Still wonder how it was BBrown threw in that clunker at Belmont, then came back and romped in those two races at Monmouth? Was Jersey racing still on steroids at that time?

What’s the chance that many recent top sires were on steroids during their racing careers?

Steroids were indeed used by a very high percentage of trainers during that period, and for decades prior. In that narrow sense, the playing field was somewhat level.

At the same time, certain trainers learned to abuse steroids through “stacking”, which, while not good for the animal, had the potential to improve performance further.

Big Brown’s performance in the Belmont had nothing to do with a change in steroid routine. It had a lot to do with his foot issue, and, those inclined to be cynical would also point out using blood doping agents in a horse running in three races that close together would be a disaster waiting to happen.

When blood doping was rampant, prior to any hint of tests for EPO in horse racing, one of the easily identifiable corroborating pieces of circumstantial evidence was that the horses in question almost never raced more than a couple times in close proximity. In the majority of cases, they had one race (and big performance), followed by weeks off before seeing action again.

When a body (human or equine) is pushed to perform beyond its natural limits through the use of drugs, recovery time becomes a very, very big issue.

First Big Brown should not have been entered to run in the Belmont, no horse can strech out to 11/2 mile with no training for three weeks (very bad judgment there) so add this to bad training compounded to a terible ride. One can not blame Big Brown for loosing the Belmont the card badly staked up against him, any one that kept tab on him could not bet on him in the Belmont so there shouldn’t have been a Gigantic Bridge Jumping Jumper Show Pool.

# 1 Wallace, IMO there still seems to be some misconception on the use of and effects of steroids. Equipoise (the most popular brand of a steroid supplement) was and has been given to horses for decades. Perfectly legal and a commonly excepted supplement by a vast majority of trainers for decades. Most probably didn’t know exactly what was is it nor have a full understanding of its effects. No different then Lasix IMO. Its common use was probably handed down over the years from trainer to apprentice. And thus the use as a matter of course. Personally I neither condone nor approve when it is used as a matter of course. I am sure the industry was as surprised at the backlash over its use as R Dutrow. I don’t remember reading many high profile trainers coming out talking about their use of Equipoise or Winstrol which I am sure most were.
As to Big Browns “clunker” in the Belmont, horses do this, one of the mysteries of training horses. But in my I mind what #2 Chariset posted would be a much more realistic way of looking at it.
It is my understanding that when a horse is taken off Equipoise it will take several months to observe noticeable change in, body, mind and training characteristics. If any. The same as when it is first given. So, given the relatively short period of time between the Preakness and the Belmont IMO, and I believe the science will back me up, the non use of Equipoise in that time period had no detrimental effect on Big Brown’s performance. Correct me if I am wrong on the above statements concerning the use and effects of Equipoise. But please back up your rebuttal so I and others in the future can state fact not innuendo or hearsay. As to returning to his winning form at Monmouth, and I do not know what the rule was concerning the use of Equipoise at the time, I would attribute it more to the training, conditions and timing along with the horse feeling like a champ at that time.

While I (obviously) have no sympathy for Dutrow, he happened to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time with Big Brown. The only reason that steroids had become a hot-button issue is because of the MLB scandals, which were peaking with congressional hearings.

The powers that be in racing were therefore very anxious about the possibility of Federal intervention, and recognized that steroids would be the logical sacrificial lamb to offer up. After all, how could racing justify their use when the public had become increasingly outraged by their use in human athletics?

If Dutrow hadn’t been training an exceptionally high profile horse at the time, he never would have had a platform on which to speak.

Larry (above) is quite correct that a horse’s form would not regress sharply in such a short span of time. The only exception would be, as I alluded to above, the “stacking” of steroids, which was used as a pre-race performance enhancer by certain trainers.

In Big Brown’s case the foot problem (and resulting loss of training) was by far the most important factor, though I would not rule out the possibility that his system was unable to recover fully from a type of over-exertion (wink) in his previous two races.

Kyle, I do not believe that there was a link between his training regimen and any steroid withdrawal. His foot was a SERIOUS problem, and that explains the interrupted training. It also explains why he was not keeping a straight course in his final works before the race, something was (unsurprisingly) missed by the racing media.

Tinky, I see we are on the same page. Kinda of boring. Where’s Frank?

If a stallions owner while he was racing had any effect on his career as a stallion, Unbridleds Song would be standing for $2500!

In my opinion he threw a clunker because of his feet. Dutrow trained him too light going in to the Belmont because his feet were a problem… Every American based horse in all the triple crown races that year were PROBABLY on steroids as well because they could…

Tinky, considering he stated in a post the other day that anyone that uses their real name is stupid, and I do. So,I can only assume anything I have to say is dismissed out right no matter how many licenses and experience I may or may not have. Takes a lot of pressure off.

Barbara, I think he did that the other day. I was at Laurel renewing our owners license and when a guy in front of us was informed there was no such license asked for he went off the way Frank would of.

Frank, if you are lurking, no disrespect I think a lot of your post are worth reading. But you lack a bit in diplomacy.

Remember Pleasant Colony’s Woman Veterinarian being found floating in a lake a few days before the Belmont?? Many a strange thing can happen when a Triple Crown or significant money is on the line. BB’s Belmont was a joke, more than just a bounce or clunker.
Steroids and the rampant drug use of racehorses is why a few very good trainers retired, and those who refuse to cheat have a hard time competing long term with those who do. Royally bred isn’t quite what it used to be.

Larry –

While it is true that Danzig’s first two dams were weak producers, comparisons between him and Big Brown are a bit strained considering that the former is by the most important and influential sire over the past 50 years (and one of the greatest ever), while the latter is by a modest sire whose only son of note at stud is (as you point out) the equally modest Pomeroy.

