It’s been days since the stunning non-performance by Big Brown in the 140th Belmont Stakes and everyone is still seeking an explanation, a reason for such a glaringly listless performance.

The truth is the fans and the industry will never know for sure until the results of a test, one that should have been administered on the morning after the Belmont, are made public.

image
Ever heard of Hypoadrenocorticism? Neither had I. But as a Big Brown fan I cannot accept what I saw last Saturday at Belmont Park. “Not himself” was not a suitably acceptable explanation, nor should it be, I thought.

Now I know better. Not only was “not himself” acceptable, it’s the only answer. Perhaps with an added qualifier. Because what I have learned since is that the Big Brown of Kentucky Derby and Preakness fame might not have been himself, either.

Maybe every single horse that’s ever been administered steroids, whether it be of the anabolic or corticosteroid variety, was never truly itself from the moment it got its first dose. Here’s what we didn’t know in the moments after the Belmont, nor learned from Dr. Larry Bramlage.

Hypoadrenocorticism is known by other descriptive names: adrenal exhaustion; turn-out syndrome, or steroid letdown syndrome. The condition, according to wikipedia sources, is a poorly documented cause of poor performance in race horses. Apparently not even experts in the field understand it fully.

But they know this much: Poor performances are usually attributable to the withdrawal of exogenous corticosteroid. It’s been a month since trainer Rick Dutrow was forthcoming about administering Winstrol, a non-corticosteroid, legal in 28 racing jurisdictions, to all his horses on the 15th of every month.

At that time, Dutrow said that he didn’t know what it did, but liked using it, and referred the media to his veterinarian, one of several he uses. Dutrow never said that his horses received corticosteroids, and subsequently admitted that Big Brown hadn’t received Winstrol since April 15.

Corticosteroids are commonly administered to race horses for one of two reasons, neither of which is good for the animal or the sport. By injecting it into the joints, it reduces musculoskeletal pain. Its other use is as a stimulant by causing a state of euphoria.

Prolonged corticosteroid therapy causes decreased secretion of ACTH by the pituitary, which results in adrenal atrophy. Withdrawal of exogenous corticosteroids may result in low concentrations of plasma cortisol.

Another symptom of turnout syndrome may be adrenal exhaustion, caused by the chronic stress of training. Or, perhaps, racing three times at the highest levels over three different surfaces in five weeks. Additionally, long term use of anabolic steroids may lead to adrenal insufficiency.

There are five clinical indicators of Hypoadrenocorticism, two of which are depression/lethargy and intolerance to exercise. According to what is known about the condition, the best time to test for this is the morning after a poor performance, seeking out either low concentrations of cortisol or a decreased response to ACTH stimulation.

image
There are three acknowledged methods of treating steroid letdown syndrome: The gradual withdrawal of corticosteroid treatment; turning out the animal for a period of one to three months, and decreasing alternate day doses of ACTH.

Relative to the above, either Dutrow or his veterinarians must supply some answers to racing authorities, preferably before the wrong people start asking those same questions.

Personally, there were many indications that Big Brown was not himself Belmont day. I watched video of him in the paddock on the large infield screen from my reserved grandstand seat. He appeared listless, not the inquisitive colt I’ve seen several times before.

But I’ve learned not to trust my lying eyes since the first time I learned that stretch runners don’t come flying down the homestretch to win a race. Rather, they simply decelerate at a slower pace than front-runners racing on tapped reserves.

Big Brown looked no better live in the post parade. He was sweating--something that horses should and must do on 94-degree afternoons. But the sight of kidney sweat, often a sign of internal stress that’s unknowable to onlookers, is never a positive.

Appearing listless is one thing but there were other indications this wasn’t the same undefeated winner of five races, three Grade 1s and two classics, by a total of 39 lengths.

The barn said that he had been rank--hard to handle--in the two days preceding the race. That’s not him, either. Neither was it him seen throwing his head, tugging at the reins on several occasions; nor was he a pretty picture prior to loading into the starting gate. We had never seen skittishness from Big Brown like that before.

Clearly there were other factors at work, too. He wants to run outside of horses. If not, why would his connections choose post 20 in the Derby when there were four other options available at the time?

The Belmont’s rival jockeys knew this, too. Alan Garcia on Da’ Tara got in front of him going into the first turn. Eibar Coa on Tale Of Ekati trapped him in a box on the lower first turn. Without question, Big Brown resented his jockey’s restraint and probably the tight quarters he was in, too.

Even if he did so abruptly, Desormeaux got him to the outside of rivals as soon as he could, almost bowling over Anak Nakal to do it. Then, after straightening out into the backstretch, Coa did some more race-riding, making sure he kept Big Brown way out in the middle of the track.

And the middle of the main track appeared dead all afternoon, and Desormeaux had to know that. He was in a perfect three-wide position aboard Commandeered, a 2-1 chance in the day’s first race, and the team just floundered there, never making so much as a bid.

