When they run against each other a half dozen times and the finishes are thrilling each time, or when each accounts for a race against the other in a way that you’ll remember it forever, maybe that’s when there will be a rivalry. Until then, prepare for a Belmont Stakes that might re-unite the Kentucky Derby and Preakness Stakes winners and that, in itself, is worth something. It'll be the first time for the rubber match since 2005.
Last year’s Belmont Stakes didn’t feature either the Derby or Preakness winner. In the year before, the Derby king Mine That Bird finished third while the Preakness queen Rachel Alexandra remained in her stall. In 2008, Big Brown, running invincibly, supposedly, had his Triple Crown beheaded when Kent Desormeaux pulled the undefeated horse up and out of the race when he saw that his effort was futile.
Only nine winners of one of the first two Triple Crown races or both competed in the third over the term of the last 10 years. Only one Belmont winner since 1995, namely Thunder Gulch, won the Derby. In the last couple decades, half the Belmonts were won by basically once-in-a-lifetime sensations.
As a matter of fact, the Belmont Stakes hasn’t accommodated rivals since 1989 when Easy Goer turned the tables on Kentucky Derby and Preakness winner Sunday Silence. The two Hall of Fame horses met on the racetrack only four times. Sunday Silence defeated Easy Goer three times. Yet, in two of the races, the margin was less than a neck. In the betting, one was favored and the other was made second choice in all Triple Crown starts, and they finished one-two each time.
In 1978, Easy Goer’s father Alydar had a rivalry with Affirmed that was even more thrilling. The two horses met on 10 occasions, facing off eight times before the Belmont. Heading into Louisville for the Run for the Roses, the count stood at two wins for Alydar and four for Affirmed. The chestnut son of Exclusive Native, under-appreciated by the Eastern establishment, swept the Triple Crown and beat his rival twice more to the finish line, although he surrendered his Travers Stakes prize money because of Laffit Pincay’s boo-boo.
There have been years when circumstances conspired to create rivalries, too. Sham is often considered the rival of Secretariat, but in none of their showdowns was the outcome in doubt. Frank “Pancho” Martin, Sham’s trainer, contributed heat to this comparison, boasting wildly that Sham finished ahead of Secretariat in the Wood Memorial won by Angle Light and that his horse lost two teeth in the gate before the Derby began. But to nought.
East vs. West was the theme behind the fabrication of a Nashua vs. Swaps rivalry in 1955. A “Great Match Race,” held at Chicago’s Washington Park, eventually settled which colt was the better – the Kentucky Derby winner Swaps or the Preakness and Belmont Stakes winner Nashua. The race turned out to be not much of a contest, as the East Coast-based Nashua took the lead at the start and, like Seabiscuit beating War Admiral – two other famed rivals, found the finish line first.
In the late 1930s, Seabiscuit and War Admiral developed their followings with feats that kept them apart. Only they, unlike Zenyatta and Rachel Alexandra, were given the chance to meet. Rivals that never face off often cause the most intrigue. Unresolved issues play into the imagination. We’ll never know now, for example, if Uncle Mo was the better of Premier Pegasus or if Uncle Mo was a flash in the pan.
At this point, neither Animal Kingdom nor Shackleford are candidates for anxious conjecture. In Animal Kingdom, horse racing has an impressive Kentucky Derby winner that achieved his success after the top three-year-olds dropped out. The lightly-raced horse is 50-50 in his half dozen starts, having won only one race of questionable note - the Grade 3 Spiral - before breaking through to the peak of his generation.
Shackleford is a Preakness winner that took advantage of his tactical speediness to hang on in a race that set up poorly for Animal Kingdom. The Dale Romans-trained colt wasn’t able to hold off a lesser adversary - Dialed In - in the Florida Derby, a similar, albeit, slightly longer route. Although the colt’s three-for-seven record’s admirable, the son of Forestry may, if he stays healthy, become Hard Spun.
