativum was undefeated since being gelded and in his victory at Newmarket at 33-1, the horse he beat, Crowded House, came back and romped in a Group I stakes the morning of the Juvenile Turf.

As for Goldikova, she may be the best miler in the world, having already beaten Henrythenavigator, and even John Gosden admitted that Raven’s Pass would have had a hard time beating her in the BC Mile. She ran a spectacular race, and defeated last year’s Mile winner Kip Deville, who probably ran a better race this year than he did last year.

The BC Turf was nothing we haven’t seen many times before. The main difference is that this was an extremely weak year in America for mile and a half turf horses. We had a few nice horses, but no depth or consistency. We’ll only have a fighting chance against the Euros in years when we can come up with a brilliant, top-class grass horse like a Manila or an English Channel. At 12 furlongs, they’re simply much better than we are and always have been. If we’re getting sick of the Euros manhandling us year after year, then perhaps the American breeders should stop snubbing their noses at long-distance turf horses as if they were lepers that are going to infect their stallion roster. We exile our turf horses off to far-off stud farms and want no part of their offspring. Care to guess how many of the 14 living BC Turf winners at stud are standing in Kentucky? Two. The rest are in Ireland, England, Japan, South Africa, Illinois, and New York. Going farther back, even the great Manila was shipped off to Turkey. Fraise was sent to Japan. And Prized wound up at a small farm in Virginia. Let’s not forget that several our BC Turf winners, such as Kotashaan, Northern Spur, and Theatrical were bred in Europe. In addition, many of our best-bred young horses are bought by Coolmore and Godolphin, so they become European turf horses by circumstance more than anything else.

Finally, we come to the Pro-Ride races. Is anyone really surprised we were defeated in the Marathon? We basically sent mile and an eighth and mile and a quarter horses and turf horses against Euros who are just getting warmed up at a mile and a half. The winner, Muhannak, was four for seven, with a second and two thirds over a synthetic surface. Again, we have ourselves to blame. Do you think we’re ever going to send a grade I classic horse like Sixties Icon to the Marathon? Most of our Marathon horses this year were the ones who were not good enough to run in the Classic or the Turf. It is hoped that will change. We carded a number of 12-furlong “Win and Your In” races this year, but some of the more successful horses who competed in those races, like Evening Attire and Delosvientos, didn’t show up for the Breeders’ Cup. And by the way, don’t think the Euros aren’t laughing behind our backs for calling a mile and a half a marathon.

As for the Classic, which was the impetus for all the hyperbole, let’s face facts. Raven’s Pass and Henrythenavigator were superstar milers over demanding courses in Europe and both had dirt pedigrees. They were fast, brilliant, and had powerful closing kicks, and were racing over a synthetic surface that played more like turf, with a good bounce and virtually no kickback. But mostly, with the exception of Curlin, our horses simply were too slow this year, if you go by all the speed figures. And many feel Curlin, for whatever reason, was not as dominant and brilliant this year as he was last year when he was running against far superior horses. Combine that with the strange surface, having only one five-furlong work and two slow half-mile breezes in four weeks and then running 10 furlongs over a synthetic track that demands fitness, and a quick early move around horses that did not set him up well for the final quarter mile against the late-kicking Europeans. Although his work pattern did not differ from his previous 10-furlong races, he’d never run over this surface, and most everyone in California and at other tracks that have synthetic surfaces agree you need a fit horse going long distances. Remember, the best finish by an American horse was Tiago, who worked a strong six furlongs and had a good effort over the surface.

Let’s also not forget that French-trained Arcangues, at 133-1, has already won the Classic, Swain should have won the Classic, Giant’s Causeway and Sakhee were beaten in photos by Tiznow, and 38-1 Ibn Bey was second, beaten only one length by Unbridled. Even a 3-year-old French filly (Jolypha) managed to finish third behind A.P. Indy and Pleasant Tap in the Classic. So, let’s not go into panic mode because two brilliant Europeans finished one-two over a synthetic surface in a sub-standard year.

Big Brown should not be considered for Horse of the Year because he beat a bunch of inferior horses this year:

Isn’t there a bit of hypocrisy in that statement, considering the older horses Curlin defeated were just as mediocre? Granted, this was far from a top-class group of 3-year-olds, but if you’re going to completely discount Big Brown’s accomplishments because of that, then how do you account for the fact that two horses Big Brown trounced by 14 and 21 lengths in the Kentucky Derby – Colonel John and Smooth Air – finished 2 1/4 and 2 1/2 lengths, respectively, behind Curlin in the Classic, and only a half-length and three-quarters of a length behind Go Between, winner of the Pacific Classic and second in the Santa Anita Handicap and Hollywood Gold Cup? And they finished ahead of the winners of the Pimlico Special and Hawthorne Gold Cup, as well as a five-time Group I winner in Europe.

While on the subject, 22-1 shot Two Step Salsa, 19-1 My Pal Charlie, and 11-1 Pyro finishing third, fourth, and sixth in the Dirt Mile, ahead of Well Armed, Lewis Michael, and Surf Cat, wasn’t too shabby either..for a bad crop of 3-year-olds. The first two were beaten 1 3/4 lengths for all the money. And let’s also remember that Anak Nakal, who was beaten badly by Big Brown in the Derby, finished a fast-closing second to top older horse Arson Squad in the grade II Meadowlands Cup. So, while this year’s crop of 3-year-olds does not rank anywhere near last year’s crop, they certainly haven’t embarrassed themselves against their elders, and the horses Big Brown defeated went on to finish 1-3 in the Travers, 1-2 in the Jim Dandy, 1-3 in the Ohio Derby, 1-3 in the Swaps Stakes, 1-3 in the Pennsylvania Derby, 1-3 in the Northern Dancer, and first in King's Bishop.

Getting back to Big Brown’s record, can you simply ignore the fact that he earned the highest Thoro-Graph and Ragozin figures ever in the Kentucky Derby, faster than Secretariat, Monarchos, and Spend a Buck? He also ran the fourth fastest final Derby prep of all time, and the three who ran faster all regressed in the Derby, while Big Brown actually moved forward in the Derby.

I’m not saying Big Brown should be Horse of the Year. I’m just saying that perhaps his accomplishments require a second, more objective, look and be put in proper perspective. What he accomplished this past spring off only two career starts and very little training is pretty remarkable. Based on that and all his missed training after the Preakness due to a foot injury, a meltdown prior to the Belmont, a terrible trip early in the race, and getting part of his shoe pulled off at the start, does anyone really believe that race was not a total aberration? And how many Derby and Preakness winners in recent times have won two stakes (in two starts) following the Triple Crown? Did he defeat any worse horses in the Haskell than Point Given did? Have any two-time Classic winners defeated three grade II stakes winners on the turf, and in only his second career start on grass? I know Shakis finished last in the BC Mile, but he was making a big move along the inside when a tiring Thorn Song closed up the rail on him and backed up into him and Alan Garcia had to stop riding him the last eighth of a mile. In his prior start he was a fast-closing second in the grade I Shadwell Turf Mile at Keeneland.

I am only attempting to defend Big Brown because of all the unwarranted animosity directed toward the horse for whatever reason. Now that I’ve done my best to make my case, I can remove my hand out of the hornet’s nest for good.

(See my final comments regarding this at the end of the blog)

Soldier of Fortune needed a pacesetter in the Breeders’ Cup Turf:

Yeah, like the proverbial hole in the head, as it turned out. What 8-5 favorite needs a 66-1 pacesetter to go six furlongs in 1:10 1/5 in a mile and a half race when he’s going to be crawling up his behind most of the way? What was that all about? He’s lucky he didn’t clip his pacesetter’s heels. And when was the last time you saw a European horse take over the lead in a 12-furlong race after a mile and a quarter in 1:58 3/5?

