IEAH still whining, threatening to go to Haskell

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by pgardn

If my expert trainer told me I was fit.

Dutrow kinda of made some sense saying the horse
was still in very good shape and the extra time (Preakness-Belmont)
gave them far more training options. They would adjust accordingly.

I would expect the heat had to be a factor also.

So when Brown returns in the Haskell on a faster track and most
likely a lower temp., we should expect the same dominant horse?
Or the others have a chance to mature and catch up? Or the others
are so bad its a horse out of the blue?

Or... and I think this is what many think, he was off the roids,
so he did not run well. And he may have had his roid spurt and its over.

We don't know that he was really off the steroids. When Dutrow mentioned that the horse was on steroids, there was a big backlash. I think the backlash surprised Dutrow since steroids are legal. So then he said that he wouldn't give the horse steroids any more. He might have just been talking to get people to shut-up.

One of my trainers is friendly with Dutrow and talks to him all the time. Now this trainer never talked to Dutrow about whether Big Brown was still getting his steroids or not. But this trainer told me that he would be shocked if BB did not get his regular steroid shot before the Belmont. He said, "Dutrow gives all of his horses steroids. Everything Dutrow had done with Big Brown seemed to be working. The horse won the first two legs of the Triple Crown. Do you really think the guy is going to change his routine while he's trying to win the Triple Crown?"

I'm not saying that he did give the horse steroids after the Derby. I have no idea. But considering that most people don't believe many of the things that come out of Dutrow's mouth, I don't know why you guys would believe him on this. If I had to bet at even money whether the horse got his regualr steroid dose after the Derby, I would bet that he did. I think there is at least a 50% chance that Dutrow was just trying to shut everyone up about it.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

You make a good point. I'm no trainer or vet, but it seemed like his performance was due to a number of things, most notably the foot. I do however think we'll see him again, only because I think they have to run him more to assure some more money in the shed.

I think they want to run him and I think they will run him if they can. But if the quarter crack gets any worse, they're not going to be able to run him.

I am no expert on quarter cracks and there are certainly different opinions out there. But the trainer that I trust the most, took one look at that quarter crack and told me that the horse will need six months off and he didn't see how quarter crack could possibly be healed in 2 months.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

You make a good point. I'm no trainer or vet, but it seemed like his performance was due to a number of things, most notably the foot. I do however think we'll see him again, only because I think they have to run him more to assure some more money in the shed.

That's the conundrum. If he runs again this year, it will be a bit difficult to "throw-out" the Belmont from his PPs, if you assume it was the quarter crack that did him in.

It will be interesting to see if the Haskell gets tailored to provide Big Brown with a paid public workout or if it attracts a full field of horses looking to knock him off again.