Will The Drought End Tomorrow?

---

---

I remember the last Triple Crown winner — vaguely. I had just graduated from high school — and broken up with my girlfriend. I was going to enroll in college in the fall. I didn't really pay close attention to horse racing at that time in my life. After all, a Triple Crown? What was so special about that? It was the third one in six years.

In hindsight, the duels between eventual Triple Crown winner Affirmed and his rival Alydar were quite special. In addition to producing the most recent Triple Crown winner (in 1978), they were just darn good horse races.

I must admit that I have been pretty busy this year. I have managed to watch the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness as usual, but that has really been the extent of it this year.

Still, I learned a few things. For one, I know — as everyone knows about horses that win the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness — that American Pharoah is a speed horse. But that means nothing going into tomorrow's race. The first two races of the Triple Crown emphasize speed; the Belmont, which will be run tomorrow, is the longest race any horse will ever run, and it emphasizes endurance. It is really more of a jockey's race. The jockey must make critical decisions, such as when to make your move and dig deep for any reserves of energy. You don't really see signs of that in the Derby or the Preakness. They're over in the blink of an eye. But the Belmont is a longer race. The jockey's strategic skills combine with the horse's endurance.

I didn't realize until three weeks ago how good American Pharoah could be on a sloppy track. His victory in the Preakness was dominant in soggy conditions, which might tell us a lot if rain was in the forecast. But there's only a slight chance of rain in Elmont, N.Y., tomorrow. Should be a pleasant day, actually, with a northerly breeze and a temperature in the mid–70s.

But the track should be dry, as it was at the Kentucky Derby five weeks ago. American Pharoah's victory wasn't as dominant in that one.

---

---

That was, by far, the more dramatic race, with American Pharoah bunched with two other horses as they sprinted to the finish line. They were so tightly bunched, in fact, that I thought I was about to see my first–ever photo finish involving three horses. But American Pharoah pulled away and was the clear winner.

I've become a bit jaded about the Triple Crown in recent years. We've been disappointed a little more than one–third of the time when the Derby/Preakness winner either did not win or did not enter the Belmont; the rest of the time, there was no chance that the winner of the Belmont would win the Triple Crown because two different horses had won the Derby and the Preakness — and that meant low TV ratings and low attendance.

Last year, with California Chrome making what turned out to be an unsuccessful bid for the Triple Crown, more than 100,000 people came to the track, and things got out of hand. This year, organizers say they're putting a cap on attendance at 90,000. We'll see how that works out.

So will American Pharoah end the drought? He's the clear favorite going into the race, but I have been skeptical in recent years. I have written about that before, and I feel much the same way this time. I doubt that it will happen.

I don't have any overwhelming reason for that. I don't have a horse in mind that I think will win the race, although there are a couple of names I have been hearing mentioned frequently — Keen Ice and Frosted. Keep an eye on those horses. Even though the 1½–mile Belmont emphasizes endurance, I think it is possible that either of those horses could make a move from the start that forces American Pharoah into a speed race. Unless he really turns out to be one of those rare perfect blends of speed and endurance, he will run out of gas before he reaches the finish line.

---

---

Here's a look at the last time a horse won the Triple Crown — Affirmed's triumph in the Belmont Stakes in June of 1978.

There's No Such Thing as a Sure Thing

---

---

When I worked on a sports copy desk in Little Rock, I became friends with the sportswriter who covered horse racing for us.

I learned a lot from him. I remember most of the things he told me, and I will never forget what may have been the most important thing he told me: There is no such thing as a sure thing. That's why they call it gambling.

In a week and a half, California Chrome will become the 12th horse to enter the Belmont Stakes with a chance to win the Triple Crown since Affirmed became the most recent Triple Crown winner in 1978. (Well, I presume he will run in the Belmont. He might not have if he hadn't been permitted to wear the nasal strip that helped him breathe easier in the first two races — and he still might not compete. I guess we won't know for sure until the Belmont is run on June 7.)

Obviously, we've been here before — and, just as obviously, success in the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness does not mean success in the Belmont Stakes.

It's a point every Triple Crown winner must reach en route to achieving the goal, of course, and 11 horses have won all three races for 3–year–old thoroughbreds that comprise it.

That's 11 Triple Crown winners in 95 years — since Sir Barton won the first Triple Crown back in 1919. But we's have had that many horses win the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness and fail to win the Belmont since Affirmed's Triple Crown in 1978 — starting with Spectacular Bid in 1979.

There had never been three consecutive Triple Crown winners when Spectacular Bid ran in the Belmont, but, if Spectacular Bid had won that race, it would have made three straight Triple Crown winners.

On the morning of the 1979 Belmont, it was discovered that Spectacular Bid had stepped on a safety pin, and it was lodged in his hoof. He didn't appear to be lame, though, so he was allowed to run the race, and he appeared to be doing well, holding the lead at the midway point. However, he began to falter and finished third.

---

---

Since then, 10 other horses have won the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness but failed to win the Belmont — and it might have been 11, but we'll never know. I'll Have Another won the first two races in 2012 but did not run in the Belmont.

Winning the first two races and losing the third wasn't a new thing in 1979. In the years before Spectacular Bid's Triple Crown attempt, eight other horses won the first two races but came up short in the third and last one. But it has been happening with greater frequency in the last 35 years.

Why is that? Well, I could be wrong, but I think it is because of the age of specialization that permeates sports these days.

Take baseball, for example. When I was growing up, it wasn't uncommon for a pitcher to throw a complete game. In fact, it was routinely expected that starting pitchers would go the distance — and relievers were called upon only when things got out of hand.

Now, baseball teams carry staffs of relief specialists who are called on (ideally) when the starter has gone six or seven innings, long enough to receive credit for the win, starting with the middle reliever and (again, ideally) proceeding to the closer.

I don't breed horses, but I gather — from my own observations and comments from those whose evaluations on such things I trust — that horses are bred for either speed or endurance, not both. To a degree, I suppose it has always been that way; I have always heard certain horses referred to as speed horses and other horses referred to as endurance horses.

