Well, at least one sporting favorite decided to show up this weekend, the athlete on two legs not the one on four.
In Paris, Rafael Nadal crushed Roger Federer in straight sets for the most lopsided French Open final since 1977 and the first time since 1999 that Federer lost a set 6-0. Nadal, in winning his fourth straight title in Paris, is 28-0 in the French Open. “He dominated from the first point until the end,” said Federer. Excellence, though, can be a bit boring and there was little doubt from the start of the tournament that Nadal was going to win again. He is the best on clay. Fortunately for Federer, the next major is on the grass at Wimbledon, where last year he beat Nadal in five exciting sets.
In the horse racing world, Big Brown was the biggest favorite to collapse since the Patriots in the Super Bowl , but at least New England put up a good fight. Big Brown, in contrast, finished last in the Belmont despite being a prohibitive 1-4 favorite. I wish I had bet on 38-1 winner Da’ Tara.
Big Brown’s anemic effort in the Belmont contrasted with his dominance in the Kentucky Derby and Preakness, and raised questions as to whether the horse’s success was fueled by steroids.
Worst of all for Big Brown’s connections, perhaps, were the questions about steroids. [Trainer Rick] Dutrow told The New York Times last week that Big Brown had not had his usual shot of the anabolic steroid Winstrol since April 15, enough time for the drug to leave his system.
Was Big Brown’s poor performance because of his lack of “juice?”
“He wasn’t on steroids for the Preakness,” [part owner Michael] Iavarone said. “There is a million things that could have got him beat. If people are going to say that no Winstrol got him beat, they are going to say that.”
Having an athlete win while on the juice is no surprise these days, and in Big Brown’s case he can’t be blamed since he was not the one to make the choice to take them. His loss makes it 30 years and counting since a horse won the Triple Crown. –Jim Buzinski
on Jun 9th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
A couple of days have passed since the Belmont. Veterinarians have gone over Big Brown with a fine-tooth comb by the veterinarians, including close scrutiny of his problem hoof, and they couldn’t find anything. So his people say they still are not sure what happened that day.
It was extremely hot and humid. Some horses, like some people, don’t perform well in that kind of heat. Big Brown wasn’t a happy camper early in the day, bucking in his stall in the security barn. When he went to the post, he was sweating and lathered — a sign that he was uptight about something. So…was it steroids? Was it other things too, piled on top of that? Had he fallen behind on training and lost his edge because of the foot problem?
I think it’s important to put the Belmont loss into a bigger perspective. Now and then, even the best horses have a really bad day in their career…a day when they just can’t bring it. Man O’ War didn’t win the Triple Crown either. His defeat by Upset put the racing public into the same kind of shock, but “Big Red” went on to become the top sire of his time. Secretariat did win the Crown, but he had his own bad day, and still went on to make his mark. Last year, Curlin didn’t win the Triple Crown, but he came back strong to win at the Breeders Cup and the Dubai Cup, becoming the #1 Thoroughbred in the world.
So…while I admit I was one of those who hoped Brownie would win, I don’t think it’s the end of the world that he didn’t. Maybe too much emphasis is being put on the Triple Crown. With international racing set up the way it is now, there are other avenues to establishing a brilliant record.
The important thing now is to for the horse to be sound, and healthy. With that done, his owners will decide whether to go on taking the risk of racing him, or to play it safe and retire him into the $50 million stallion deal with Three Chimneys Farms. If he races again, there has been talk of the Travers, the Breeders Cup, and even a match race with Curlin. But that can only happen if the horse is in tip-top shape.
Meanwhile, with steroids…well, if Big Brown is taken off the steroids that Dutrow was using permanently, he will be racing against some other horses who are on the juice. So the sport is faced with deciding how to create a level playing field — er, level track — for everybody when it comes to steroids. Not to mention other drugs like Lasix, which are also allowed. Is it a good idea to race horses that are “bleeders”? I.e. help them win races in spite of this problem, then put them into breeding programs where they’ll pass it on to their get?
These are big questions that the industry will have to address.
on Jun 9th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
I’m sure that it’s just me, but Nadal diggin his draws outta his crack before EVERY serve is nasty and distracting. I can hardly stand to watch any match he’s playing.
on Jun 9th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
This writer suggests that the jockey was the reason Big Brown lost.
http://tinyurl.com/6flj7g
on Jun 10th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
I disagree with this writer. He’s ignoring the clear visual evidence that something was going on with Big Brown before he ever got to the post parade.
It’s IS possible that Desormeaux made some strategic mistakes, but I don’t think they were the sole cause of his “having no horse” when he finally asked Big Brown to run. In the news footage you can see him asking as they started into the far turn, and it’s important to look at the large distance they still had to go, including the extra-long lane approaching the wire.
From that point on, Big Brown not only didn’t fire, but he started losing ground as the leaders picked up the pace around the far turn. You can see it clearly in the blimp shot. If the horse had been his normal self, with that supersonic kick of his, he likely could have recouped from rider mistakes enough to get up there by a nose ahead at the wire.
Given that trainer Dutrow has such a big mouth, I think he would have blamed the jockey publicly if he had seen any mistakes that cost them the race.
When asked his opinion, commentator Jerry Bailey (former jockey) had an interesting comment. He thought the condition of the track might have been a factor. It hadn’t been watered, and the surface was very loose and deep. At some point early in the race, when Big Brown tangled with a couple of the other horses, he pulled a hind shoe loose. That, and the track surface, may have added into his apathy about going to top gear.
on Jun 11th, 2008 at 1:20 am
Oops…I just saw the AP story about Dutrow now blaming the jockey, because he says he can’t find anything wrong with the horse.
I’ve had my say about this…time to move on to other subjects.
on Jun 11th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Yes, Big Brown had a bad day. But why?
As someone who has had horses for over 30 years, I cannot believe it is steriods. They build muscle, but once that muscle is built, it can be maintained without it. Plus, you want leaner muscle for racing, and steriods tend to bulk.
Could it have been the crack in the hoof? His daddy didn’t have the greatest feet. Maybe the owners didn’t want to advertise the fact that he was sensative prior to the start.
The heat? Like all althletes heat plays a factor. In training, this type of heat is typically avoided.
The track footing? When a horse sinks lower into the footing the expend more energy to run. This could have played a part.
Mental Breakdown? I have heard little said about this, but it does happen. Some horses do break under the pressure, and maybe this race was when he did.
But really, why does anyone expect to see a Triple Crown Winner again? These horses running have 3 to 7 starts before the Derby, years ago they had 10-15 plus. And 20 horses ran the Derby this year. All 20 did not belong in the race. And only one of those started the Preakness. But the Belmont featured a bunch of them. Meaning the “cream of the crop” had 5 weeks off to Big Brown’s 2nd race in those 5 weeks.
Most likely, the reason so many were interested in this race was the media hype. They basically talked non stop about him and Casino Royale who went home early and ignored the rest of the field. It just goes to show that sometimes a sure thing isn’t quite sure at all.
on Jun 13th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
ThomD, I think you have hit the horseshoe nail right on the head.