For this, superintendent John “Fast Track” Passero must take the heat. The Belmont Park surface was sealed and rolled tighter than a drum on Friday night, long after the rains of Thursday had stopped.

There might not be as much cushion on Big Sandy as there used to be, but the surface still requires a great amount of water. Given the extremely hot day and the notion that all the moisture had been wrung from the surface the night before, the surface certainly would have benefited from more water content.

Desormeaux said that he thought Big Brown “slipped up front” coming out of the gate. That did not appear to be the case. Television analyst Jerry Bailey said he couldn’t verify that either from slow motion replays, but thought he might have slipped in behind.

image
While Desormeaux should have given Big Brown more rein away from the gate to get his horse into the clear, the fact is the winner broke cleaner and faster. It wasn’t riding strategy that beat Big Brown. In fact, Desormeaux told close confidants afterward “I knew I had no chance in the post parade.”

Desormeaux knew he wasn’t astride a happy horse; one that with the exception of those rank-early beginnings never was into the bridle; one racing on a quarter-crack patched only 24 hours earlier; that runs down--anathema at Belmont Park; one stressed out and off steroids, one worth $50 million.

To blame Desormeaux is scapegoating and shows little understanding of the variables at work. Given the scenario, the rider was unfairly maligned and didn’t deserve to get thrown under any buses, including the one steered by Big Brown’s trainer, race strategy be damned.

“I saved a horse today,” was Desormeaux’s immediate reaction after the race. And considering what had happened at Churchill Downs five weeks earlier, and the PETA demonstrators carrying signs outside the gates of Belmont Park, what the hell was Desormeaux supposed to do, anyway?

Another possibility is that, as smart as he is, Big Brown was taking care of himself before he was pulled up. And maybe, by racing as poorly as he did, he’ll do more for the sport than any lasting impression a Triple Crown victory would have made on his troubled sport.

Racing authorities need to find out what tests were administered to Big Brown post-Belmont, and what those findings were. Then, like Barbaro has done for laminitis research, and like Eight Belles is doing for musculoskeletal inquiry, Big Brown’s stunning Belmont performance can be the catalyst for good; an all-encompassing ban on the use of steroids.

  1. Nick Kling says:

    John,

    Interesting, but I have two opinions.

    1) If Desormeaux indeed told someone “I knew I had no chance in the post parade,” they and he should come forward and say so.  The people who wagered millions on the horse deserve to know that, and why Desormeaux didn’t say that after the race.

    I would encourage you to encourage them to come clean.  To do any less adds to the suspicion some have for our sport.

    2) I don’t remember, and didn’t write down his name, but I saw a brief segement with an animal scientist at Cornell U. who said given Big Brown’s apparent physical condition the week before the race, when according to all reports he looked fit, healthy, and full of himself, the withdrawal of the steroid should not have had any affect. 

    Remember, this is not an industry vet saying so, but a trained scientist at one of the world’s premier animal research centers.  Could he be wrong?  Of course.  But I’ll trust his scientific opinion until proven wrong.

  2. sidweiner says:

    JOHN--AS A SHEET PLAYER BIG BROWN DID NOTHING MORE THAN CONTINUE HIS BOUNCE--HE BOUNCED IN THE PREAKNESS AFTER AN OUTSTANDING NUMBER IN THE DERBY HOWEVER NOTHING WAS IN BACK OF HIM THAT RACE--A 3YR OLD WITH AS LITTLE FOUNDATION AS POSSIBLE EARNING A FIGURE IN THE DERBY THAT TO MY KNOWLEDGE HAS NEVER BEEN EARNED BEFORE HAD ONLY ONE WAY TO GO AND HE DID--

  3. JRP says:

    Gentlemen,

    Thanks for commenting. Nick, next time I see Desormeaux, I’ll ask him about it. Your second point about the Cornell man was a little fuzzy. Was he saying the horse looked good, or other observers? Anyway, a lot can happen in a week; I’m thinking of Whittingham and strawberries.

    Sid: There’s bounce, then there’s Big Brown’s Belmont, whatever that was. I look at sheets, too, and on the Equiform scale, which doesn’t measure ground loss--and he seems to like the outside, yes?--his Derby figure was good, but not among the best of all time.

    John

  4. Nick Briglia says:

    John, banning steroids and other unnecessary drugs sounds great but can it really be done?  What are the costs involved with the kind of testing needed to keep them out of the game?  Can smaller tracks afford to do it?  You can’t have detention barns for 10,000 claimers.  How can we possibly keep the criminals away?

  5. Nick Kling says:

    Nick B.

    “How can we keep the criminals away?”

    A good start would be to implement an idea I first heard from Barry Irwin—inventory ALL racetrack medications and drugs in one central place on the track, under supervision.  Then, require all licensed vets to sign them out in the morning, return the unused portions at night, and provide an accounting of how all the portion that is missing was used, by name of horse, trainer, and reason for use.

    Obviously, some horses would be shipping in, but if the medication consortium can start a consensus on drugs and withdrawal time, they could work on this as well.