I've heard some people suggest that, based on the times of the first two races, California Chrome is an endurance horse. I'm not sure about that. These assessments are made on the basis of times that differ by fifths of seconds. Sports are often described as being games of inches, though, so judging distances by fifths of seconds may not be all that different. I'm just not entirely sure it is the way to differentiate between a speed horse and an endurance horse.

Essentially, I suppose, a horse that can win all three races of the Triple Crown is both.

They call the Belmont the "test of the champion," and it really is. It is the longest of the three races by at least a quarter of a mile, thus emphasizing endurance over speed. If a horse can win the Triple Crown, he really has proven himself as an all–around champion.

In an interesting piece in The Atlantic last week, Henry Fetter wrote that even a Triple Crown winner won't be enough to save horse racing.

"[H]oping that a Triple Crown for California Chrome can jump–start a turnaround in the fortunes of the erstwhile sport of kings is almost certainly a hope too far," Fetter wrote.

I hope he's wrong.

The Return of Calvin Borel

---

---

Does the name of Calvin Borel sound familiar to you?

He's a jockey from Louisiana, and, even if you only pay attention to horse racing in the five weeks of the Triple Crown, Borel's name should sound familiar to you. He's a Hall of Famer, a three–time winner of the Kentucky Derby; in 2009, he won the Preakness as well and became the first jockey to win the first two races of the Triple Crown on different horses.

In fact, when he won the Preakness (exactly five years ago this Friday), Borel rode a filly, Rachel Alexandra. It wasn't the first time that a filly won the Preakness, but it was the first time in 85 years.

It is important to know that because Borel apparently will be trying to duplicate horse racing history in this Saturday's running of the Preakness. It was reported yesterday that Borel will be riding another filly, Ria Antonia.

The immediate plans for the filly, who recently changed owners, were uncertain initially, but Jennie Rees of USA Today reports that "[a]n impressive workout Sunday under Calvin Borel seemed to seal the deal."

Meanwhile, Kentucky Derby winner and presumptive Preakness favorite California Chrome arrived in Baltimore Monday. He seemed to enjoy the attention he received, writes Childs Walker in the Baltimore Sun.

He's getting plenty of attention from other owners who would like to puncture the Triple Crown balloon. As I observed following the Kentucky Derby, the comparatively leisurely pace of the Kentucky Derby might encourage the owners of speed horses to challenge California Chrome in Baltimore.

Is that what is happening? Is Ria Antonia a speed horse who might be capable of challenging California Chrome?

Her new trainer isn't saying, only that he see the Preakness as being California Chrome vs. the field. If he is able to run the race his way, he will win. But if he is thrown off by something or someone, all bets are off.

Speaking of bets, according to the odds posted yesterday, the pending odds against Ria Antonia are 32–1. If the odds are unchanged Saturday afternoon, and Borel rides Ria Antonia to victory, it will be a big story — but it won't be the biggest story in Borel's career. Two weeks before he rode Rachel Alexandra to victory in the Preakness, he rode Mine That Bird, a 50–to–1 shot, to a huge upset win in the Kentucky Derby.

Borel rode Ride On Curlin in this year's Kentucky Derby on May 3, finishing seventh. Ride On Curlin will be in the Preakness field this Saturday, but Joel Rosario, who rode General A Rod to an 11th–place finish at Churchill Downs, will replace Borel.

(General A Rod has been confirmed for the race, too. Javier Castellano, who rode the winner in the 2006 Preakness, will be on board.)

Can California Chrome Win the Triple Crown?

---

---

As expected, California Chrome won the Kentucky Derby yesterday.

I watched the race, as I always do. I enjoyed the spectacle of the thing. I reminded myself that someday I would really like to go to Churchill Downs to watch the Kentucky Derby in person.

It isn't a Bucket List kind of thing. I know that you've probably got to have connections with people who have connections to people who have connections to the Derby merely to be able to watch from the grandstand. During my days as a sports copy editor, I knew a handicapper rather well, and he might have been such a connection for me then. But that was many years ago, and my friend is now deceased. The odds against my ever going to the Kentucky Derby must be incredible.

So it will remain the sort of thing I would like to do, but it isn't the sort of thing I absolutely positively must do, before I die. And that's OK.

Anyway, as I say, I enjoyed the spectacle of the race. It's always exciting for me to watch those horses running around that track, but each year it seems I care less about who wins — and more about whether he can win the other two races in the Triple Crown, the Preakness in two weeks and the Belmont in early June.

It has been nearly 36 years since Affirmed became the most recent horse to win the Triple Crown. Since I'll probably never get to see a Kentucky Derby in person, I would like to witness a Triple Crown winner.

There are those who follow horse racing who will tell you that a Triple Crown can not be won — but they have been saying that for decades, whenever there is a gap between Triple Crown winners. Thirty–six years and counting is the longest such drought in Triple Crown history, which encourages the naysayers all the more.

The Kentucky Derby is the clean slate for the Triple Crown. Once it is over, there is only one horse that can win the Triple Crown that year. But before the Run for the Roses, the number of horses that could win the Triple Crown is however many horses are running at Churchill Downs.

The Preakness is always important in the quest for the Triple Crown, but it can be misleading. Since Affirmed won the Triple Crown, a dozen horses have won both the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness, but none won the Belmont.

(In fact, it has been 10 years since a horse won the Derby and the Preakness and even finished the Belmont. Big Brown didn't finish in 2008, and I'll Have Another was scratched in 2012.)

Why is that so? Well, the Derby and the Preakness are shorter races. They're practically the same distance, and they favor speed. The Belmont is considerably longer, and it favors endurance.

Few horses combine both. The legendary Secretariat did, coming from behind to win the first two jewels but seizing control of the Belmont and winning it by 30 lengths. The video tape of that race is the most amazing thing you will ever see at a race track.

Judging from the somewhat pedestrian pace of yesterday's Kentucky Derby, which was run on a warm, sunny day and a dry track, this year's field may lean toward endurance. That could encourage owners of speed horses to challenge California Chrome at Pimlico on May 17, and he may wind up facing horses he hasn't seen before.

If you are mostly unfamiliar with horse racing and don't really follow it until this five–week period in May and June, you probably don't think of two weeks as being short rest, but for nearly all horsemen, it is probably the equivalent of sending your ace pitcher back out to the mound a couple of days after his last start.