So, what happens? They go out and do it again in the Melbourne Cup, as the two fancied Ballydoyle horses, including second favorite Septimus, spent most of the two miles chasing their own pacesetter, opening up on the rest of the field. By the time they came to the head of the stretch they were spent.

Canada is no place to prep for the Breeders’ Cup:

If you think that, wait until next year. The following horses all raced at Woodbine this summer and fall: Ventura (winner of the Filly & Mare Sprint), Forever Together (winner of the Filly & Mare Turf), Kip Deville (second in the Mile), Fatal Bullet (second in the Sprint), Sealy Hill (second in the Filly & Mare Turf), Laragh (third in the Juvenile Fillies Turf), and Storm Treasure (third in the Turf Sprint).

Other thoughts:

-- Let’s go one step further regarding the 3-year-old crop. How about Fatal Bullet, the only 3-year-old in the Sprint, finishing second to Midnight Lute, while running his six furlongs in 1:07 2/5 in defeat and finishing open lengths ahead of Street Boss, Fabulous Strike, In Summation, and First Defence.

-- Did Godolphin cost themselves the 3-year-old filly Eclipse Award by finishing second with Cocoa Beach over Music Note? There’s no guarantee Music Note would have won the championship over Proud Spell had she finished second in the Ladies Classic instead of third, and she still may get it, but a second to Zenyatta would have looked awfully good on her record to go along with wins in the grade I CCA Oaks, Mother Goose, and Gazelle, and a head defeat (to Proud Spell) in the Alabama, in which she was victimized by a slow pace. It will be interesting to see how the voting goes.

Sheikh Mohammed, who, with Godolphin, Darley, and his wife Princess Haya, won the Classic (with Raven’s Pass), the Juvenile (with Midshipman), the Juvenile Turf (with Donativum), and was second and third in the Ladies Classic and second in the Turf Sprint with Diabolical.

-- Although he finished eighth, how about a round of applause for 9-year-old Better Talk Now, who was making his fifth consecutive start in the Breeders’ Cup Turf. Along the way, he’s picked up a win, a second, and a fourth for earnings of $1,793,000.

Final myth: The few people who keep sparring with each other on these blogs about Curlin and Big Brown, spewing out the same venom ad nauseum, will have all such comments on this particular blog deleted:

Sorry, this is not a myth and will not be debunked. All the nastiness directed at the two horses and most of all at the supporters of each one has been heard countless times, even on blogs that are not about them. I can’t believe it started again on Jason’s interview with Shirreffs. I stepped up on my soapbox one last time to make what I felt were valid points about Big Brown. That will end all comments on him and Curlin by me…and by several other people. My only point is that all three horses warrant at least discussion for Horse of the Year. I am not sure who I’m voting for that this point. The best cases obviously can be made for Curlin and Zenyatta. I just don’t feel Big Brown should be totally ignored after what he accomplished over a seven-month period. So, if I am exacerbating the situation, I apologize to those with level heads and open minds who no longer want to be subjected to the mud-slinging that follows every innocuous comment about the two horses. Anyone is free to comment on the points I made about Big Brown, whether pro or con, but those who indulge in the same tiresome Big Brown--Curlin trench fighting again will not have their comments posted.

Horse of the Year Follies

Blood-Horse Staff — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 15:53:00 GMT

So, will it be Curlin or Zenyatta for Horse of the Year? That is the question everyone – fans, writers, horsemen – either seem to be asking or are adamant about one way or the other. Obviously, a case can be made for either one.

But I have to admit I am flabbergasted that not a single person I’m aware of has even thrown Big Brown into the mix. Now I know he’s not going to be voted Horse of the Year or likely even come close, due to a variety of reasons, many of them fueled by a dislike for the horse’s trainer and/or owner. Others simply feel he beat up on inferior competition all year.

But don’t we at least owe it to the horse and his remarkable accomplishments to place him in the same category as Curlin, who also beat up on inferior competition all year, and Zenyatta, who…nah, I’m not saying anything negative about her. Curlin supporters claim she’s never run against colts, so we’ll just use that one for the sake of fairness.

These are three special horses, and knocking one to enhance another is like chopping Thomas Jefferson’s nose off on Mount Rushmore to make George Washington look better.

I am not going to spew out the same litany of praises for Big Brown that I’ve been doing all year. Most of it falls on deaf ears anyway, and there is no further reason to sound like a defense attorney constantly telling a hostile jury what a fine, upstanding citizen his client is.

We all know that Big Brown’s accomplishments earlier in the year were unlike anything we’ve ever seen. No one has put together performances like the Florida Derby, Kentucky Derby, and Preakness with so little foundation and experience. The bottom line is, he never lost a race he finished, and the fact that he returned after a physically and mentally demanding Triple Crown to win both his starts, in a grade I and on the turf, shows what an extraordinary horse he was, competition aside.

But enough of that, as I can already feel the fumes beginning to build up from the Curlin fans. Everyone has been trying to figure out what happened to Curlin in that last quarter of a mile in the Classic. There are several theories, but we’re never going to know for sure.

Some feel he’s not as good as he was last year. I can’t disagree with that. Some feel he was undertrained for a 10-furlong race over a synthetic surface. I can’t disagree with that either, although I certainly don’t know the horse like Steve Asmussen does; he’s done nothing wrong so far in his training of Curlin. Asmussen, however, admits he doesn’t have a handle on synthetics yet, and the trainers that do all seem to believe you need to have a horse dead-fit to run well over it, and most work their horses at least six furlongs before a distance race. Was Curlin fit enough for a synthetic Classic with only one serious five-furlong work and a couple of slow half-mile breezes in four weeks? Beats me, but it’s at least worth throwing out there. Some feel the six-week trip to Dubai, during which Curlin made his 2008 debut under 132 pounds and then came back four weeks later in the World Cup, had a long-range effect on him. Who knows? Remember, Cigar came back from Dubai and won his first two races and then lost three of his last four.

If Curlin wasn’t the same horse as last year, why wasn’t he? We all know horses are supposed to get better at four. One factor that has not been brought out, and this pertains to Big Brown as well, is that Curlin was taken off steroids this year. Many veterinarians will tell you that has nothing to do with anything. I wouldn’t know; I’m just going by my observations, which are shared by many.

When majority owner Jess Jackson found out Curlin had been using Winstrol regularly last year, he had Asmussen discontinue its use in January in order to prove that the horse was every much a champion without drugs, which in turn would increase his appeal as a stallion. I don’t claim to know much if anything about the effect of steroids on horses. I do find it interesting, however, that Curlin, while still a magnificent horse, wasn’t quite as dominant and brilliant after being taken off Winstrol. The same with Big Brown, who still proved he was a fantastic, gutsy horse after being taken off the drug, but didn’t display the same dominance and brilliance he did when he was using it. Make of that what you wish. I am not giving an opinion, because I have no scientific basis to do so. I’m just stating the facts and what I, and most everyone, witnessed on the racetrack. Yes, Curlin won the Dubai World Cup and Stephen Foster by open lengths, but compare that competition to Street Sense, Hard Spun, Any Given Saturday, and Lawyer Ron. By late summer, he was doing just what he had to to win by narrow margins against the likes of Past the Point and Wanderin Boy.

But none of that has anything to do with who should be Horse of the Year. Conceding the anti-Big Brown movement, as misguided as I believe it is, I won’t waste anyone’s time making a case for him, as I’ve done that ad nauseum over the last several months. Perhaps one day after the dust has been swept away everyone will look back with more objectivity and realize what a special horse this was.

