Due to make the trophy presentation that afternoon at Belmont was New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo, fully sensing the exposure he'd receive if he were to be seen making a Triple Crown presentation.
The guv's plans were waylaid when two hardened felons escaped from the maximum security Clinton Correctional Facility upstate in the town of Dannemora that morning. Inasmuch as the escapees were not quickly caught, Andrew Cuomo thought it best to satay close to manhunt news by remaining in Albany. Hobnobbing at a downstate racetrack while two dangerous people were crashing through the woods upstate, and possibly taking hostages, was not what Cuomo felt should be the concern he should be showing to citizens faced with potential peril. Thus, he sat tight.
Eventually, after many days of searching, the felons were reeled in—one killed by a trooper while running, the other returned to the facility.
In 2018, with another Triple Crown in the possible making, Justify escaped from the starting gate in front of the stands, circled the track with the rest of his 9 competitors in lukewarm, or not-at-all pursuit, led at every call—wire-to-wire—as the track lingo goes, and accomplished the three race sweep, a scant three years after American Pharoah. Justify wins in what is only his sixth race, while not even ever racing as a two-year old.
This was the 50th anniversary of my first going out to the races, starting with the Belmont Stakes in 1968. I've seen all the Belmonts since, and I can't even guess at how many other races I've watched or bet on. Triple Crowns come in clusters. There is no predictable cycle they adhere to, like Olympics every four years.
NBC's Randy Moss filled the viewers in on the clusters: Three in the 1930s: 1930, 1935, 1937. Four in the 1940s: 1941, 1943, 1946, 1948. Three in the 70s: 1973, 1977, 1978. And now two in the teens: 2015, 2018.
I was there for all the Triple Crowns in the 70s and distinctly remember not appreciating Seattle Slew's effort as he won with an undefeated record. I still had the memory of Secretariat "moving like a tremendous machine..." as Chick Anderson told the crowd. My feeling was Seattle Slew was not that good. He wasn't Secretariat. But Seattle Slew was good, and had a further championship year racing as four-year old.
And Justify is good. He ran like Joe Drape said at his 'American Pharoah' book signing at the Northshire book store in Saratoga in 2016, championship horses take the lead and control the race. Certainly not all races are won from the front, but enough of the great ones are.
My own take of the race was that I was disappointed it was not more exciting—at least for me. My money was not on Justify, even though he earned a staggering number on my rating system, with everyone else nearly at least 30 points behind him.
(There is always a backward look, and with that kind of spread the logical bet would have been to look at the exacta payouts with Justify on top, and see if a top wheel with everyone else would have been worth it. As it turned out, the $2 exacta with long shot Gronkowski produced an $89 payout. Certainly a great ROI for a base bet of $18.)
As the race unfolded, Justify kept to the rail as any horse starting from the one hole would. Oddly, Bob Baffert's other horse, Restoring Hope, ran for the lead, but drifted wide on the clubhouse turn, almost looking like he wanted to go back to the barn. Settling into the turn Justify emerges with what looks like a three length lead. The start almost unfolded like a staggered start track race, with outer lane competitors seemingly given a head start, only to be equalized as the distance evens out as the race develops. The tactics seemed odd to me, but that's racing.
First fraction of :23 1/5 was more than decent. It looked like a fast race was going to develop. Until it didn't. The subsequent fractions were rather pedestrian, and the final time of 2:28 was mediocre. But it was Justify all the way. The others offered no real competition. But when Justify is by far and away the best of all the other three-year olds, what can you expect?
Aside from the Triple Crown, Gronkowski was the story of the day. Before the race I gave someone my quick point-by-point analysis of each entrant and said that Grankowski had a great trainer in Chad Brown, a great jockey in Jose Ortiz, but had never raced in this country before, has never competed beyond one mile, has only run on the turf or an artificial surface, not a dirt track like today's Belmont, but did have first time Lasix, as many foreign horses do when they come to the country.
What is Lasix? It is an accepted drug that nearly all race horses compete under that helps a horse in their breathing by preventing blood from entering the lungs during the exertion of running, Untreated EIPH, exercise induced pulmonary hemorrhage, reduces performance. North American racing allows the drug. Foreign racing jurisdictions forbid it.
A good past performance readout will indicate the first time use of Lasix with a white L inside a black oval next to the weight. It is considered an angle by many. On paper, Gronkowski's only angles were the trainer, the jockey and the indication of first time Lasix.
Chad Brown called Jose's ride a million dollar effort, as he guided Gronkowski from last place, through traffic, holding onto the rail and angling out in deep stretch, finishing a rousing second to Justify. As impressive as that looked on replay, it showed Gronkowski not really gaining on Justify, perhaps only a quarter of a length. Certainly not enough.
The chart caller described Justify as "...hustled along springing from the starting gate..." to Gronkowski's "lumbered his way out of the starting gate..." That is quite a difference.
Everyone looks at a race through subjective eyes, usually guided by their rooting interests and money. My own modest bets did not use Justify, but I was disappointed that the race did not have a more competitive look.
Wire-to-wire efforts like Justify's can bring out the cynical description of a "boat race." Everyone is vainly chasing the leader, almost in single file. I called it a boat race. My friend of many years who was with me the first time we went to the track, 50 years ago agreed. "Get the oars out" he proclaimed.