It simply isn't done.

Well, except during the run for the Triple Crown — three races, three states, five–week period. That's like an Iron Man Triathlon for horses.

"I'm not real comfortable with running him back in two weeks, but I know that's what we're bound to do," California Chrome's trainer told Reuters. "I'm more the kind of guy who likes to wait seven or eight weeks between races. These horses run hard and they need time to recover."

No records were set in yesterday's race. Don't expect any two weeks from now.

When Secretariat Won the Preakness

---

---

When a horse wins the Kentucky Derby, it sets off a certain amount of speculation about whether that horse can win the Triple Crown.

But most railbirds don't get excited about a horse's chances of winning the Triple Crown until the Derby winner actually wins that second jewel, the Preakness.

After all, someone has to win the Kentucky Derby, right? Win the Preakness, too, and then we'll talk.

(There will be no such talk this year. Oxbow won yesterday's Preakness, not Orb, the Kentucky Derby winner.)

When Secretariat won the 1973 Kentucky Derby, there was still some residual uncertainty about whether it was a true representation of the likely outcome of a duel between Secretariat and Sham. After all, Sham had beaten Secretariat decisively in the Wood Memorial a few weeks earlier.

The rematch of the top two finishers in the Derby was highly anticipated, and the Secretariat–Sham showdown riveted the attention of the sports world for the five weeks of the Triple Crown.

And when Secretariat won the Preakness 40 years ago today, it triggered a wave of excitement in the sports world. It had been 25 years since a horse had won the Triple Crown, and, in that time, only seven horses had won the first two jewels of the Triple Crown. Five of them had come along in the last 10 years alone.

While many people in horse racing did not believe a horse could win the Triple Crown again, others believed recent history indicated otherwise.

---

---

Could he do it?

The sports world was about to find out if Secretariat could become the eighth horse in 25 years to win the first two jewels of the Triple Crown, and a record crowd was on hand at Pimlico in Baltimore for the 100th running of the Preakness Stakes.

Other than the fact that Secretariat set a speed record in the Derby, perhaps the only thing that made him stand out was the hype that followed him everywhere. Investors had been paying record prices for breeding shares — as if Secretariat had already won the Triple Crown.

As he did in the Kentucky Derby two weeks earlier, Secretariat started almost casually, lumbering out of the gate and settling into the back of the pack. Investors' hearts must have skipped a beat or two.

But, about halfway through the race, he made his move and passed the other horses as if they were standing still, seizing the lead and sprinting down the stretch.

Frankly, I never saw anything like Secretariat. It's probably safe to say no one else had, either. He set records in all three Triple Crown races — records that still stand today.

And his most impressive performance was still to come — in the Belmont Stakes three weeks later when he beat Sham again, this time by 30 lengths.

Prepping for the Preakness

---

---

If Andrew Beyer of the Washington Post is correct, Kentucky Derby winner Orb should have no trouble winning today's Preakness.

The temperature is supposed to be mild in Baltimore today — around 72° with a slight chance of rain. That's important because, as anyone who saw the Kentucky Derby two weeks ago will attest, the first race in the Triple Crown was run in muddy conditions.

Thus, the question today is, did Orb win the Kentucky Derby because of or in spite of the track conditions? Well, that's how I see it, anyway.

Beyer, though, thinks the key factor is the small field.

"The second–, third– and fourth–place finishers at Churchill Downs will not be at Pimlico," Beyer observes. "Just eight horses will challenge Orb, and it is difficult to make a solid case for any of them."

Jerry Bossert of the New York Daily News makes a solid case for how the race will play out — and he, too, thinks Orb will win it.

"[T]he Triple Crown dream continues for three more weeks," he writes.

At this point, that is something that is not obvious. It remains to be seen.

But of all the pre–Preakness opining I have seen, Bill Dwyre of the Los Angeles Times may be the master of the obvious when he writes that the stakes are highest for Orb in today's race.

Well, duh.

It's always the most crucial. If the Kentucky Derby winner loses the Preakness, the interest level for the Belmont three weeks later plummets — to the point where only folks in the industry and diehard racing fans will care who wins.

But if the Kentucky Derby winner also wins the Preakness, the Belmont becomes a prime attraction, and advertising will sell at Super Bowl–like rates. We're in the midst of a 35–year drought in the pursuit of a Triple Crown, and horse racing could use one.

Everything hinges on the Preakness. And Chris Korman writes in the Baltimore Sun that Orb is simply better than the rest. Whereas "[t]he Derby winner's reputation always balloons somewhere on the road from Louisville to [Baltimore]," he writes, "Orb's ascension has nearly made the rest of the field an afterthought."

If Orb wins today's Preakness, TV ratings for the Belmont could set records.

As Preakness Looms, Orb Surrounded by Cosmic Energy

---

---

I hesitate to say anything for fear of jinxing it (because I really would like to see horse racing have another Triple Crown winner), but there's a kind of cosmic energy surrounding Kentucky Derby winner Orb.

Of course, there are many questions to be answered when Orb runs in the Preakness on Saturday. Did he win the Derby because of the mud or in spite of it? It's supposed to be sunny and warm in Baltimore this weekend. How will that affect the race?

Typically, the Preakness field is about 14 or 15 horses, but Chris Korman of the Baltimore Sun reports that the field could be smaller — perhaps much smaller — than usual this year.

If the field is smaller, I suppose that increases the likelihood that the Derby winner also will win the Preakness — which would put him one win away from the Triple Crown, something that no horse has achieved in 35 years.

A few of the horses that have not yet been certified for the Preakness didn't run in the Derby. I don't know if they have ever run against Orb before. That could be a wild card.

This year is special. It is the 40th anniversary of Secretariat's Triple Crown, and I think, if you conducted a survey, Secretariat would be rated the #1 thoroughbred of all time.

And it would be appropriate — for a couple of reasons — if Orb wins the Triple Crown this year.

You see, Orb is the very first Kentucky Derby winner for the family of the legendary horse breeder Ogden Phipps.

Phipps could have had Secretariat. He won a coin flip (dramatized in the movie "Secretariat") that entitled him to his choice of the colts being carried by mares that had mated with Bold Ruler, a horse he inherited from his mother — and he chose the one that was not Secretariat, largely because Secretariat's mother was older than the other mare.