As for Curlin, his Breeders’ Cup Classic should not in any way be held against him. Give Jackson major kudos for going against his and his trainer’s initial gut feeling and doing what was in the best interest of the fans and the sport. Jackson and Asmussen stated emphatically they did not want to make Curlin a guinea pig over a surface no one knew anything about. But the racing world clamored for a Curlin – Big Brown showdown, and Jackson let them have it, even though it went against every principal he believed. The showdown didn’t happen, but imagine the Classic without either one of them. Curlin’s mere presence at Santa Anita made the Breeders’ Cup. When he worked between races it was like an unexpected visit from Elvis. Let’s be honest, if Curlin wasn’t in the Breeders’ Cup, would it have had anywhere near the buzz it did? Would any of the Classic horses have been given a rousing ovation in the paddock before the race, and more important, coming back afterwards in defeat?

Let’s just say hypothetically that Curlin wasn’t quite the same horse as last year for whatever reason. And let’s say he didn’t care for the synthetic surface quite as much as he did the dirt. And let’s just say he came up a bit short in that last quarter mile of the Classic. And let’s just say he was meeting far better competition than he did all year. The fact is he showed up under conditions less than ideal, gave the fans a big thrill with an explosive move on the far turn, and ran his heart out to the wire, while running the 1 1/4 miles in about 1:59 4/5, the fastest 10 furlongs he’s ever run. Two of the horses who beat him were superstars in Europe, and may have been even more formidable at this distance and on this surface.

With everything, Curlin had an unbelievable year. He paved new frontiers by going to Dubai for six weeks, attempted the near-impossible by pointing for the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe, which didn’t quite work out, and ventured into unknown territory by attempting to win America’s richest race over a surface on which he’d never raced. With all that, he still won the Dubai World Cup, Stephen Foster, Woodward Stakes, and Jockey Club Gold Cup, regardless of the competition. Was that insufficient to retain the crown he already wore? Did Zenyatta do enough to dethrone an existing king who did little wrong over an eight-month period?

I have to admit it is too early to state emphatically who I am voting for.

I love Zenyatta. I loved being around her before and after the Breeders’ Cup, as evidenced by the 200-plus photos I took of her arriving at Santa Anita and back at the barn following the Ladies Classic. I believe she is one of the greatest fillies in the history of the sport, because of her dramatic machine-like performances race after race, and because her running style always makes her vulnerable to pace and a freakish front-running effort. I think John Shirreffs, his wife Dottie, and Jerry and Ann Moss are four of the finest people I’ve ever met, and that is not restricted to horse racing. If Zenyatta were to be voted Horse of the Year, despite not having run against the boys, I would have no problem with it.

It’s tough trying to compare these two sensational horses. It’s just, as of now, I am trying to convince myself she did enough to knock Curlin off this throne, having run all her races but one on a synthetic surface in California, while Curlin ran well on fast dirt, slop, grass, and even on the Pro-Ride, while racing in Dubai, New York, Kentucky, and California – arguably the three biggest stages in the world for an American-based horse. Being undefeated certainly will help her cause.

So, that’s where I stand right now, which is in limbo. Whoever is voted Horse of the Year, congratulations, you deserve it. Oh yes, and that goes for Big Brown, too.

Tradition!

Blood-Horse Staff — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 00:32:00 GMT

Scenario: Square Eddie wins the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile. Actually, you can add Street Hero and Midshipman to that scenario. Question: Do you vote for the Juvenile/Breeders’ Futurity winner or the Juvenile/Norfolk winner or the Juvenile/Del Mar Futurity winner – none of whom have ever run on dirt – for the Eclipse Award or do you vote for the Hopeful/Champagne winner, Vineyard Haven, who won both impressively and became only the second horse in 26 years to sweep the two most historic 2-year-old stakes in America?

The answer for each Eclipse voter will be based on the relevance they put on synthetic surfaces, and the result will reveal a great deal regarding the mindset of the voters.

So, will victories over a synthetic surface in the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile and either the Breeders’ Futurity, Norfolk or Del Mar Futurity merit a national championship over dominating scores in the Hopeful and Champagne? The traditionalist with a sense of history likely will vote for Vineyard Haven, which is the way this traditionalist is leaning heavily towards, unless something incredibly monumental happens in the Juvenile to make me change my mind. So, I’m holding off until then. Yes, traditionalists may be regarded by some as old fogeys with old ideas, but in this day and age we need to cling on to some semblance of tradition.

Racing on synthetic surfaces still is in its infantile stages, and until we can understand how it affects the sport in regard to producing true champions and to what degree it affects the breed and form, we should think carefully before we raise it to a plateau so lofty that it determines championships. We don’t even know how form on different synthetic surfaces – Polytrack, Cushion Track, Pro-Ride, and Tapeta – relate to each other.

This in no way is meant to detract from the above-mentioned synthetic horses. I couldn’t be happier for Square Eddie’s connections Paul Reddam and Doug O’Neill, two of the nicest guys in the sport, and would love to see them at Churchill Downs next spring with Square Eddie, who was devastating in the Breeders’ Futurity. But trying to compare Square Eddie and Vineyard Haven is like comparing the proverbial apples and oranges. At this point in time I am unable to do it, so I would have to lean toward Vineyard Haven…again, at this point. But it would take an absolutely monstrous performance in the Juvenile by any of the three to get me to even think about changing my mind. I realize to some this may sound narrow-minded, but no more so than the trainers who refuse to send horses to the Breeders’ Cup because of the synthetic surface. No more so than the trainers who send their horses and afterward blame the surface if their horse runs an uncharacteristically poor race. No more so than the bettors who wager on the Breeders’ Cup as if it’s going to be a normal series of races and then realize that it’s not a normal series of races as they’re ripping up their tickets.

The Breeders’ Cup “dirt” races may very well turn out to be extremely formful and I will reserve judgment until it’s over. But I will approach it with apprehension until then.

Horses like Zenyatta, Colonel John, Well Armed, Tiago, and Student Council among others all have established good form on both dirt and synthetic. But what about a classy grade I-winning mare like Unbridled Belle never picking her feet up in the Spinster Stakes (gr. I), or Hystericalady, a dominating winner on dirt, but 0-for-five on synthetic and having to struggle with Santa Teresita to finish second in the Lady’s Secret? Those are just two of many such cases. Then there is a filly winning the Alcibiades off only two grass starts, and grass fillies dominating the Spinster. Where in the world did Carriage Trail’s performance come from? There no indication in the slightest she was going to do what she did. Who runs 1 1/8 miles in 1:46 3/5, closing the last eighth in :12 flat while drifting across the entire track and finishing closer to the outside rail? Some of these races are just plain weird and do not resemble dirt racing. The Goodwood Stakes field, all within five lengths of each other and spread out across the track in the stretch, looked as if they were coming down the straightaway at Newmarket.

On the opposite end, what about a top-class California graded stakes winner (on dirt) like Arson Squad finishing out of the money in all seven of his races on a synthetic surface and then finally being sent east and winning the Meadowlands Cup by 2 1/2 lengths in his first start back on dirt?

It’s all trial and error right now. While Santa Anita bettors likely have not had many problems deciphering form because all the horses have been racing primarily over synthetic tracks, what is going to happen when horseplayers all over America have to solve the Breeders’ Cup puzzle, with dozens of horses shipping in from the east and Europe with no synthetic experience?

That is why when determining champions this year, just remember Websters’ definition of the word synthetic: “Not real or genuine.”

That’s not my definition. Talk to the people who called the surface synthetic. I’m talking strictly about form here and what is “real and genuine;” not about safety. The latter no doubt is the more important of the two, but studies in that area still are inconclusive, especially considering the fatal breakdown comparison between Saratoga (none on dirt during the races and none reported in the morning) and Del Mar (a total of eight, most of them during the races). Once they prove for certain that synthetic surfaces are safer, then we’ll be happy with those findings and cope the best we can with all its foibles.

