Throwdowns > Completed

Views
15
Comments
26
  • June 08, 2008 09:37 AM ET

Big Brown's Belmont Bust is Actually Good for Horse Racing

Bigalke (105-35-15) vs Baun-ded=PUCKHEAD (54-5-1)
11
Votes
12
Votes
11
Votes
12
Votes


Why?


Had Big Brown won the first Triple Crown in 30 years, it would have validated the recent trend in breeding to emphasize speed at all costs. With horses getting fatally injured in recent years, it is becoming apparent that thoroughbreds simply are not durable enough for the rigors of their sport. A Big Brown victory would have had every breeder in the country looking to duplicate the results...

And Big Brown simply was not in good enough shape to win this race. Having missed practice time due to a quarter-crack in his left hind foot, Brown is yet another of horses for whom the trend of breeding has taken a physical toll. Horses cannot withstand the weight imbalance created by breeding for speed, and these hoof cracks and crumpling legs cannot handle the differing lengths of these races and what now looks like a compacted Triple Crown schedule.

Sure, it would have been fun to see the first Triple Crown winner since Affirmed did it in 1978. But the aftereffects of such a victory would merely have perpetuated the damaging breeding trends already in place. Results like the one yesterday send stables back to the drawing board... hopefully to improve the health of its athletes...


I disagree.

But first let's clear up one glaring error in your argument!
The crack, was to the LEFT FRONT Hoof, not the rear as you stated.

2. The loss of this race will likely not change the way horses are being bred one way or the other regardless had Big Brown won.

3. Based on the last winner being Affirmed in 1978, were there not imitators to his breeding style as your argument suggests?
If so, why no winner since?

4. Since there were 3 Crown winners in the 70's, Affirmed, *Seattle Slew 1977, Secretariat 1973, were not all these horses attempted to be imitated per your theory?

5. Let us also note that prior to Secretariat, the last horse to win The Triple Crown was Citatation in 1948!

6. Were breeders not looking to duplicate the likes of him & the other 3 WINNERS from the 40's before him?

7. Then why the 25 yr. drought?

8. 11 three yr olds have won the Crown, 18 have failed since Sir Barton won the 1st one in 1919.

9. Perhaps Bigalke, there is more to winning the "Big Sandy" then simply breeding.

It is the longest & toughest race at 1.5 miles!

*BTW, the winner, Da' Tara is the Great, great grandson of Seattle Slew.

How's that for breeding!


Breeding in horse racing changes with the winners. As horses like Big Brown are developed to maximize speed, these traits become more and more pronounced to the detriment of other traits. Imitation is one thing; this, however, is the transfer of weakened genetics from one generation to the next.

The Belmont Stakes IS the longest and toughest race at 1.5 miles. The reason no horse has been able to keep up the chase throughout the entire Triple Crown season is that traits such as stamina are being weakened by the search for swifter velocity. Horses are not being bred for endurance, and losses like that of Big Brown when they are on the cusp of history are a great indication for this sport that the current system of doing things is not working...

Because, after all, winning is EVERYTHING for these stables, which spend millions of dollars on a horse who might take the track only a dozen times in his (or, less frequently, her) career. Losses like Big Brown's yesterday help illuminate for breeders and trainers that raw speed can only do so much in contesting the Triple Crown. This can help the sport recognize the need for change; a Big Brown victory would not have achieved this effect.


There is absolutely no proof of any kind that this race was lost due to genetics.
NONE!

I would suspect however, that a previous injury, suffered 3 wks earlier played a factor. This type of injury, cracked hoof, is as common in horses as pulled groins are to hockey players & other athletes.
As you mentioned, Big Brown, also an athtlete was UNABLE to train properly leading up to this race as a result!

The longest & hardest race of his career & he couldn't practice & condition for it!
This horse was used to only running half the distance of the Belmont. The training he missed was very detrimental to him from an athletic perspective.

Secondly, as I mentioned before, this race has been tried by many horses since 1919 without a great deal of success, regardless of the BREEDING LINES & EXPECTATIONS!