Now, four decades after Secretariat took the racing world by storm, a horse owned by the Phipps family has an opportunity to win the Triple Crown. If Orb can win the Preakness and the Belmont, he can remove the stigma of that coin toss.

"Dinny" Phipps, Ogden Phipps' son, says the experience has been "absolutely wonderful," which is, I suppose, what anyone would say under such circumstances.

Phipps made a remark in his conversation with the Associated Press that sounds like it could have been made by the horse breeder whose daughter wound up with Secretariat — "we love our fillies ... [w]e believe the broodmare is the most important quality of the race horse."

Perhaps that sense of respect is part of the legacy of losing Secretariat all those years ago. And perhaps Dinny Phipps wants to settle the score.

For now, though, it seems he is happy to say that he is "very, very lucky."

More Than Ready for Another

Tim Layden of Sports Illustrated laments the fact that "[a] generation of American adults is approaching middle age without having seen a horse win the Triple Crown."

And, as a horse racing fan, I, too, find that lamentable. But I am still enough of an optimist to believe — unlike many who follow the sport more closely than I — that it still can be done.

In my life, I have known some people who were quite knowledgeable about horse racing, and I have often heard them say that, because the first two races are much shorter than the third, to win a Triple Crown, a horse must possess both speed and endurance.

Such horses have been referred to as "super horses" at least since the time of the great Secretariat — who really was a super horse.

The distances of the Triple Crown races have varied over the years, but the distances have not changed since 1926, and all but one of the 11 Triple Crown winners have accomplished the feat since that time.

So, while it may be that it will take a "super horse" to break the drought between Triple Crown winners (which is currently 34 years), super horses weren't some sort of phenomenon that burst on to the scene, dominated the sport for a period and then disappeared.

Generations of horses have come and gone since Gallant Fox won all three races in 1930 (when it wasn't officially called the Triple Crown).

Affirmed, in 1978, was the last horse to win the Triple Crown, and I'll Have Another will be the 12th horse since that time to enter the Belmont Stakes with victories in both the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness.

The other 11 came up short, but Layden offers hope that, this time, things will be different.

I'll Have Another, Layden reports, "is so formidable because he has a useful combination of natural speed ... and stubborn cardiovascular endurance."

If that is true, the Triple Crown may well be within his grasp.

Meanwhile, I'll Have Another's preparations for his date with destiny appear to be coming along nicely. The Associated Press reports that, after two days of jogging on the Belmont Park oval, he is set to resume galloping tomorrow.

His assistant trainer was enthusiastic. "[H]e gets over the track fantastic," Jack Sisterson said, "he looked super, his energy level is high and he's doing everything we want to see him doing."

Sounds promising.

On the Brink of a Triple Crown

---

---

About midway through the week, I began searching for articles about today's Preakness Stakes in Baltimore.

I wanted to find out if veteran handicappers thought Kentucky Derby winner I'll Have Another had a chance of winning today's race — and, consequently, continuing to contend for the Triple Crown.

I found few articles that spoke of him the way articles in the past have lauded the Kentucky Derby winner.

That's understandable. The last time the Kentucky Derby winner went on to win the Preakness was in 2008. In fact, only 10 times since Affirmed won the 1978 Triple Crown had the Kentucky Derby winner gone on to win the Preakness. That is less than one–third of the time.

With that kind of history, horse racing writers had every reason to be hesitant to build up I'll Have Another until today's race was in the books.

Well, it is in the books now, and my guess is that we'll be hearing a lot about I'll Have Another in the next three weeks.

Because he did win today's Preakness — and it was perhaps the most exciting Preakness I have ever seen.

Once again, Bodemeister, the horse that led the Kentucky Derby most of the way, was the leader in the Preakness — again, most of the way.

And, once again, I'll Have Another overtook him at the end — and won the Preakness by a head. Literally.

Last year, three different horses won the Triple Crown races. And, at the time, I wrote that it was not so much a sign of a mediocre thoroughbred field as it was an indication that horse racing was enjoying a period of parity in which every race was competitive.

Those were exciting races, to be sure.

But anyone who is a fan of horse racing is likely to appreciate the fact that, for only the 11th time in the last 34 years, we can anticipate the possibility of a Triple Crown winner when the Belmont is run three weeks from today.

Even casual fans will know — if they don't already — that this year's Belmont will be something rare and extraordinary. It will be an event — and not, as it has been for the last three years, the anticlimactic conclusion to the Triple Crown season.

As I have mentioned here before, I teach journalism and writing to students in the Dallas County community college system, and nearly all the students with whom I have worked in the last couple of years were born at least a decade after the last Triple Crown winner.

If I'll Have Another does win the Belmont — and, with it, the Triple Crown — it will be the kind of thing that comes along once in a generation — if that.

I know many people who were born in 1979 or after — and, as a consequence, have not seen a Triple Crown winner. Some of them have died — and some may die before the Belmont is run — and will, as a consequence, never see a Triple Crown winner.

There is, of course, that one last hurdle for I'll Have Another, and it has wrecked many potential Triple Crown winners. At 1½ miles, it is the longest of the three, a quarter of a mile longer than the Kentucky Derby and more than one–third of a mile longer than the race that was run today.

After two races that emphasized speed, the Belmont prizes endurance. That is why it is known as the "Test of Champions." And it is quite a test.

We will find out if I'll Have Another is a super horse, one that is fast but can also handle long distances. Most horses are either one or the other. Triple Crown winners tend to be exceptions to the rule.

It should make for an entertaining afternoon three weeks from today.

Will the Cycle Be Broken?

---

---

Affirmed was the last horse to win thoroughbred racing's Triple Crown in 1978.

Thirty–three Triple Crown opportunities have come and gone since then, but no horse has won all three races. It's the longest drought since Sir Barton won the first Triple Crown in 1919, and many people think it is the kind of thing that cannot be done again.

Most decades have had no Triple Crown winners at all. Three — the 1930s, 1940s and 1970s — produced multiple winners, and their names read like the roster of a horse racing's Who's Who or the Top 10 of Blood–Horse magazine's 100 greatest thoroughbreds of the 20th century.