In the next two weeks, NYRA’s marketing and communications teams will be cranking out tweets and Facebook posts like a teen that’s on summer vacation. They’ll be spinning the face-off as a battle of champions.
This is what you do when you’re dealt a hand that costs you 50,000 fans in the grandstand.
When no Triple Crown’s at stake, Belmont Park’s management is ecstatic to host 60,000 patrons on Belmont Stakes day. Chances are, nonetheless, that the crowd will see some other horse, beside the two being hyped, prove triumphant.
30 May 2011 at 05:44 am | #
The thing about the 1989 Belmont was that at that time in particular, there were many in New York who routinely accused NYRA, fair or not, of “fixing the track for the Phippses,” and the Belmont was when those accusations were at their peak. The stories about that were so bad that I actually picked (but was unable to bet due to no OTB where I was then) Criminal Type to beat Easy Goer in the 1990 Met Mile, since anything done to “fix the track for the Phippses” was also going to favor Criminal Type, a case at beating the conspiracists who really believed that about NYRA then at their own game, as Criminal Type beat Easy Goer in that Met Mile on his way to eventually becoming Horse of the Year for 1990.
Rivalries have come few and far between, especially with everyone it seems so worried about getting to the Breeders’ Cup that they forget there is a sporting aspect that says you’re supposed to go in all the top races. It’s just one more reason there needs to be a “get tough” policy (something if I were a commissioner with teeth I would implement) in the sport where horses would be required to start in many more races leading up to the Triple Crown and Breeders’ Cup. Aside from more easily creating real rivalries, I would think it would also reduce injuries long-term because we’d have fitter horses who would be able to bounce back much quicker as opposed to the same kind of “babying” that is similar to why we have so many injuries among pitchers in baseball because they don’t pitch enough. Aside from a phase-out on Lasix, this to me is something that needs to be seriously looked at in “the best interests of the sport,” a clause that if I were Commissioner I would make every horse person and track owner sign and adhere to that would sometimes include mandating starts, especially if there are television considerations involved.
30 May 2011 at 06:07 am | #
Vic,
You said, “Let’s just put an end to this nonsense about a rivalry. Animal Kingdom and Shackleford are not rivals.”
Then, a few paragraphs down, you said, “the Belmont Stakes hasn’t accommodated rivals since 1989 when Easy Goer turned the tables on Kentucky Derby and Preakness winner Sunday Silence.”
If Animal Kingdom and Shackleford meet in the Belmont, they will be meeting for the third time. When Sunday Silence and Easy Goer met in the Belmont, it was for the third time.
If one was a rivalry, then so is the other, or vice versa, assuming AK & S actually meet in the Belmont.
Walt,
You can’t mandate starts. If a trainer or owner says the horse isn’t ready to run, and a “rule” says it must run, imagine what would happen if the animal breaks down.
Even if a state vet says the horse is fit, no one knows the animal better than its trainer, assuming the trainer is competent.
Think back to when there was a “points” bonus for running in Triple Crown races. Some horses were entered for the bonus, and some of them were not anywhere near their best form.
The lawsuits would never end, and extremist groups like PETA would have legitimate ammunition to get racing banned, or severely curtailed.
Horses aren’t machines.
30 May 2011 at 06:15 am | #
Nick:
Obviously, there would have to be a balance concerning starts, but the idea is that horses do need to start more often than they do. We didn’t have nearly the number of injuries we do now when horses raced more often, and I think the lack of fitness from frequent starts does contribute to the injuries.
Look at pitching in baseball. You see Roy Halliday for instance throwing 115-125 pitches per start as opposed to the 100 a lot of pitchers throw and often getting 7-8 innings as opposed to six for others, yet, you don’t hear about Halliday getting injured, especially with his arm the way others have. Same for Cliff Lee, who usually gives the Phils 7-8 innings and throws well over 100-110 pitches per start. To me, the “babying” of horses much like the “babying” of pitchers in baseball has in both cases severely contributed to the injuries we see today. By setting it up where if you want to run in the biggest races, you have to run your horses more often ahead of that. That to me is the only way to strengthen the breed aside from the elimination of Lasix.