Mike Repole, owner of Vino Russo, and part owner of Noble Indy, has started calling for an investigation. His take is that Bob Baffert's horse Restoring Hope acted as a "blocker" and Noble Indy's jockey, Jose Costellano ignored instructions to go to the lead and instead mailed in his efforts. Repole is so mad at Costellano that he says he will never use him again on any of his horses. Mike Repole's horses are good enough that they won't go riderless, and they won't go with unsuccessful jockeys. Jose is just on the shit list with Mike right now, a status jockeys often find themselves with owners and trainers who are mad at their ride. It sometimes goes away.
(Note:
Mike Repole complained loudly. Melissa Hoppert of the NYT was gracious enough to answer a query as to how the NYRA stewards were reacting to Mr. Repole. She provided a quote from their statement:
"The stewards did not evidence any issue with the Belmont Stakes and were not contacted with objections by participating jockeys or horsemen. As such, Mr. Lewandowski indicated neither he nor his fellow stewards plan to discuss race strategy with Florent Geroux [rider of Restoring Hope]."
Again, the start. Noble Indy is described as "...out with his initial step, brushed the right side of the stating gate, accelerated upon recovery..."
Years and years ago the rules of racing would have had Bob Baffert's two horses, Justify and Restoring Hope racing as an "entry," a coupled wager that would put the two horses under one mutuel number. Eventually the arrangement was changed to allow commonly trained horses under different ownership to race as separate betting interests. Handle gets goosed with more entrants.
Common ownership with different trainers is another story. WinStar is listed as having piece of Noble Indy along with Repole Stable. Justify is 60% owned by WinStar. Should they have been a common betting interest?
Running a rabbit in a race is something you don't hear much of these days. Fifty years ago Frank Whiteley Jr. had a horse named Hedevar, who was so fast he held the world record for the mile. He would be coupled in the wagering with Whiteley's Damascus to sprint to the front, soften up the headstrong Dr. Fager or Buckpasser, and leave his remains for Damascus to pick up and pass. It did work.
If Bob Baffert's Restoring Hope was a rabbit he was certainly a bad one. A rabbit that is not in the lead is not a rabbit. It is the tortoise.
When I started out the old timer Les would tell us of "pulling horses," a tactic by jockeys to put a stranglehold on the reins and keep a horse from running to his full ability. This was done to create a loss, and therefore goose the odds the next time out.
It was also done to create an order of finish that was to someone's advantage. The talk of the races when I started was that Angel Cordero pulled horses to let the jockey Eddie Belmonte win. If it was true or not is all part of the urban legend that follows racing. Angel Cordero is in the Hall of Fame, and Eddie Belmonte was banned from the tracks as a jockey and an agent for personal use of drugs.
Did Costellano purposely take Noble Indy out of his front-running game because of the common WinStar ownership with Justify, paving the way for Justify to have the place to himself. To run a "boat race?" Mike Repole is not going to get anyone's attention on this other than talk radio hosts and disgruntled callers. A Robert Mueller will not be looking into the Saturday's Belmont.
And the crowd of 90,000? Did they see what others saw? Or what they think they saw? Not likely. A Tweet from someone described the crowd as 90% arriving without racing forms or programs—and I'm sure without binoculars— perhaps somewhat harshly calling them a fashion show for alcoholics. Certainly TV spotlights the ensembles.
So what? Anyone in attendance paid dearly to get there, get out of there, and paid dearly for the right to stand and cheer, or the right to have a seat. Will there be those who come out next week with a marked up Racing Form in the hope of hitting the Daily Double as I did? Will they be there 50 years from now talking and watching horses? I'm sure not many.
So, did Governor Andrew Cuomo make it to the winner's circle this time to present the trophies? No one escaped other than Justify. No, the guv wasn't there.
In a sense he was there, because Micheal J. Del Giudice was in the father's inner circle when Mario Cuomo was governor. Mr. Del Giudice is chairmen of the board of directors that oversees NYRA racing. Mr. Del Giudice was front and center at the trophy presentation ceremony.
But that Triple Crown trophy? As pictured above, it is the new creation to be presented to the owner of the winner of the Triple Crown. But with the ownership of Justify reading like a court document listing either defendants or plaintiffs, who gets to hold onto it? Who can move it? It is too heavy to lift over your head, and doesn't have a bowl attached that allows beer or champagne to be gulped from, like the Stanley Cup. NBC's Bob Costas offered the principals a chance to "cradle it." Its resemblance to a ship's anchor is strong.
Given that Justify is now reported to be worth at least $85 million in breeding rights—stallion equity—and may not ever race again because of that value, it is clear money will still be following racing, even if no one goes to the track in the days after the Belmont.
http://www.onofframp.blogspot.com
Mike Smith changed his silks from the Derby & Preakness - was there a change in ownership?
ReplyDeleteNo, there are about four different groups that all have a piece of the racing rights, which are separate from the breedimg rights. WinStar were the original silks, 60% ownership. China Racing Club silks were used in the Belmont. The Asian fellow in the fedora is head of that mysterious money.
ReplyDelete