Anyway, history — not to mention common sense — suggests that, if no horse wins a Triple Crown by the middle of a decade, that decade isn't likely to have a Triple Crown winner.

This decade is still relatively young. We can go a couple more years without a Triple Crown winner before — historically speaking — it will be seen as too late.

But we've already waited more than 30 years. Horse racing fans are understandably anxious.

Admittedly, it's a little premature to be asking this question, but what are the chances we'll be anticipating a Triple Crown winner in three weeks when the horses are about to run in the Belmont, the third and last jewel?

For that to happen, I'll Have Another must win in Baltimore.

David Ginsburg of the Associated Press seems to think the chances are pretty good that Kentucky Derby winner I'll Have Another will prevail — even though he is the Morning Line's second choice behind Bodemeister, the horse he overcame to win the Run for the Roses.

Chris Korman of the Baltimore Sun writes that I'll Have Another has been running well in his pre–Preakness training sessions.

Bodemeister does have his supporters, though, like Andrew Beyer of the Washington Post.

Beyer writes that "[w]hen serious bettors evaluate what has happened in a race, they don't necessarily focus on who won and who lost. They understand that outcomes are determined not only by horses' talent but by race dynamics — pace, traffic trouble, ground loss, all the things that constitute a horse's 'trip.' They try to consider all of these factors in order to judge after the fact who ran best because that conclusion may be the key to betting a future race."

Bodemeister had the "toughest trip" of any of the horses in the Kentucky Derby, Beyer writes, because he was forced to run a faster pace from the start than he would have preferred. Yet he still almost won at Churchill Downs.

"Run the Kentucky Derby 100 times in an alternate universe and he'll capture a plurality of them."

At Pimlico on Saturday, Beyer writes, "there is only one reason to question Bodemeister, and it has nothing to do with his talent. The colt has crammed his whole five–race career into the span of four months, and the exertions may have taken a toll on him."

Jay Privman of the Daily Racing Form writes that winning the Derby exposed the many layers of Doug O'Neill, the trainer of I'll Have Another.

"His has been a complicated, multi–dimensional career, alternately praised for winning major races and multiple titles, yet questioned by racing authorities for violations O'Neill disputes," Privman writes.

I suspect the controversies will only intensify if O'Neill's horse wins on Saturday.

Animal Kingdom Comes Up Short

---

---

As it does most years, the Preakness ended dreams of a Triple Crown for the Kentucky Derby winner yesterday.

But, unlike most of those years, this year's Derby winner — Animal Kingdom — almost pulled it off.

It didn't look that way at first. Animal Kingdom started the race way back in the pack, actually leading only one other horse as they made the first turn.

But then, as the Preakness progressed, it began to resemble the Kentucky Derby, in which Animal Kingdom made his move on the outside and overtook the rest of the field.

The same thing nearly happened yesterday.

Animal Kingdom shifted into the next gear and began passing horses on the outside — and was making what would have been a comeback of legend if he had been able to pull it off.

Shackleford, though, held off the hard–charging Animal Kingdom in a thrilling — and, for some lucky folks, a profitable — Preakness finish.

Does Animal Kingdom's loss mean there is little reason to watch the Belmont Stakes in three weeks? Hardly, according to Mark Breech of Sports Illustrated.

If Animal Kingdom had pulled off an historic reversal and won the Preakness, he might have been the one horse racing has been waiting for. And Breech thinks he should be the favorite to win the Belmont.

If Animal Kingdom does win the Belmont, he will have achieved something that has been almost as rare as Triple Crown winners. He will have won the first and third jewels of the Triple Crown (with a near–miss in the second).

Thunder Gulch, in 1995, was the last horse to win the Kentucky Derby and the Belmont. There have been seven horses since then who have won the first two jewels but have fallen short in the third, the longest and most grueling of the three races.

And two horses have won the second and third jewels but not the first.

Animal Kingdom, writes Breech, "should love the immensity of the Triple Crown's third track. ... Animal Kingdom has been the fastest horse at the end of both of the first two races in this series. Having more room to run can only be to his benefit."

False Prophets and the Preakness

---

---

If you're one of the apparently few who believe that the "rapture" will occur at 6 p.m. local time today, I suggest that you tune in this afternoon for the Preakness in Baltimore — unless 6 p.m. has come and gone where you are.

By that time, you will already know if the rapture has occurred as predicted. The folks who have been telling us that the rapture would occur on this day have been saying that it will happen when it is 6 p.m. locally.

But if you live on the West Coast or in the Rocky Mountain time zone — or, like me, you live in the Central time zone — you might want to tune in.

Because the Preakness is supposed to be run when it is 6 p.m. in Baltimore — which is in the Eastern time zone.

Consequently, if there really is anything to this rapture stuff, you should see

• jockeys disappearing from horses and/or


• spectators disappearing from the stands.

That ought to make the Preakness pretty interesting.

Oh, wait a minute. Those party poopers at the Christian Science Monitor are reporting that 6 p.m. has come and gone in some parts of the world — and no rapture. (And, writes the International Business Times, Harold Camping, the minister who prophesied today's rapture and bought billboards and distributed pamphlets across the country telling people about it, has been exposed as a false prophet, which will doom his ministry.)

Guess you can eliminate that as an entertainment factor.

Well, the Preakness should still be interesting. We'll find out today — as we always do on the third Saturday in May — whether there will still be a chance for a horse to win this year's Triple Crown three weeks from now in the Belmont.

It's been more than 30 years since a horse won the Triple Crown, and many of the folks in the thoroughbred racing industry don't want to talk about it — kind of like superstitious ball players (or bowlers, for that matter) who don't want to talk about a perfect game while the game is still being played.

Barry Irwin, who heads the group that owns Kentucky Derby winner Animal Kingdom, appears to be one of those.

"I don't even want to hear about it, to tell you the truth," he told Ed Fountaine of the New York Post. "Let's just see what happens in this next race."

Tim Layden of Sports Illustrated thinks Animal Kingdom can prevail. He says the horse should be well rested and prepared to handle what he sees as a relatively weak Preakness field.

Layden's colleague, Gene Menez, agrees that Animal Kingdom is the horse to beat today although he warns readers that they should not be surprised "if [15–1 shot] Midnight Interlude shocks the Preakness at a price."