This is a completely different type of race.

As far as Big Brown losing being good for the sport of horse racing. I disagree too.

People want Champions & Big Brown had name recognition going in undefeated.
A Triple Crown Winner wold produce as positive an impact as any long suffering Team or Country would garner for a Major Championship or Gold Medal.
Excitement!
FANS!


What would a Big Brown Triple Crown have actually accomplished? Buzz is generated each year by the quest for this trophy & a win would take away the buzz of the chase. All that would have been gained is Brown's spot in the record books. Horse racing, in the end, is a niche sport which will continue to attract its niche following -- Triple Crown winner or no Triple Crown winner...

But what good CAN come from this defeat? Horse racing must once again look at its practices and recognize that which is beneficial & that which is detrimental to the horses' health and the sport's health. The current practice of breeding horses for one particular trait -- speed -- IS real, it is ongoing, and it is resulting in horses who are in many cases simply not genetically capable of withstanding the pressures of varying track surfaces and lengths.

Fans will continue coming to the track regardless of the winner. People will still be able to hold the Triple Crown as a mythical record only won by those horses who are versatile enough to compete @ all lengths. A Big Brown win would only have raised his stud fees and perpetuated the myth of speed at all costs... hardly a beneficial outcome at all...


You asked a question, yet failed to answer any of the several I put to you in my initial argument questioning your proclaimations on the imitation issues. You were not able to offer any logical explanation why after a successful group of horses won the Triple Crown in the 70's & 40's there were not more winners following these runners.

What would a Big Brown Triple Crown have actually accomplished?

Using history as a benchmark, when a similar gap existed a horse came along & epitomized the American Hero becoming a beloved figure attracting new comers & old-timers alike in the aftermath.
Secretariat.

Feelings Bigalke, the love of a horse. A Champion!
This would do more for the plight of the thoroughbred, from people more than any lost race will.
Publicity & human sentiment towards an animal & champion would reap many benefits in the long run.

Our odd-toed ungulates have been tampered with for centuries. The loss of a race will do little or nothing to change that.

Da'Tara's win tied his GG Granddad, Seattle Slew's time. Conversely Big B's famous ancestor, Northern Dancer failed at Belmont too.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

June 8, 2008  10:24 AM ET

Glad to see someone take this... especially someone competent. Good luck, Baun-ded...

June 8, 2008  11:31 AM ET

This should be interesting.

June 8, 2008  11:32 AM ET

Big Brown is now going to retire to write his biography and implicate other horses who've has done performance enhancing drugs with him.

June 8, 2008  11:35 AM ET

I'd love to retire to a life that champion horses retire to...

June 8, 2008  11:38 AM ET

Amen to that, stowe!

June 8, 2008  11:39 AM ET

I won't be able to complete second argument until either I return home from work @ 6:00 PM Pacific or Baun-ded responds... whichever comes LATER... so please hang tight and refrain from voting until more arguments occur... thanks, and have a great day everyone!

June 8, 2008  11:49 AM ET

Interesting....

June 8, 2008  12:26 PM ET

Sorry for the delay Bigalke, but you didn't expect me to come back at your argument un-armed did you. I know better.
Have a good Td.

June 8, 2008  12:37 PM ET

I don't really understand the counterpoints here. I assume that if he thinks Brown's loss is good for racing you would need to find an argument that it was bad. You haven't done this.
For what it's worth, I don't think his loss is good for racing. It may be good for animal rights activists, and perhaps the horses, but not the sport of racing itself.
It won't stop the breeding and even though Bigalke makes logical points, these horse trainers won't hear it. They will keep trying to find the next Secretariat because of the lucrative nature of the sport.
Tragedies to Barbaro, 8 Belles and flops by Brown will not deter stables.
They will always look at how close a great horse like Smarty Jones got to the triple and keep going.

June 8, 2008  12:39 PM ET

I also think Brown's flop had more to do with horrible jockeying more so than horse fatigue.

June 8, 2008  12:45 PM ET

Secretaiat, Seattle Slew, Affirmed all had superb jockeys. This Big Brown jockey is nothing more than a hack.