    Finally, for any horse which tested positive, stiffen the penalties by: 1) requiring the horses to go to an unrelated barn, not an assistant trainer, in the event of a suspension lasting more than a specified number of days, 2) suspend the horse, and/or, suspend the owner.  If you did the latter, owners would soon demand their trainers played the game on the level.  The controversy would be over. 

    I doubt racing officials have the guts to do it, or the influence to make it stick if they did.

    John,

    I don’t recall for sure, but I believe he was commenting on horses in general, not specifically Big Brown.  I don’t believe he said he had seen Big Brown.

    The pre-race take from people I heard, Baffert, Bailey, Randy Moss, etc, was he looked great, hand’t turned a hair.  In retrospect I would agree that might have been a bad thing Saturday.

  6. JRP says:

    Nick B.

    Sterois are used to bulk up yearlings before the sales. Security starts there. If the consignors want to sell their horses at a particular venue, let them supply documentation that the yearlings weren’t puffed up through chemistry. Some horses become junkies before they begin to race. Since racing is a latter day marketing tool for the breeding industry, let them pay for the tests. Eve the buyers wouldn’t mind chipping in if they knew their purchase wouldn’t deflate a month after bringing it home.

    Nick K.

    I’ve alrady gotten grief from a trainer friend who doesn’t believe the steroid theory. Neither could trainer be found to defend KD’s ride, which was poor but not the reason for that performance. Hadn’t turned a hair, alright. He was asleep. Inteestingly, I thought War Pass hadn’t turned a hair in the Tampa Derby. And we know how that turned out, too.

  7. Nick Briglia says:

    All good ideas.  I still wonder, however, how we are going to stop the claiming trainers from doing there thing.  If the tests can’t be done on all races because of cost or the drugs stay one step ahead of modern testing then the juice trainers will continue to do their thing.  Not to make any accusations but right now Wayne Catalano in 24 for 38 with 33 in the money finishes at Arlington Park.  His horses consistently fight back when seemingly beaten and his stats defy logic.  Does he know something about training horses that Bill Mott or Shug McGaughey doesn’t?

  8. Nick Kling says:

    Gents,

    Be sure to read Bill Nack’s Bloodhorse column titled “Drill Bits.”

    Billy Turner rips Desormeaux and actually says the stewards should penalize him for easing the horse.  Read the column to get the whole thing before judging what Turner said.

    Interestingly, despite questioning how the horse was trained going into the race, Turner said he thought Big Brown would win during an interview Saturday on OTB’s Down The Stretch.  It wasn’t a ringing endorsement, but still…

  9. JackZ says:

    Gentlemen,

    Very interesting points in your discussion each leading to more questions as to the WHY’S of his poor performance.

    It is once again most unfortunate that this “stale” performance occured on the big stage where racing had the world watching.

    I attended the race and I was surprised to see the shocked look of the casual as well as seasoned racing players in attendance. It just does not make a first time or occasional fan want to come back and attend the sport at a later date...which is most unfortunate.

    Jack Z.

  10. JRP says:

    Who was it that said perception IS reality?

  11. JackZ says:

    Very true John!!!

  12. jimf says:

    I thought the most interesting thing was that BB was 3-10. Without Casino Drive in the race and breaking from the inside as the controlling speed, he should have been 1-20.

    A tremendous overlay at 3-10. Three to six times the actual price he should of been!

    Also, wasn’t there any bridge jumpers in the show pool? Or are these prices due to net pool pricing?

  13. JRP says:

    Yes, New York uses net pool pricing, and the lack of bridge jumpers had to be a product of all the publicity surrounding BB’s foot issues.

  14. Bellwether / james staples says:

    troubled sport...its not the sport its the yo yo’s trying to run it...Long Live The King!!!

  15. Nick Kling says:

    “JRP says: Who was it that said perception IS reality?”

    JRP,

    I don’t know if he was first, but Stanley Kubrick sure did in “A Clockwork Orange.”

    I also know something Little Alex said in that movie applies to Dutrow, Desormeaux, and IEAH.

    “Evidence of the glassies.”

  16. Joan Cornett says:

    This was a great article.  You said everything that needed to be said.



    ** Due to recent inappropriate salacious comments and personal attacks in our comment sections, we are now requiring users to register. It is a quick, one-time-only process requiring e-mail verification. The option to automatically login in future visits is incorporated into the new security measure.

    We apologize for the minor inconvenience but felt it necessary to take this measure in the best interests of all our readers. Many thanks for your understanding, helpful suggestions, and loyal support. -- The HRI Management Team **

    Log In to leave comment
    Register as a new member

    Remember my personal information

    Notify me of follow-up comments?



    *** HorseRaceInsider will delete any comment that engages in personal attacks directed at anyone, uses foul language, or one made by an imposter using another’s name to express an opinion or comment.

    HRI will not, however, edit or discourage those who, with intellectual honesty, disagree with HRI staffers or other readers. We also will not, as is done on some racing sites, edit disagreeable or negative commentary in the interests of commerce.