Not so fast, my friend, writes Brad Telias of The Sporting News. While the Preakness is just about the same distance as the Kentucky Derby, there are significant differences between being a relatively anonymous longshot and a much–heralded favorite.

Such pressure seems unlikely to affect a horse, but it could influence the performance of a jockey — and even the slightest change in the way a jockey rides or sits in the saddle can, in turn, influence what a horse does.

And, while it has been relatively rare in the last three decades for a horse to win the first two jewels of the Triple Crown, neither is really adequate preparation for the Belmont, which has (justifiably) been dubbed the "Test of Champions." It's longer than either of the first two races.

Thus, even if Animal Kingdom does win today, history strongly suggests that the hype that is sure to surround him from now until June 11 will prove to be overblown — and his meager race record to date will be proven to be inadequate preparation.

I don't know who will win today's race.

But I do have a couple of predictions — and I am reasonably confident they will be correct.

By 6:30 Baltimore time this evening, we will know whether the Triple Crown is still a possibility. And we'll know if there was anything to that rapture business.

My guess is that there will be a lot of false prophets revealed by sundown today.

Will Animal Kingdom Rule the Preakness?

---

---

You really don't have to be blessed with any special insights to predict that the winner of the Kentucky Derby will not win the second jewel in horse racing's Triple Crown.

Since Affirmed won the Triple Crown in 1978, roughly one–third of the horses that won the Kentucky Derby went on to win the Preakness two weeks later. In the last six years, only Big Brown (in 2008) has accomplished it.

Last year's Derby winner, Super Saver, lost the Preakness, fading at the end when Lookin at Lucky seemed to come from nowhere to seize control.

Up to that point, Super Saver had been among the leaders, but, after Lookin at Lucky made his move, Super Saver was like a balloon that lost all of its air and deflated, finishing out of the money.

That's the thing that casual observers of horse racing don't really understand. A horse race isn't just a horse race. Distance matters. So does surface — and experience.

The surface will be the same as Animal Kingdom encountered two weeks ago, and the distance will be almost what it was — but the great intangible for him is the fact that his racing history is not extensive enough for anyone to know what to expect.

With a record that could be written on a cocktail napkin, Animal Kingdom is one big question mark — and that is the sort of thing that, back in the day, would have made all of my old railbird friends uneasy, to say the least.

Being the defending Kentucky Derby winner, the odds on Animal Kingdom won't reflect the absence of experience going into the Preakness on Saturday — the way they did two weeks ago — but they should.

Today, with the Preakness only days away, observers are wondering if Animal Kingdom, a 20–1 shot when he won the Derby, can keep alive for a while longer the dream that a horse will win the Triple Crown this year.

That is the question. It's as clear as it can be. Can he do it?

The answer is not as clear. Not yet.

Yes, says a National Thoroughbred Racing Association poll. (I could be wrong, but I get the sense that the respondents are towing the company line, trying to build some enthusiasm momentum for the possibility of a Triple Crown.)

It's possible, writes Andrew Beyer of the Washington Post. " It would be natural to suspect that Animal Kingdom's victory might be another Kentucky Derby aberration," he says, "[y]et an examination of the race indicates that his performance was legitimate."

No, writes Ray Kerrison of the New York Post. He spoke to a horse racing expert who told him that, for at least two reasons, he can't see Animal Kingdom winning the Preakness.

We will get some answers on Saturday.

Once Again, No Triple Crown

---

---

They ran the Preakness Stakes for the 135th time on Saturday.

If you read what I wrote before the race, you know that I suggested that the death of Skip Away on Friday could be an omen. In a way, I guess, that is precisely what it turned out to be.

Skip Away was widely expected to do well in the 1996 Kentucky Derby, but ran an unexpectedly poor race. He bounced back, though, and finished second in both the Preakness and the Belmont.

Anyway, Super Saver, the winner of the Kentucky Derby on May 1, finished out of the money in the Preakness, guaranteeing that there will be no Triple Crown winner in 2010.

That's a familiar refrain. We have had no Triple Crown winner since 1978.

Initially, it didn't look that way. Super Saver never really took the lead, but he was near the lead until the far turn. And then a funny thing happened. Super Saver got boxed in, with three horses in front of him and horses on either side, and he never threatened to take the lead again.

Meanwhile, Lookin at Lucky, the second pick on Saturday, was back in the pack through most of the Kentucky Derby. He performed better in the sunshine at Pimlico than he did in the slop at Churchill Downs, running fifth or sixth until the final three furlongs, then making a move that put him in the lead for good.

Perhaps Skip Away's death was an omen.

Anyway, we will know in three weeks whether we had a near–miss for the Triple Crown or not. If Super Saver or Lookin at Lucky win the Belmont, a horse will have won two of the three races in the Triple Crown for the 19th time since Affirmed won the Triple Crown in 1978. But if some other horse wins the Belmont, it will be the 14th time that three different horses have won the Triple Crown races.

One thing we know for sure. There will be no hat trick in 2010.

The Second Jewel of the Triple Crown

---

In 1996, Skip Away was second in the Preakness
and a memorable duel in the Belmont Stakes.

---

I guess it was ironic that Skip Away, a champion thoroughbred horse that never won a Triple Crown race but came in second in both the Preakness and the Belmont, died yesterday, apparently of a heart attack.

Ironic because today is the 135th running of the Preakness Stakes.

Skip Away was the third–highest–earning thoroughbred in North America. Back in 1996, when he was a 3–year–old, Skip Away bounced back from an unexpectedly poor showing in the Kentucky Derby, starting with his second–place finish in the Preakness. Perhaps something like that will happen today.

If something like that does happen today, though, I'm inclined to think that would make Skip Away's death more of an omen than an irony.

For that matter, I guess you could find at least as much symbolism in the problems that congressional incumbents are encountering in the 2010 midterm campaigns.

But that's only if Super Saver doesn't win this afternoon. Personally, though, I'm inclined to think he will win. I don't have any special reason for this, other than the fact that Calvin Borel, who is becoming the hottest jockey in thoroughbred racing, will be riding him today, as he did two weeks ago at Churchill Downs.

