Maybe because he is rundown after 3 races in 5 weeks after having 3 races in 8 months? You know the actual legitimate use for the stuff?

"Hey Kent, sorry I was an A-hole babe. You ride real good. Let's move on and get ready for the Travers, babe."

Here is the real reason BB didn't run well.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...ASMUSSENBR.DTL

This makes perfect sense. Every vet, trainer, qualified opinion, etc. -- even Billy Tuner's comments, aside from his opinion on the jock pulling the horse up -- speak to this being the understandable reasoning. This coupled with the training, or lack thereof, and everything else, seems to have much more to do with the outcome and result.

Putting the horse "back on" the treatment/cycle doesn't speak to "need" -- it speaks to the legitimate uses. Taking him off was a judgement call and that was Dutrow's call to make. Nobody has been around this horse, knows this horse, understands this horse, etc. like Dutrow -- thus his call is the most applicable. The result was not contingent exclusively on taking the horse of the treatment from what I gather.

Eric

Does that mean he gay? Not thats confused.

http://tcm.bloodhorse.com/article/45683.htm

Dutrow and Desormeaux meet, mend fences -- from The BH.

Eric

John Nerud is always great when he is on the show. Unbelievable wealth of knowledge-Tartan surface, being around when NYRA passed on OTB, great trainer and horseman

Any chance of Steve Haskin writing a book with/about Nerud?

I went back to that thread out of courtesy to read what you said, you make some bold points and yes you were correct on many. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, it is America afterall but even knowing what we know now 20/20 hindsight. I would have still ran Big Brown, you can't achieve anything if you don't atleast try.

Lindbergh was quoted as saying "What kind of man would live where there is no danger? I don't believe in taking foolish chances. But nothing can be accomplished by not taking a chance at all."