June 8, 2008  12:53 PM ET

Bigalke all the way. He did have the placement of the crack wrong but thats a common mistake.

June 8, 2008  02:05 PM ET

Interesting premise by Bigalke...Good rebuttal by Baun-ded. As a sports fan (though not a particular fan of horse racing per se) I was hoping for a triple crown winner- I like to bear witness to amazing feats. But my disapointment was short-lived.

I'm not sure with which side of this debate I agree...I need to wait for more.

Good start though.

June 8, 2008  02:08 PM ET

I don't really understand the counterpoints here. I assume that if he thinks Brown's loss is good for racing you would need to find an argument that it was bad. You haven't done this.


EO | 06/08/08, 12:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment

But he countered Bigalke's arguments for why the loss was good. It's not necessary for Baun-ded to argue that the loss was "bad"...only that it did not benefit the sport. If the loss made no difference, then that is a successful counter.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with Baun-ded, merely that he doesn't need to take the polar opposite position to drbate the issue.

June 8, 2008  05:49 PM ET

I ended up getting some chances @ work to respond... thanks for a great debate, Baun-ded!

June 8, 2008  05:54 PM ET

I agree it was best for horse racing that he lost. Had he won we would have heard all about the doping of the horse from everyone including the other horse trainers and jockeys.

June 8, 2008  11:52 PM ET

someone drugged big brown. imagine, 38-1 da'tara. put 2 million down for da'tara, 76 million ladies and gents

June 9, 2008  04:04 AM ET

I ended up with a cable crash & was just now able to complete this. I'm hoping to give Porkins that amazing feat he is looking for by winning this.
Always a pleasure Zach.

June 9, 2008  04:12 AM ET

He did have the placement of the crack wrong but thats a common mistake.
----------------------
Not in Bigalke case it's not! :)

 
June 9, 2008  06:24 AM ET

Good arguments from both sides. However, I have to give the slight edge to Baun-ded. While the loss may have been good for the horses because trainers/breeders will maybe now possibly look to start breeding a little strength and endurance into these horses, it was not good for horse racing as a spectator sport. We have been teased a few times throughout the past 30 years with the idea of a Triple Crown winner, only to be let down. Eventually, the idea will lose its luster and excitement as people will begin to assume that it is impossible for a horse in this day and age to win a Triple Crown. A Triple Crown win by Big Brown followed by another decade or two of silence would have been a terrific renewal of the excitement that surrounds these horses.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Leaderboard

  Fan W L T Win %
1 DetroitFan* BS: Start Stanton! 132 9 7 91.6%
2 Porkins 138 13 1 91.1%
3 Baun-ded=PUCKHEAD 54 5 1 90.8%
4 The Ram 139 17 4 88.1%
5 Foosball 70 9 2 87.7%
6 Philly-- www.sportsnoise.com 74 11 4 85.4%
7 Hyped78 116 19 5 84.6%
8 Dookie: Here We Go Steelers 117 19 8 84.0%
9 [The] Coach 97 18 5 82.9%
10 BSchwartz07 129 27 6 81.5%

Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Dodgers hitters wanted payback
    Views
    3894
    Comments
    848
  2. 2
    Dolphins, Lions shopping players
    Views
    36368
    Comments
    132
  3. 3
    Photos escalate Harvick-Edwards fight
    Views
    1575
    Comments
    73
  4. 4
    Kobe: Gold medal better than NBA title
    Views
    6943
    Comments
    63
  5. 5
    What's wrong with Beckett?
    Views
    3991
    Comments
    55

Weekly Most Active Users

Comments + Blog Posts + Throwdowns

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9

Message Boards

  1. MMA > Fight Club

    'Rampage' ready to return?
    Views
    200
    Replies
    3
  2. MMA > Fight Club

    EliteXC fighters overshadowed…
    Views
    126
    Replies
    1
  3. NCAAF > General NCAAF

    Bowden Fired at Clemson
    Views
    124
    Replies
    18

Blogs