I have long believed — and often said — that each of the events in thoroughbred racing's Triple Crown has its own unique identity and agenda.

• Of the three races, things are probably easiest — at least in terms of promotion — for the Kentucky Derby, the first jewel that was run two weeks ago. It always generates interest because, well, it's the Kentucky Derby.
  
  It is the big–name annual event in its sport, like the Masters is for golf, Wimbledon is for tennis and the Indy 500 is for auto racing. It doesn't need to do anything special to draw attention to itself.
  
  Each of those sports has other events that are equally prestigious but not as legendary. And, since those sports have no clear championship event — like a Super Bowl or a World Series — those competitions sort of fill that role (rightly or wrongly) in the public's mind.
  
  The race itself doesn't really matter. In recent years, it's been run in sloppy conditions, but the only thing that really seems to hurt attendance (but not necessarily ratings) is a poor economy.
  
  As long as the Kentucky Derby's coverage is generous with its images of mint juleps, bizarre hats and the playing of "My Old Kentucky Home," the viewers will be satisfied.


• The final jewel of the Triple Crown is the Belmont Stakes five weeks later in Elmont, N.Y. It is a grueling distance — in comparison to the first two races — and justifiably known as the "Test of the Champion."
  
  I don't think the folks who run the Belmont particularly care if a horse wins the Triple Crown. They just want the Kentucky Derby winner to win the second race — which means a Triple Crown is possible.
  
  If a different horse wins those two races, the Belmont is rendered irrelevant. That is unfortunate, but that's the way it is. The Belmont's usually a pretty nice race — visually appealing and typically competitive (well, except for that time in 1973 when Secretariat won by 31 lengths) — but it's been more than 30 years since a horse won a Triple Crown.
  
  So, in early June with other activities vying for people's time and attention — and money — all that potential viewers want to know is whether it is possible for a horse to win the Triple Crown by winning the Belmont. If the answer is no, then here's a hot tip on a sure thing — TV ratings will be way down ... and attendance at places like the beach, amusement venues, ballparks and movie theaters will be way up.


• Today, we have the second jewel of the Triple Crown, the Preakness Stakes at Pimlico in Baltimore. All eyes will be on Super Saver, the winner of the Kentucky Derby two weeks ago, as Marty McGee of The Daily Racing Form observes at ESPN.com.
  
  In its way, I suppose, the Preakness is often forgotten — regarded as, at best, the legitimate albeit nondescript middle child, and, at worst, the redheaded stepchild of thoroughbred racing — but, as McGee points out, the Preakness has one thing that the Derby does not — the Derby winner.
  
  However, the Derby winner must also win the Preakness to breathe life into the Belmont, to give a purpose to its existence.
  
  Before the sun goes down, we will know if the Belmont Stakes three weeks from today will have any meaning.

Gene Menez of Sports Illustrated apparently thinks it will.

The Preakness is "setting up differently from the Derby," Menez writes, but "there is one significant similarity between the two races: The top choice is still Super Saver."

Is that due to his jockey, the aforementioned Calvin Borel, who won the Derby and the Preakness aboard two different horses last year? Well, Menez hardly mentions Borel, focusing instead on the horse's attributes. For his part, Borel, a colorful Cajun, expects a "super race" from Super Saver.

Liam Durbin of the Baltimore Sun seems to think Super Saver can make it two for two as well.

But Brad Telias of The Sporting News isn't convinced. He likes Lookin at Lucky, which is where that omen I mentioned earlier may come into play. Lookin at Lucky finished sixth in the Derby two weeks ago. "This time, there will be good karma for horse and rider, and the beaten Derby favorite will finally get his due," Telias writes.

Shades of Skip Away.

Borel Wins Again

---

---

Vic Ziegel of the New York Daily News deserves credit for predicting the winner of a Kentucky Derby that, by most accounts, was as wide open as any Derby in recent memory.

Ziegel was modest, almost apologetic, about his picks in the past, and he practically warned the reader not to take his advice too seriously. Someone is going to win the Derby, he wrote. "Somebody I didn't pick always does."

Well, this time somebody he picked did win.

Jockey Calvin Borel won his third Kentucky Derby in the last four years aboard 8–1 shot Super Saver.

Borel rode the Derby winner last year, and he followed that up with a win on a different horse in the Preakness, the second jewel in the Triple Crown. Keep that in mind two weeks from now.

Triple Crown Drought Continues

---

---

Rachel Alexandra outran the boys at Pimlico today.

If you read my previous post, I picked all three of the top finishers in today's Preakness. But I had them in the wrong order.

I picked Mine That Bird to win, Musket Man to place and Rachel Alexandra to show.

Rachel Alexandra actually won the race. Mine That Bird placed. Musket Man was third.

It was the first time a filly had won the Preakness in 85 years. But the Triple Crown drought, which began more than three decades ago, goes on.

One of those streaks had to end today.

So there will be no Triple Crown winner this year — although we might have to put an asterisk next to the year 2009 in the annals of horse racing because the same jockey, Calvin Borel, has won the first two races. He just won on different horses.

I don't think it's ever come up before, but Borel might win all three Triple Crown races — but not on the same horse. Would he be considered a Triple Crown winner by himself?

In the three weeks until the Belmont, I'm sure someone will explore the possibility. But at least one sports writer, Rick Bozich of the Louisville Courier–Journal, says Borel "deserves his Muhammad Ali moment."

Well, he deserves to savor what he has done so far — win or lose in three weeks.

The Baltimore Sun reports that attendance was down more than 30% over last year and was the lowest it has been in 26 years. One can only imagine what the absence of a Triple Crown possibility will do to the gate receipts and overall wagers on the Belmont three weeks from today.

But the folks in Baltimore saw a pretty exciting race this afternoon.

The Battle of the Sexes

Well, that is what they are calling today's 134th Preakness at Pimlico in Baltimore.

The battle of the sexes.

In a way, I suppose, that's an appropriate label for today's race, matching as it does the winner of the Kentucky Derby, Mine That Bird, and the fabulous filly, Rachel Alexandra, that apparently has stolen the hearts of the betting public along with Mine That Bird's jockey.