If Curlin or Big Brown win the Classic in their synthetic track debut, it would enhance or at least confirm their greatness, whether due to their talent or versatility. If neither perform well and are beaten by a synthetic specialist like Go Between, is that going to prove anything?

That is why this year’s Breeders’ Cup should be fascinating, challenging, bewildering, and hopefully entertaining. But should it really be about deciding championships? That is a question each of us will have to answer.

Where Should Big Brown Run next?

Blood-Horse Staff — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 16:35:00 GMT

Just when you think you’ve said all there is to say about Big Brown and/or Curlin, another revelation pops into your head, and the way this volatile soap opera is going, God help you when it does.

This, however, has nothing at all to do with Curlin. It is about the three choices for Big Brown’s prep for the Breeders’ Cup Classic – an undetermined grass race at Belmont Park, the Goodwood Stakes at Santa Anita, or the Clement Hirsch Turf Championship at Santa Anita the same day.

Any one of these races could prove to be a good springboard to the Classic, but here is the way I break them down, looking at them from a strategic and historical viewpoint.

As for the grass race at Belmont: eh. I have no idea what that is, who would run in it, how far it would be, when it would be, and how much good it would do for Big Brown as a Classic prep. As a whole, Eastern-based horses have not fared well going to California for the Breeders’ Cup, especially in the Classic, where Slew o’Gold, Alysheba, Gulch, Cryptoclearance, Afleet, Track Barron, Devil His Due, Colonial Affair, Miner’s Mark, Funny Cide, Evening Attire, Perfect Drift, and Volponi were defeated, with 11 of those 13 horses finishing out of the money.

Again, I have no idea who would show up for the race, but you have to ask yourself if a race like that would adequately prepare Big Brown for the Classic. Frankly, I don’t know. And why subject Big Brown to the Belmont holding barn, where he had such a bad experience before the Belmont?

Next, we come to the Goodwood, which has proven to be an excellent prep for the Classic, but if Big Brown runs in that race then he will go into the Classic without a 1 1/4-mile race after the Triple Crown. So what, you ask? Well, maybe it means absolutely nothing, but let’s look at the 3-year-olds who have won the Classic.

Curlin was coming off the 1 1/4-mile Jockey Club Gold Cup against the leading older horse in the country, Lawyer Ron.

Tiznow won the 1 1/4-mile Super Derby in track record time of 1:59 4/5 in September.

Cat Thief ran in the Haskell, the 1 1/4-mile Travers, and then ran against older horses in the Kentucky Cup Classic.

Concern ran in the Travers, the Molson Million, and the Super Derby, giving him two 1 1/4-mile preps.

A.P. Indy ran in the Jockey Club Gold Cup.

Unbridled ran in the 1 1/4-mile Secretariat and Super Derby.

Sunday Silence romped in the Super Derby.

Only Proud Truth in 1985 did not have a 1 1/4-mile prep, but he won the Discovery Handicap seven days before the Classic, and in that year’s Classic there were only eight horses, four of whom who were 3-year-olds.

Now, we come to the Clement Hirsch, run the same day as the Goodwood. Before that race is discussed, let’s go back to the very first Breeders’ Cup in 1984. Could it be that two of the winners that day got it right, and no one since has followed?

In the first Breeders’ Cup race ever run, Chief’s Crown, who had already established himself as the best 2-year-old in the East, did something unusual. After winning the Saratoga Special, Hopeful, and Cowdin, he passed up the Champagne to go to California and prep for the Juvenile in the Norfolk Stakes in order to get a race over the track and acclimate himself to Southern California. Well, Chief’s Crown won the Norfolk and then the Juvenile, earning himself an Eclipse Award. No Eastern-based 2-year-old has since followed that strategy, with major stakes horses Dehere, Cuvee, Chapel Royal, Alysheba, Bet Twice, Gulch, Demon’s Begone, and Polish Navy all going down to defeat in the Juvenile at California tracks. Yes, Favorite Trick won the Juvenile without a prep in California, but he was so far superior to anyone else and wound being voted Horse of the Year that year. The same goes for Skip Away in the Classic. But those are the exceptions to the rule.

Now, let’s go to the final race on that first Breeders’ Cup card, the Classic. Wild Again, a 30-1 shot despite winning of the Meadowlands Cup, made his final prep for the Classic in a one-mile allowance race on the grass at Bay Meadows 12 days before the Breeders’ Cup. After finishing third, beaten two noses at 1-2, he scored one of the gamest victories in the history of the Classic. Once again, no Eastern-based horse has followed that strategy, and you can see the results from the list of beaten horses mentioned earlier.

So, let’s see what all this adds up to: a 1 1/4-mile race, which would appear to be essential from the list of previous 3-year-old classic winners, a grass prep (which is what Big Brown’s connections are looking for), and a race at the Breeders’ Cup site in order to acclimatize. That would seem to add up to the Clement Hirsch.

This is all based solely on history and fitting together all the pieces of the puzzle. I have no idea what the right prep is for Big Brown. But based on what his connections are looking for, and what has transpired in past Breeders’ Cups, everything seems to point to the Clement Hirsch as the most logical.

What if he gets beat, you might ask? After all, he’ll be facing some talented, veteran older turf horses. Well, so what if he gets beat if the ultimate goal is winning the Classic? No one held it against Curlin getting beat on grass by older horses, and no one is going to hold it against Big Brown, as long as he runs a competitive race. The important thing is that he’ll get the bottom he needs, going 1 1/4 miles; he’ll get his race over the turf they’re looking for; and he’ll acclimate himself to Southern California.

Some may say the Santa Anita turf course could be pretty hard. Well, he has to run somewhere and would running over soft turf against not-yet-known competition prepare him for whatever kind of track he’ll get in the Classic? And if New York doesn’t get any rain, the Belmont turf course can be pretty hard in its own right.

On final thought regarding having a 1 1/4-race after the Triple Crown: racing against 3-year-olds in early May, horses can rely on sheer talent more than stamina. But by late October when they’re facing grade I older horses who are already well-seasoned at 10 furlongs, that stamina is going to come more into play. Perhaps that is why so many 3-year-old Breeders’ Cup Classic winners had a 1 1/4-mile race under their belt in August, September, or October. Perhaps they needed that little extra bottom to excel in the Classic.

So, there you have it. I am not in any way endorsing the Clement Hirsch as the right race for Big Brown. I am merely stating the facts, based on history. And it is history, and a little logic, that seems to be pointing to the Hirsch.

Mixed Feelings

Blood-Horse Staff — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 09:00:00 GMT

I don’t know how I feel anymore. I hate to become too wrapped up in all this Curlin vs. Big Brown banter and then have it all become moot when they go their separate ways. If it turns out to be nothing but idle chatter, then what good did it do other than provide us with amusement or indignation, depending on how you reacted to it?

There was Rick Dutrow’s harsh challenge to Curlin’s connections, calling them out as would a professional boxer goading an opponent by taking potshots at him and his family. There was Jess Jackson’s stern, but tactful response, scolding the instigator as a teacher would a disruptive student.

Should Curlin and Big Brown face each other for Horse of the Year honors? Certainly. Now that it's not going to happen in the Woodward, should they do it in the Breeders’ Cup Classic? Well, that’s where the ambivalence comes in.