30 May 2011 at 06:28 am | #
Walt,
I hear what you’re saying, and I agree completely about MLB pitchers.
I just don’t know how you could effectively mandate anything about starts.
You and I may not like the current state of the Thoroughbred, but it is what it is. There can be little doubt that breeding for speed and for sales, as well as breeding bleeders to bleeders, has had its impact.
Even if we eliminate raceday medication, which should be done, we will still have breeders mating horses for fashion, not stamina and strength.
Too bad we can’t mandate more trainers like Bill Mott, Allen Jerkens, and Richard Mandella, who know how to get horses fit for the long haul, and de-mandate trainers like (you fill in the blank), who get horses ready to run every 6-8 weeks.
30 May 2011 at 08:01 am | #
A rivalry in horse racing always has more INTENSITY when it’s east vs. west.
Remember Tom Durkin’s stretch call in the Belmont as Easy Goer drew away from Sunday Silence.
It’s New York’s Easy Goer in front.
Alot of New York race fans, handicappers and turf writers took pride and redemption in that Belmont win.
30 May 2011 at 08:20 am | #
Tobasco Cat’s comment illustrates a point that I should have written more clearly. I confused readers, including Nick Kling, to think the number of times that horses run against each other solely determines the existence of a rivalry.
If that was the case there would be hundreds of horses engaged in rivalries. Horses run against each other all the time and occasionally they take turns beating each other.
Rivalries, as I am referring to, include multiple face-offs between two contestants, a high-level of anticipation for those face-offs, a history of accomplishment for each horse, repeated performances by the rivals that cause genuine thrills to occur and passionate followings for the horses by fans with diametrically opposing views and preferences, e.g East vs. West.
30 May 2011 at 08:50 am | #
Cat,
This isn’t meant to be picky. Rather, it is to salute an underrated racecaller.
That race call was made by Marshall Cassidy.
Marshall’s race calls stand up very well over time. His enunciation was perfect, and you knew where every horse was. Accuracy took precedence over color. Some folks preferred the latter, and hence the change was made.
Tom and Marshall are/were both great racecallers, just totally different.
The closest there is to Marshall today is Kurt Becker.
30 May 2011 at 09:28 am | #
So we can’t have a Triple-Crown champion and now we can’t have a TC rivalry, either? What a promotional “diZASTer” from a marketing maven no less! Indeed the number of times rivals faced each other is meaningless considering that one of the greatest rivalries to ever exist—Zenyatta and Rachel Alexandra—was never even consummated.
Too bad neither Shak nor AK is considering today’s Met Mile as a workout like Arts and Letters did prior to defeating HIS acknowledged rival, Majestic Prince, in the Belmont.
It’s possible this week’s two classic renewals at Belmont are the most competitive in years. The question is, will our host allow us to consider Tackleberry and Soaring Empire a rivalry and/or either with Tizway and/or Caixa Eletronica, the horse that may enhance Pletcher’s reputation as a claiming trainer? Can we have a rivalry in the same barn like Aikenite and Ibboyee who join their stablemate CE in an effort to keep his “non-rival,” Haynesfield—who he just defeated at their first meeting—from reversing that earlier decision?
30 May 2011 at 09:35 am | #
Indulto, and how sbout Met/Belmont repeater Conquistador Cielo?
30 May 2011 at 10:11 am | #
JP,
CC’s trainer won 5 Belmonts in succession and did it differently each time. I have to think that A&L;’s quarduple crown effort was the more impressive.
30 May 2011 at 10:50 am | #
Nick,
Thanks for the correction, my bad. Yes it was Marshall and he was a great race caller. I remember listening to stretch calls on tape delay on the radio huddled with people at work in the eighties.