And the guys in the pressbox seem equally taken with Rachel Alexandra. The filly, writes Tim Layden in Sports Illustrated, could be the fastest horse in the field, regardless of gender. And she has Calvin Borel — her regular rider who rode Mine That Bird to a stunning win in the Derby.

In fact, Borel rode Rachel Alexandra to a 20–length victory the day before the Derby

For some reason, it just doesn't seem like the battle of the sexes to me, perhaps because the battle features animals and not humans. If one of the jockeys was a girl, I might feel differently about it. But Mike Smith will be aboard Mine That Bird today.

Kevin Van Valkenburg of the Baltimore Sun says this is Mine That Bird's moment of truth. And indeed it is. In a couple of hours, the horses will run and we will resolve the storyline that I think is the real theme of the day: Is Mine That Bird the real deal? Will he reward the believers? Or will he confirm what the skeptics have been saying?

And there are plenty of skeptics who feel that a 50–1 shot got lucky when a "perfect storm unfolded" on a sloppy track at Churchill Downs two weeks ago.

The odds haven't changed much. According to the Morning Line, Rachel Alexandra is a 8–5 pick. Pioneerof the Nile, the second–place finisher in the Derby, is 5–1. Mine That Bird is 6–1. So is Friesan Fire, which was a favorite at the Derby but ended up far back in the pack. Musket Man, the show horse in the Derby, is 8–1.

All the other horses — there are 13 running today — are getting odds of 10–1 or higher.

I'll be honest. I would like to see a Triple Crown winner. When I was a teenager, they were commonplace. Between 1973 and 1978, there were three Triple Crown winners — Secretariat (1973), Seattle Slew (1977) and Affirmed (1978). Great horses. I remember watching them run.

Is Mine That Bird worthy of becoming only the 12th horse to win the Triple Crown? We'll find out a lot in less than two hours now.

I'm going to predict that he is. I was impressed with Borel's work as the jockey two weeks ago, but I've seen Smith ride before, and I think he is capable of riding Mine That Bird to victory.

I'm not convinced of Rachel Alexandra's speed, but I've never seen her run. If I was at the track today, I would put $2 on her to show. If she has a duel with Mine That Bird that conjures memories of the epic Affirmed–Alydar battles, I'd be willing to bet her higher at the Belmont in three weeks.

But I'm going to pick Musket Man to come in second.

So my picks are:

1. Mine That Bird


2. Musket Man


3. Rachel Alexandra

Enjoy the race.

Betting on the Bird

I don't know what the odds will be on each horse when the Preakness field bursts through the gates at Pimlico tomorrow.

But I do know one group that will be virtually unanimous in its support for Kentucky Derby winner Mine That Bird — the folks who are affiliated with the Belmont.

The Belmont, of course, is the third jewel in horse racing's Triple Crown. If the winner of the Derby doesn't win the Preakness, the Belmont becomes primarily an afterthought. TV ratings are down, wagers are down, everything is down.

So, every year, the folks who are connected to the Belmont want the Derby winner to prevail in Baltimore on the third Saturday in May. It doesn't matter to them if that horse proceeds to win the Belmont in June as long as there is a chance that there will be a Triple Crown winner.

Because that means more bets, a bigger crowd, more food and drink sales.

And that can only happen if the Derby winner also wins the Preakness.

The Belmont folks always have motivation to pull for the Derby winner in the Preakness. But this year, with the economy decidedly down, there is more motivation than usual.

Mason Levinson reports, for Bloomberg.com, that the New York Racing Association estimates that, if Mine That Bird enters the Belmont with victories in both the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness, it can mean "as much as $3 million extra from ticket sales, concessions and betting."

That's quite an incentive. It's been more than 30 years since there was a Triple Crown winner. If there is a chance that the winner of the Belmont will be the one who ends the Triple Crown drought, obviously a lot of folks will want to be there to see it.

"The most recent of horse racing's 11 Triple Crown winners was Affirmed in 1978," Levinson observes. "Eleven horses have won the first two legs since then — seven in the past 12 years — and all have failed to win on the 1½–mile Belmont track just outside New York City in Elmont. The Derby is 1¼ mile, the Preakness is 1 3/16 mile."

According to George Vecsey of the New York Times, Mine That Bird is the Rodney Dangerfield of horse racing.

"Sometimes there is no respect," Vecsey writes, "even for a Kentucky Derby winner."

Vecsey says there are at least four reasons why Mine That Bird "is being played down" on the eve of the Preakness — "the suspicion that he got lucky in the Derby; the entrance of Rachel Alexandra, the wonder filly; the defection of Calvin Borel, who took such an audacious ride in the Derby; and the apparent insecurity of his ownership."

My guess is that, if Mine That Bird wins tomorrow, he'll get plenty of respect in New York in three weeks — and the folks at the Belmont will be laughing all the way to the bank.

Will There Be a Triple Crown Winner in '09?

---

In a thrilling finish, Affirmed edged Alydar in the 1978 Preakness
and captured the second jewel in the Triple Crown.

---

There hasn't been a Triple Crown winner in thoroughbred racing since 1978.

There have been several near–misses in the last three decades. Last year's was noteworthy. Big Brown won the first two races and was proclaimed by racing observers to be a virtual lock to win the Belmont and wrap up the Triple Crown. But fate intervened.

Nearly two weeks ago, Mine That Bird, with jockey Calvin Borel aboard, ran to the second–biggest upset in Kentucky Derby history, and racing fans have been wondering if he can capture the elusive Triple Crown. But if he does, he will have to win at least the Preakness with a different jockey. Borel won't be riding Mine That Bird this Saturday. He will be riding Rachel Alexandra, the controversial filly that is currently a 9–5 pick to become the first filly to win the Preakness since 1924.

Jockey Mike Smith will be riding Mine That Bird, presently a 9–2 pick, in Saturday's race. Even though Mine That Bird is one of the favorites in this race — unlike the 50–1 shot he was two weeks ago — the filly has been turning some heads.

Rick Maese writes, in the Los Angeles Times, that Mine That Bird's chances seem slimmer than the existence of UFOs. Whatever one thinks of Mine That Bird and his chances of ending the Triple Crown drought, it's an appropriate comparison, given his connections to Roswell, N.M.

You can find out more about the 13–horse field, as well as the weather and track conditions at Pimlico, here.