Part of me says go for it and hope they both run to the best of their ability over the synthetic surface, while the other part of me, and the more dominant one, says championships, at least at this time, should not be decided on a synthetic surface, especially one that won’t even be tested until five weeks before the Breeders’ Cup. We have no idea what they’ll be running on. I keep picturing Curlin and Big Brown getting beat by a synthetic surface specialist who couldn’t warm them up on a dirt track and going away feeling, what a waste of time that was. And then it will hit me: “Geez, we have to go through this again next year.”

Even if Curlin wins and Big Brown finishes second, or vice versa, can you honestly say it was a true test, or did the loser simply not handle the track as well he would have had the race been on dirt? I can’t help but think of Street Sense, who ran well enough on Polytrack to be competitive, but was not anywhere near as good as he was on dirt. Getting beat a nose in the Blue Grass Stakes and finishing a good third in the Breeders’ Futurity would suggest that he handled the Polytrack fine. But compare it to his subsequent performances in the Kentucky Derby and Breeders’ Cup Juvenile and you can clearly see he was a totally different horse on dirt than he was on synthetic.

Yes, you can always say a sloppy track compromises the chances of some horses. And this is true. But they don’t set off to run in the slop. Last year’s track at Monmouth was an act of nature on a nature-made surface and it was just unfortunate it had to come in such an important and eagerly anticipated race. Artificial surfaces are not an act of nature; they are just that – artificial, and you would hate to have it produce an artificial result with so much at stake.

I also have mixed feelings about Jess Jackson’s inclination to skip the Classic. Again, you’d love to see Curlin compete on racing’s biggest stage, but I can understand his misgivings about using Curlin as an “experiment,” not even knowing what kind of surface he’ll be running on. What if the new track turns out to be a disaster, just like the previous surface at Santa Anita, or just like the previous surface at Del Mar? Even if it’s not, why run him on an uneven playing field against seasoned synthetic track horses?

Jackson has done everything right in his attempt to show off Curlin to the world, and he must be applauded for his ambitious quest to send the champ to France for the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe. It is that kind of pioneer spirit we need nowadays to put racing in the national and international spotlight following the Triple Crown. He could, of course, prep Curlin on a synthetic track in the Goodwood, but if he doesn’t take to it then you’ve wasted a race. Maybe that would inspire him to go for the BC Turf, but that would mean running the on dirt, turf, dirt, synthetic, and back to turf. Not only could that confuse the horse, it’s got me totally confused just thinking about it.

As for Dutrow and Big Brown, there’s nothing wrong with a few friendly jabs being thrown between two potential combatants, but with many owners inclined to think of their horses as their “children,” one can understand Jackson taking offense to the personal and derogatory nature of Dutrow’s comments.

“What you have is an attempt to show the animals at their very best,” Jackson said. “And to run down another guy’s horse, it may make for interesting reading for (the press), but I don’t think it’s the right thing to do; it demeans the industry. Yes, I’d love to meet him. It would be great for the industry and for the fans. They’re both great horses.”

Well said by a classy guy. But let’s face it, Dutrow, when he feels strongly about something, speaks from the gut, and when he says “Big Brown is way better than Curlin,” and “Shame on them for not running in the Classic,” he’s saying what he feels -- in this case based on his passion for Big Brown -- and doesn’t care about any repercussions. He’s too focused on what he’s feeling to think about that. Those feelings head straight for the mouth without making the usual stop upstairs where most people screen and then modify them. If people dislike Dutrow, so be it. His philosophy is, he can’t control how people feel about him. That is Rick Dutrow – take him or leave him. This year, many people have left him. Even his owners almost left him. But like he said when asked if this year has felt like a roller coaster ride: “My whole life has felt like a roller coaster ride.”

The guy is a great horseman, regardless of all his baggage, and while his comments provide fodder for the press, if you’re on the other end of them it’s best to just smile, shake your head, and not take him too seriously, just as racing manager Nobutaka Tada did when Dutrow threw several darts at Casino Drive. Sometimes, silence is much louder than rebuttal.

I also commend the decision by IEAH Stables and Dutrow to run in the Classic and wanting to meet Curlin, but I also can’t help but wonder if they’re going to regret it should Big Brown not perform up to his usual standards on the synthetic surface. Honestly, I just don’t know what to think anymore.

There are two possible ways out of this mess. How about if we can get IEAH Stable and Jess Jackson to agree – a handshake will do – to one of two things?

First, they agree to run in the Classic, and if both horses come out of the race in good shape (no phony maladies, please), the winning owner agrees to give the loser, if he so desires, a rematch in the Clark Handicap at Churchill Downs four weeks later – 1 1/8 miles on the dirt and over a track on which both horses have excelled.

If Jackson remains adamant about not running in the Classic, the other alternative would be to simply agree to meet in the Clark (over a fast track or by mutual agreement over a sloppy track – the horses’ safety must take priority) and the heck with the Classic. If Big Brown’s people want to run for the $5 million, that is their prerogative. But let them shake hands with Jackson beforehand and agree to come back in the Clark. In short, the Clark will be become the championship race, regardless of what happens in the Classic. This way, the horses’ connections are free to prep for the race anywhere they so desire. Just imagine the atmosphere at Churchill Downs having these two magnificent horses square off over what it is hoped will be a fast track.

I realize this will seem too contrived and unrealistic to many, but, heck, it’s a blog, where one can spew forth whatever comes to ones mind, right? In reality, Big Brown is scheduled to have only one or two more races, culminating with the BC Classic. In his connections’ minds, if Big Brown should win the Classic, and they fully expect him to, then what better way to end his career. And they can always claim Curlin had every chance to take the same gamble they did and chose not to. That certainly would make a good case for Big Brown being voted Horse of the Year. So, why agree to run in the Clark? Then again, what if he does lose? That puts Curlin in the driver’s seat and gives his connections the luxury of running him wherever they want, Big Brown or no Big Brown. Knowing Jackson’s sporting nature and his confidence in his horse, he could very well give Big Brown a chance to take Curlin’s crown away from him in the Clark anyway.

So, there you go. I just confused myself even further. If you’ve moved on to another blog by now I can certainly understand why.

For those remaining, instead of rambling on, let’s turn our attention to the Haskell. While up in Saratoga, the vast consensus of opinion among the media and horsemen was that Big Brown’s performance was unimpressive -- he was drifting out, he was under pressure early, he did little running until the last 70 yards, he was facing a mediocre field, and was in danger of losing to an allowance horse.

All true, but having a need to play devil’s advocate, here is the race I saw. I saw a horse who basically hadn’t run since the Preakness; you can add a few fruitless furlongs in the Belmont if you wish. I saw a horse chase a lone speed horse over a notoriously speed-favoring track through testing fractions and still found a way to run him down. And that lone speed horse had a 9 1/4-length win and 102 Beyer over the track, was trained by the destroyer of idols, Nick Zito, and had been the most highly regarded of all of owner Robert LaPenta’s 2-year-olds last year. With some horses, sometimes it takes talent a while to surface, especially when they have things their own way.

I saw a horse who earned a 107 Beyer speed figure and 110 Brisnet figure, turning certain defeat into victory, while showing a whole new dimension. Jerry Brown of Thoro-Graph agonized over this race for four days before giving Big Brown a negative 2 1/4, which was more than a full point better than he got in the Preakness. And he said he came very close to giving him a negative 4 1/4, basically the same record-breaking number he earned in the Kentucky Derby, but decided at least for now to take the conservative approach. Brown said that could change, but added, however, that negative 2 1/4 still is an excellent number.

Big Brown actually hit another gear in the last 70 yards and was just beginning to run as he approached the wire. And it it’s not like he was all out to win in a photo. He won under a hand ride in the final strides by 1 3/4 lengths in 1:48 1/5 with a gap of 4 1/2 lengths back to the Fountain of Youth winner. Most people knock the :13 final eighth, which isn’t that bad in the first place, but Big Brown’s final eighth in :12 3/5 was certainly respectable enough, especially after chasing a :46 2/5 and 1:10 4/5 pace and a 1:35 1/5 mile and running his two previous quarters in :24 1/5 and :24 3/5.

