I find it interesting that there are so many people saying that IF he wins the Belmont, THEN he'll be great. I've always thought that if/then scenario was odd. It's my feeling that he's either a great horse or he isn't already. Winning that race won't prove it. It might help solidify the argument but not prove it.
I go back to the NBA. Hakeem Olajuwon won led the Rockets to back to back championships in 1994 and 1995. It solidified his position as one of the all-time great players in the league. But what if Michael Jordan hadn't retired? What if Jordan had stayed on and instead of the Rockets winning, the Bulls had continued their streak and won two more? Would that mean that Olajuwon wasn't as great as he was just because someone else was better? I don't think that's true. Same thing for Charles Barkley, Pat Ewing, Karl Malone, and John Stockton. All were great players and played as well as they could play but didn't win titles because they weren't as great as Jordan was. But that shouldn't mean they were less than they were.
Getting back to Big Brown, either he's great now or he's not. I've always been in the camp that says greatness and ability are natural things. A trainer might be able to raise it to a higher level but either the horse has it or he doesn't. If Affirmed's nose had been on the other side of Alydar's in one of those races, is he less great all of a sudden? Big Brown can be great and lose the Belmont. Spectacular Bid and Smarty Jones both did.
__________________
The real horses of the year (1986-2020)
Manila, Java Gold, Alysheba, Sunday Silence, Go for Wand, In Excess, Paseana, Kotashaan, Holy Bull, Cigar, Alphabet Soup, Formal Gold, Skip Away, Artax, Tiznow, Point Given, Azeri, Candy Ride, Smarty Jones, Ghostzapper, Invasor, Curlin, Zenyatta, Zenyatta, Goldikova, Havre de Grace, Wise Dan, Wise Dan, California Chrome, American Pharoah, Arrogate, Gun Runner, Accelerate, Maximum Security, Gamine
|