In other words, I’d be far less optimistic about a Big Brown type on pedigree than a Danzig type. The fact that he had tremendous ability is a mitigating factor, but as you surely know, only a small percentage of such types succeed at stud with so little pedigree behind them.

Tinky, I totally agree. In keeping with the premise of the article I was not trying to compare but to use Danzig and Big Brown more as an analogy. IMO, The fact that Danzig had a strong and select syndicate behind him along with the excellent management by Claiborne. And just as importantly the weight of Woody Stephens’ regard for the horse and long association with the farm contributed enormously to his success. In short no controversy, no drama. Investors don’t like baggage in an “IPO” I don’t care what the widget is. You never know how long the horse will be carrying it around with him. They want a horse that has people standing in line to carry the baggage. When a breeder is buying a season or a share, especially an unproven one, you have to take in the tangibles, pedigree, race record, stud fee, etc. and the nontangible, strength of his press, good or bad, how much legs does it have, etc.. Will the “Buzz” last until he’s first and hopefully second crop hit the races?
When Danzig was syndicated the breeding industry was on the tail end of the “Golden Era” of racing and breeding and the way of “doing business” was and would change drastically. And there was no internet. I sold a lot of well bred mostly useless race horses as stallion prospects all over the world from the mid 80s to the mid 90s. A fellow agent said to me years back, if Danzig had come along a few years latter you probably would have sold him to South America.

A tangible comparison would be to look at it like this; Danzig hand the following going for him; a short but brilliant race record. A legend and highly respected trainer to back it up. Buy, even at that time, one of the greatest sires and sire of sire Northern Dancer. Being stood and syndicated by the most respected farm in the US. Still is IMO. Draw backs; A moderate pedigree for a Northern Dancer. Also there was the question of soundness due to his short racing career. His owner Mr. V a relative “new comer” was on the verge of major success on the race track, he had an interesting back ground that gave him a certain likeable “air” to him. Latter that “back ground” become controversial. I found him to be a likeable guy regardless of the controversy. There was no negative drama or controversy
Big Brown, tremendous race horse, had fabulous press at the time syndicated, being stood at a well known and respected farm. But going through management change of father to son. I guess you could say this is Case Clay’s Secretariat. Draw backs; very moderate pedigree, lots of negative drama, controversial trainer, controversial owners, the over blown steroid press. And the fact that even though he had a race record beyond reproach at the time of syndication it has been unfairly over shadowed by the controversy. Secretariat never gave Claiborne these kind of headaches. He was also going to stud at the height of the historic economic collapse. In short a lot of baggage. Despite all of this I am rooting for him.

SteveG #4. Sorry to get back to you a day late. Mr. Drape’s blog had to do with BB’s salability as a sire.
Since almost all current sires apparantly have run on a steroid regimen, as you noted, it would seem a realistic buyer would not be deterred from buying a BB foal on a steroid basis.

You don’t have to be a nice guy to get lucky! I will give credit where credit is due though…..IEAH was smart enough to pay big money for a horse that was already running. I would like to see more of the partnerships doing that instead of buying yearlings & two-year-olds. What the finance deal was…and who got paid & who didn’t….who knows? Was he much the best horse that year? I think so. Will he make it big as a stud? I guess we’ll have to wait ’til next summer to start finding out.

Boundary was not much stud…..but it just goes to show you a horse who’s a hell of a sprinter….by one of the greatest stallions in history….out of a family of Claiborne bred graded stake winning mares….STILL might not make it at stud! But he DID sire a hell of a race horse….Big Brown. There are PLENTY of those out there too! You just NEVER know!

My feeling is this…..with a declining foal crop going forward those who are able to support their stallions with large numbers of decent mares are going to “make” stallions. This is nothing new…….but since the numbers are going to be significantly smaller overall the effect might be magnified? I am not & have never been a breeder…..I buy yearlings & two-year-olds & race & sell them. Remember….. all it takes is for a two-year-old to work in :9&3 or :20&change & vet 1/2 way decent & nobody cares what the pedigree is…..the horse will sell high. Boundary was a good-looking horses & so is Big Brown….all it will take is for him to get ONE fast two-year-old next summer & that will carry him. Personally…….in the new stud category….I’d rather try to buy a young horse by High Cotton who already has a G1 winner, stands for a cheap stud fee & has a shot if his big horse comes back & runs well next year to hit a major home run! But that’s just me…who knows?

If Big Brown can pass his genes to his offspring, no one will care.
In people, coming off of steroids takes time and planning. I’ve had dogs who had to go on steroids and the biggest caution from my vet was the weaning process coming off the drug. You can’t just decide to go “cold turkey” because the body enters a catabolic (biochemical breakdown of molecules) phase including a decrease in strength, muscle mass and lack of desire to train.
Some common symptoms of stopping steroid use abruptly include the following:
Because steroids mess with the body’s (natural) cortisone signals/production (kind of deactivate the normal process) When you abruptly stop using steroids, there is a rush effect of cortisone released to the body that breaks down amino acids far too rapidly.
Depression and lethargy
Anxiety and nervousness
Because testosterone production was suppressed by Winstrol, if abruptly stopped, there is an immediate “vacuum” while the body comes up to speed.

Maybe horses don’t react like humans and other animals…

weight loss
muscle loss
lowered body strength
increased body fat

Rachel, If Big Brown passes his genes on to his offspring they will be $10K claimers. The hope is that he overcomes his genes in the breeding shed like he did on the track. That, however, almost never happens.

When should of been *before