Let’s remember that Point Given was life and death to win the Haskell over a weak field by a half-length, earning a 106 Beyer. Yet no one castigated him for his performance and for trying to duck in turning for home. Skip Away won the Haskell by one length; Holy Bull won by 1 3/4 lengths; Touch Gold won by 1 1/2 lengths. Curlin ran the worst race of his career in the Haskell, finishing a dull third; Preakness and Belmont winner Hansel finished third, beaten 13 lengths at 1-2. In short, the Haskell is almost always a tough race, and most of its winners have won by small margins, many over horses with a race over the track. Does anyone recall the tough time the overwhelming favorite Lion Heart had with local horse My Snookie’s Boy in both the Long Branch and Haskell?

As for his drifting out, he’s done it before. The legendary John Nerud, having watched all his big races, pointed out that he firmly believes Big Brown has a problem with his mouth, whether it’s a tooth, the roof of his mouth, or even his tongue. He feels he needs a special strap, similar to the leather Indian-style strap he designed for his horses that had a similar problem.

Is Big Brown the super horse he was perceived to be during the spring? Who knows? That still remains to be seen. But, for now, he’s won every race he’s finished. The way people are talking, one would think he lost the Haskell. But he won it. So, at least for now, let’s give him the credit he deserves and see how he progresses off this race. If he regresses, then his connections will have to deal with that. If he moves forward, then the rumblings of a showdown with Curlin will be heard loudly once again.

So, what does all this mean? It means that the Breeders’ Cup will be run on a synthetic surface this year and next year and we just have to accept it. Whoever ships from the Eastern dirt tracks, good for them. Whoever doesn’t, good for them. How’s that for clarification?

Magnificent "7"

Blood-Horse Staff — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 01:27:00 GMT

Although I have discussed Evening Attire and his stirring performances in mile and a half races at age 10, I feel I must say something about another amazing old boy, Commentator.

These are the horses and stories that stir our souls and reach deep into our heart…and remain there. We all have our favorite Triple Crown horses and speak of them with great reverence. But many of them provide a fleeting jolt of emotion and then depart, leaving us wanting more. Horses like Commentator, Evening Attire, Better Talk Now, The Tin Man, and Perfect Drift -- just to name a few -- are the ones who feel like old friends. The longer they stay around the longer they amaze us with their youthful exuberance.

As I wrote in part in Blood-Horse magazine, on July 26, the injury-plagued 7-year-old New York-bred gelding Commentator defied the years, winning his second Whitney with the same brilliance and fervor he displayed in his victory three years earlier. And it came after layoffs of 10 months and eight months, the result of a shin fracture suffered after the 2005 Woodward. Despite winning his first Whitney by only a neck, defeating eventual Horse of the Year Saint Liam, Commentator’s average winning margin in his 11 career victories still is an astounding 10 lengths. He has won his races by margins of 7 lengths twice, 8 lengths, 9 3/4 lengths, 10 1/2 lengths, 11 1/4 lengths, 13 3/4 lengths, 14 lengths, and 16 1/2 lengths, while earning outrageous Beyer speed figures of 119, 121, and 123. But in the Whitney, at age 7, he made time stand still, winning wire-to-wire by 4 3/4 lengths, earning an unheard of 120 Beyer figure. Not even the defending Horse of the Year Curlin has run that fast (he ran a 119 in the BC Classic), and Big Brown hasn’t come remotely close. Andy Beyer said he can’t recall a 7-year-old getting that high a number.

After the race, owner Tracy Farmer stood by himself on the track waiting for Commentator to return. The applause from the grandstand was already starting to build. Photographers, many with broad smiles on their faces, raced toward the middle of the track to get in position. There was plenty of hugging and even a few misty eyes. Then the cheers from the crowd began to swell as the horse came into view.

“There’s still fun in this game, isn’t there?” Farmer said.

With all the turmoil that has infiltrated racing over the past three months, Farmer’s words were a breath of optimism for a sport trying desperately to come up for air after being deflated by one crisis after another.

Yes, there still is fun in this game. If you have any doubts, just ask the fans who were at Saratoga on Whitney day, and many who watched on TV.

As Farmer’s wife, Carol, said of their ageless wonder, “Seven is the new four.”

Although Nick Zito received all the kudos and congratulations, the unsung hero, and the most choked up person on the track, was Commentator’s exercise rider of five years, Carlos Correa, who kept repeating, “I love this horse.”

The morning before the Whitney, Farmer came by the barn, sat down on a bench, and just soaked up the atmosphere. “This is a field of dreams and (Commentator) is a dream horse,” he said. “Just sitting here with all these horses and being at Saratoga is a dream.”

Another of his dreams was to accept a second Whitney trophy from his good friend Marylou Whitney. In the winter of 2004, the Farmers and Whitney and her husband and racing manager John Hendrickson were on a cruise together during the Christmas holidays.

“There was a wishing tree, and Marylou and I put a star on it and wished for Commentator to win the Whitney,” Hendrickson said. “We weren’t thinking about having it happen twice.”

When someone asked Zito what he wanted to do with him next, he replied, “What do I want to do with him? I want to put him in a glass house with lots of maids and take care of him the rest of my life. That’s what I want to do with him.”

Actually, Farmer has pretty much the same plan, minus the glass house and maids. “I’ve got a nice paddock for him whenever he tells us he’s ready for it,” he said. “If there’s one thing for sure, he’ll be well taken care of.”

Shortly after the Whitney, the skies opened up and torrential rains pounded down on Saratoga, accompanied by lightning and thunder that would last on and off for over five hours. Commentator was caught in the deluge walking back from the test barn, and after returning was dried off with clumps of straw that Zito and his help rubbed all over him.

Zito still was amazed at what Commentator was able to accomplish. “That fractured shin always kept stopping him,” he said. “They thought the first operation was a success, but it came back and he had to be operated on again. It’s continued to bother him, but here he is. He’s just unbelievable.”

So, that’s a brief look at what it was like being at Saratoga on Whitney day. I’ve experienced many special days at the Spa, but this has to rank right up there with the best of them. And it’s mainly because of Commentator’s age, his perseverance, coming back from several long layoffs, and his remarkable ability to return as brilliant as ever. He is proof that older does not necessarily mean slower.

Punching bag

Remember how they ganged up on Smarty Jones in the Belmont? And how about the tactics employed by a couple of jockeys in this year’s Belmont against Big Brown? There was no way Eibar Coa was going to let Big Brown out of the trap he had gotten into early in the race. The key word there is early. The move hurt Big Brown, but Coa’s mount, Tale of Ekati, came out of the race cut up near his coronet band.

Jockeys apparently are not going to let horses trying to make history have an easy time of it, or any huge favorite on the public stage for that matter. Then there was Ginger Punch in the Go For Wand.

She showed in that race why she is a champion when she fought off a gang of assailants determined to bring her down.

Although none of the other jockeys in the 1 1/8-mile race committed any infractions or were technically guilty of anything other than race-riding, to many observers the race appeared to be a well-orchestrated attempt to get the 1-5 Ginger Punch beat or at least put her in a compromising situation. But 1-5 favorites are always going to have a target on their back, and with Ginger Punch drawing post 1, this was a perfect opportunity for the opposing riders to try to make life miserable for her.

Last year’s champion older female was in a vulnerable spot, and when her jockey Rafael Bejarano tried to go for the lead, Edgar Prado, on Moon Catcher, outran her, and Shaun Bridgmohan, on Copper State, moved up into second, trapping Ginger Punch down on the inside. Runaway Rosie loomed right behind, ready to seal off any escape route.

By slowing the race down to a crawl (:49 and 1:14 4/5), it kept Ginger Punch bottled up longer than usual and prevented her from finding a way out. She was forced to steady on one occasion and then had to sit and wait for something to open up. When nothing did, many thought the champ was beaten, including her trainer Bobby Frankel.

After turning into the stretch, with the field still bunched up and plodding along at a snail’s pace, Bejarano desperately began looking for even the slightest opening. Finally, just before reaching the eighth pole, he and Ginger Punch were able to bull their way through, slicing between Moon Catcher and Copper State. Once Ginger Punch got to the lead she drew clear to win by 1 1/4 lengths in 1:53 2/5, the result of the dawdling pace and the heavy rain that hit just prior to the race.

“How the hell did she win that?” Frankel asked. “They were looking for her, but she showed she’s a champion.”

That she did, slow time or no slow time.

Divine intervention

There have been editorial rumblings in the press recently -- myself included -- about a potential dream match between Curlin and Big Brown in the Aug. 30 Woodward Stakes. The general opinion has been that this would be the battle for Horse of the Year, and would generate a tremendous amount of interest, even beyond racing’s borders.

But wait a minute. This all sounds kind of familiar. Two years ago, there was a similar showdown for Horse of the Year honors in the Breeders’ Cup Classic between the budding 3-year-old superstar Bernardini and the legend in the making Lava Man, who needed one big victory outside California to secure his true place in history.

It all came to pass, and everything seemed ripe for a race for the ages. A poster was made up showing Bernardini and Lava Man ready to do battle in the ring. But, there was another horse around with exemplary credentials in his own right who was never even considered to be part of the poster. His name was Invasor, and because of an ill-timed fever, he was forced to miss the Jockey Club Gold Cup and go into the Classic cold off a layoff. All his trainer Kiaran McLaughlin could do was remain silently confident. After all, Invasor’s victories in the Pimlico Special, Suburban Handicap, and Whitney stamped him as something pretty special, too. Well, we all know what happened there.

So, here we are again with a similar scenario: the budding 3-year-old superstar against the reigning Horse of the Year and the biggest name in the older horse division. But has anyone seen McLaughlin lurking about with a sly grin on his face? He’s been here before, and now he could be back again.

Has anyone forgotten about Divine Park? All this McLaughlin-trained colt has done is win the Westchester Handicap in a blazing 1:32 3/5, the third fastest mile ever run in New York and co-fourth-fastest mile ever run on dirt, anywhere, and come right back and defeat Commentator in the Metropolitan Handicap for his third straight win. So, how come it’s as if he’s invisible in this picture? Yes, he’s been out of action since the Met Mile, just as Invasor was out from the Whitney to the Classic. And yes, he could be nothing more than a terrific miler, but what if he can stretch out another eighth of a mile? Why is a horse with his talent and limitless future being totally ignored in all this talk of a Woodward showdown, just as Invasor was ignored?

Anyway, this is all pure speculation anyway. Curlin’s owner Jess Jackson has never said anything that would lead one to believe he’s thinking about the Woodward, nor has Big Brown’s connections. But Mike Iavarone would love nothing more than to get in a shootout with Curlin for all the marbles. So, in case there is talk of it, I just thought it was an appropriate time to mention Divine Park’s name before he and McLaughlin sneak up on everyone and ruin the party, just as Invasor and McLaughlin did in 2006. Now, I’m not comparing Divine Park to Invasor by any means, but he’s still a horse who shouldn’t be ignored.

Here is another interesting, but unlikely scenario: Music Note in the Travers, instead of the Alabama. Again, it’s not likely to happen, but A.P. Indy out of a Sadler’s Wells mare; ran 1 1/4 miles in 2:01 3/5 in the CCA Oaks, last quarter in :24 1/5, winning in hand by 11 lengths. Is there a colt other than Big Brown who is capable of matching that performance? No one has seen one yet. If Big Brown does run in the Travers, then never mind. And I still think Harlem Rocker could be special. But I’m just tossing it around for fun.

Where's Waldo, I mean Big Brown?

Blood-Horse Staff — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:26:00 GMT

I am sticking both my blogs together this week in order to report and comment on something that I find rather bizarre. It concerns Big Brown. Remember when he was the talk of all racing from March to June, the sport’s next superstar who had performed deeds never before seen? Remember the hordes of media that congregated outside his barn the week before the Belmont Stakes, most of them convinced they were going to witness racing’s first Triple Crown winner in 30 years?

Well, when was the last time you saw Big Brown’s name anywhere of prominence? What in the world happened in such a short period of time? The Kentucky Derby and Preakness winner has had two works in the past two weeks and they both have gone virtually unreported by the major online publications. The Daily Racing Form managed to get a small three-paragraph item of the second work on their website at 6:42 p.m. that evening. A check of several racing message boards and forums produced one minor mention of the second work and nothing of the first work. You would think both works would be a much-talked about subject. Now that Big Brown has turned in two solid five-furlong works – in 1:02 3/5 and 1:01 1/5 – it would only be natural to assume websites would be reporting them in as much detail as possible and people would be talking about them. But it’s as if they barely existed. As IEAH’s vice-president of investor relations Mike Sherack said to co-president Michael Iavarone, “It’s like this horse has fallen off the face of the Earth.”

So, what happened? Trainer Rick Dutrow isn’t talking much, and hasn’t acknowledged either work in any detail, providing a few mundane words at most, because he apparently is at odds with the media for constantly printing negative things about him. Iavarone has had to endure the backlash of all this, and also is keeping a low profile after many of his quotes were misinterpreted and printed out of context, not to mention the negative twist the New York Times put on an article regarding the equine hospital IEAH is building. Yet through all this, IEAH is winning graded stakes after graded stakes – with Frost Giant, Pure Clan, Benny the Bull, and Kip Deville, as well as listed stakes winner Sharp Susan, in July alone -- and is on its way to having the favorite or second choice in the Breeders’ Cup Classic, Sprint, Mile, and Filly & Mare Turf, and who knows what else?

So, as the name Big Brown fades from public view, at least until the Haskell Invitational Handicap, all anyone can do is assume that his works have been satisfactory to his connections. For the record, Iavarone said Big Brown “worked beeeautiful over a track that was like Jones Beach” and that exercise rider Michelle Nevin said it was reminiscent of his works at Palm Meadows early in the year when he was “cutting through the wind and through the track.”

As Iavarone said, “The Haskell cannot come too soon.” I’m sure. A great deal of debris has piled up in front of Big Brown since those happier days of the Preakness, and he is going to have to hurdle it in order to get out in the clean open air again. Those ocean breezes blowing in his face as he charges down the Monmouth stretch would be the perfect elixir.

With communications all but broken off between Big Brown and the public, the colt likely will have to win the Haskell, and impressively, in order to re-connect with the fans. But as of now it looks as if the fans will be forced to go into the Haskell without having a clue whether Big Brown’s works have been satisfactory or not. They might not even know what those works are until they see them in the past performances. So, do they bet the bejeebers out of him even though they’ve been kept pretty much in the dark about the horse? It’s just weird. He has two more strong works scheduled before blowing out three-eighths two days before the Haskell, so maybe the public will somehow be made aware of those works and what the connections thought of them.

What’s really strange about this situation is that there is an excellent chance Big Brown will return the same horse he was before the Belmont and blow his opposition away in the Haskell, and we won’t know how people will react. The fans and the media will have to try to recapture the passion they had for the horse, as well as the awe in which they once held him. Could he have lost that all because of one bad day that likely will forever remain a mystery? Is he suffering the slings and arrows that have been hurled at Dutrow? It would be a shame and an injustice if he is. If he continues to progress in his works, and Dutrow is once again beaming with confidence, as silent as it may be this time to outside ears, then why in the world shouldn’t we expect the real Big Brown to resurface on Aug. 3?

Let’s not forget so quickly the amazing feats this horse accomplished in such a short period of time. Unless he was some force that swept through the sport like a tornado and then quickly disappeared, or unless he has problems of which the public is unaware (which it’s been said is not the case), or unless he was somehow traumatized from his Belmont ordeal, there is absolutely no reason to think he won’t return the same horse he was before the Belmont. A horse like Big Brown doesn’t lose what he had, and what he had was something rare.

So, the bottom line is, Big Brown breezed five furlongs in 1:01 1/5 Monday and hardly anyone was aware of it. It looked impressive on paper, but what Dutrow thought of it is anyone’s guess. If Dutrow feels he’s been wronged by the media and wishes to keep his distance he has every right to. But the friction that exists is not healthy. One can only hope the void it has created between Big Brown and his once-adoring fans will be filled in the weeks ahead.

Breeders' Cup Ramblings

cdawahare — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 02:53:00 GMT

OK, I've finally figured it out. I have figured out how to deal with this year's and next year's Breeders' Cup at Santa Anita as it relates to Eclipse Awards.

After all, there are several possible scenarios this year that could have a major impact on the various championship categories. For instance, what if either Mast Track or Go Between wins the Classic, or run one-two, as they did in the Hollywood Gold Cup? Let's go one better; what if one of them wins the Pacific Classic, Goodwood, and BC Classic? That, in many cases, would be sufficient to earn Horse of the Year, especially if you also have a win in the Hollywood Gold Cup or seconds in the Hollywood Gold Cup and Santa Anita Handicap, as Go Between does. But that's not going to happen. I just don't see many people voting for a synthetic surface horse for Horse of the Year no matter what they accomplish.

Regardless what these two horses do, or any horses for that matter, Curlin will be the champion older horse. Now, let's say Colonel John wins Saturday's Swaps, and then adds the Goodwood and BC Classic to go along with his win in the Santa Anita Derby. He still has no shot at the 3-year-old title, which will go to Big Brown. He will have to win the Travers and the Classic, with Big Brown losing the remainder of his races, to have a shot at it.

So, does that mean if Big Brown should happen to miss the Classic or simply doesn't handle the synthetic track, this year's Classic will prove to be a meaningless race to everyone except the winning connections and those who bet on him? Sadly, the answer is yes. That is how important Big Brown is to the Classic. How do I know this? If Go Between wins the Classic, and no disrespect to him, can anyone picture Darley, Three Chimneys, and Lane's End shoving each other out of the way trying to purchase his breeding rights?

At this point in racing history, championships should not be decided on a synthetic surface. That brings us to my brilliant idea. Considering the Breeders' Cup's ravenous appetite and how it is gorging itself on new races, and considering the addition of new Eclipse Awards to accommodate the profusion of Breeders' Cup winners, why not add several more championships to give the synthetic specialists their due?

Now, we all know a synthetic surface horse is somewhere between a dirt horse and a turf horse. These are generally second-tier turf horses, not good enough to compete at the highest level, and either second-tier dirt horses or horses who have never even laid eyes on a dirt track. Yes, there are horses like Student Council and Tiago, or the 3-year-old Gayego, who have won major stakes on both dirt and synthetic, but they are in the minority.

So, let's just say Go Between or Mast Track - two typical synthetic/turf horses - run the table the rest of the year. What do you do with them when it comes to year-end honors? Simple, you make up a new Eclipse Award. How's this? Champion Dirf Horse (that's right, something between dirt and turf). This way, they can join the long procession of 2008 Eclipse Award winners without intruding on the major award contenders like Curlin and Big Brown.

OK, so now you ask yourself, what about Colonel John, who has a sixth-place finish in the Kentucky Derby as his only attempt on dirt? He obviously loves synthetic surfaces, but supposedly is not as good on the dirt (although I'm still not sold on that) and has never been on the turf. So, you can't give him the Dirf Award. In his case, as with others who are proven only on synthetic surfaces, we offer the Latex Award. This way, we can honor horses like Colonel John, who supposedly love only the feel of balloon fragments under their feet. But there is still the Travers to expand his horizons, and the belief here is that he handles the dirt just fine, despite the Kentucky Derby, in which he actually put in a big move around the turn.

With these awards, every horse will get his or her due, and it would allow the Breeders' Cup Classic to have at least some championship implications. And as for having a legitimate Horse of the Year showdown, Churchill Downs could then boost the purse of the Clark Handicap if they so desire. And what about the top-class milers who flop in the BC Dirt (?) Mile? They can flock to Aqueduct four weeks later for the Cigar Mile to determine who really is the best miler in the country.

Now that we've resolved that disturbing aspect of the Breeders' Cup, I have one more issue that needs to be discussed. What does John Shirreffs and Jerry and Ann Moss do about Zenyatta? They already have Tiago for the Classic, and he is capable on any given day of winning a race of that caliber. Shirreffs has already stated that running against the colts is not in the equation. But let's say Zenyatta continues her unbeaten streak, goes back to blowing away her foes, and looks invincible heading into the Breeders' Cup.

Do you run her against colts in what is likely to be a so-so field (depth-wise) in the Classic in front of a sellout crowd and highlight the best filly in the country to TV audiences around the country or do you run her on Friday in the Distaff (sorry, for blog purposes I cannot bring myself to say Ladies Classic) in front of one-third or one-half the crowd and a negligible TV audience? How many people are going to take off from work that day to come to the track or rush home to watch the races on TV?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against change, and these new changes this year could turn out just fine. I hope they do. But everything is being done so quickly and in such excess. Can't we at least wait to see how last year's changes work out on a nice sunny day as opposed to last year's disaster before smothering everyone with additional races? Here is a test the Breeders' Cup can conduct. Put five committee members in separate rooms and give them five seconds to name the winners of last year's Friday Breeders' Cup races. If they can't do it, you keep the number of Friday races the same until they can. Then, and only then, can you add more races. Better still, you can also give them an additional five seconds and have them name the new races this year. If they can't do it, scrap them until they can.

The reason I can't bring myself to say or write Ladies Classic, besides it sounding like a golf tournament, is that you already have a Classic that is open to males and females, and horses are not ladies, they are horses. Distaff designates female as much as Ladies, so why change after 24 years? What is with this new obsession to keep changing names until its political correctness makes us want to barf? Webster defines "distaff" simply as a "female," and it defines "lady" as a "woman." So, the Breeders' Cup in its divine wisdom determined that they'd rather have a race for women than females.

If Tiago and Zenyatta win both races, Shirreffs and the Mosses will be victorious in the Classic and Ladies Classic. Sort of takes away from the power of the name Classic doesn't it? "Oh, you only won the Classic? Well," I won the Ladies Classic (and with a horse no less) -- twice as many words, must be more important. At least I know what kind of Classic I won. What kind of Classic did you win?" Come on, Breeders' Cup, it's the Distaff, period. Stop thinking so much and leave the darn name alone. If it was good enough for Personal Ensign and Lady's Secret it's good enough now.

I will go into this year's Breeders' Cup with an open mind -- hey, we do have a bunch of turf races. If all the horses come back safely I will be happy, and that will take precedence over the results, the surface, the silly name changes, and the plethora of races, even if many of them do turn out to be meaningless in the grand scheme of things. But after the relief of knowing that all the horses and jockeys have returned sound and healthy, all the other stuff mentioned above will begin to sink in. That's the part I'm not looking forward to.