On Big Brown as a Commodity
There are few things more tragic to me than when someone almost takes his thoughts to their logical conclusion, falls short, and then appears to think he’s onto something really big.
Allow me an example to elucidate using Peter Thomas Fornatale‘s Opinion piece entitled, "If Big Brown Wins, Racing Loses," in today’s New York Times.
Let’s deconstruct:
- Fornatale won’t be rooting for Big Brown at the Belmont Stakes today. "Yes, Big Brown is a magnificent animal whose efforts I can’t help but admire. But he also represents the worst aspects of the sport." Not a bad start. Too early to make any judgments.
- Ah but wait. He then writes: "This might sound obvious, but it’s worth stating: horse racing is nothing without the horse. And yet right now the horse’s best interests don’t seem to be paramount in racing." Right now? As opposed to the long and glorious history up until now when the horse’s interests were paramount?
- If you’ve been following the story, you know about the legal and nonlegal issues with Big Brown’s owner and also his trainer. But I don’t think they’re as significant as Fornatale and others claim, and it should become clear why in what Fornatale writes.
"Big Brown’s main owner is not a venerable stable like the Phipps family’s or even a group of casual investors who bought a racehorse on a lark (like the old high school friends who went in on Funny Cide, the 2003 Kentucky Derby and Preakness winner). Instead, his main owner is International Equine Acquisitions Holdings, whose stated purpose is to be an equine hedge fund that delivers profits to its investors by consistently racing winners. When you run your stable like a hedge fund, the horse becomes just another commodity to be bought and sold like a share of stock, with little concern for its fate."
In case you missed it, that last sentence said: "When you run your stable like a hedge fund, the horse becomes just
another commodity to be bought and sold like a share of stock, with
little concern for its fate."
Fornatale would have us believe, then, that it wasn’t until Big Brown and International Equine Acquisitions Holdings (IEAH), that horses began to be treated like commodities, with little concern for their fate. (And after appearing to care so much about horses, referring to them as "its" doesn’t help his cause.) Horse racing is a business wherein horses are treated like commodities every day. Nothing has changed about that. In fact, I think IEAH shouldn’t be painted as a shady company, doing something untoward. I find the idea of them refreshingly honest. They are saying what traditional stables don’t want to say: that the horses are bred and trained to make a profit, and if they don’t they will probably be slaughtered, either immediately or after they get bought and sold a couple of times by various other exploiters of horses.
- Fornatale isn’t worried about Big Brown, though. "He has already been promised to the reputable Three Chimneys Stud Farm — but I worry about the less talented horses Equine Acquisitions owns." What about the less talented horses owned by everyone else? Where does he think they’re going? IEAH is an easy target, I admit, with its spokesperson and co-president having a checkered past, and its trainers (former and current) being well known for drugging horses. But horses have been drugged for years, and the "win at any price" mentality that Fornatale attributes to IEAH is not new in horse racing (can you say Eight Belles?).
Look, I’m not defending anything IEAH has done. My point is that they haven’t done anything new, and picking on them seems more like an attempt to push out a company that’s actually being honest about what horses mean to owners, trainers and racing. IEAH isn’t being sentimental, gushing about their love for the horses they are using and might send to slaughter. They are clear about being in business to win and to make money. "Venerable stables" may find that behavior tacky, but I think it’s refreshingly blunt.
- Fornatale doesn’t want to see Big Brown win, as that would validate the tactics (and existence) of IEAH. He writes:
"But a Big Brown victory could make the fundamental problems of the sport even worse, encouraging other outfits to be as aggressive with the rules as the scarily named Equine Acquisitions is. Until we find ways to protect horses and make owners and trainers more accountable, the real problems aren’t going away."
So the "outfits" can be aggressive, but not too aggressive. And Equine Acquisitions is scary why, exactly? Because it is honest and there’s no doublespeak?
You don’t have to look far to "find" ways to protect horses and to get rid of the "real problems." All you have to do, if what you want is the "best interests of the horses" is to stop doing what you’re doing to them. Stop breeding them. Stop training them. Stop racing them. End of problems.
- Fornatale ends with: "No horse is going to save racing. Racing must first save itself — and for that reason, I’d rather see Big Brown lose."
Ah-ha. The real story. Fornatale isn’t primarily interested in saving the horses; he’s interested in saving racing.
Do your part to save the horses. Don’t support industries that exploit them. We’ve forced horses to do enough for us. And for several hundred years (in the US). It’s time to leave them alone.
Send your thoughts to letters@nytimes.com.
TV Promo from Canada's Globe and Mail newspaper:
JEFF BROOKE
Print Edition 07/06/08 Page S2
1 BELMONT STAKES – Race horses are aware they're race horses. They get nervous and excited on race day. When the gates open, they know they're competing. They know if they've won or lost. But how much do they understand beyond that? For example, does Big Brown realize he could become the first Triple Crown winner in 30 years if he wins the gruelling Belmont Stakes today? Does he know this could be his last race, that he could retire with a perfect 6-0 record and spend the rest of his days at stud, lolling around a green pasture, eating grass and chasing fillies? If he does, he'll no doubt run extra hard. That's a pretty attractive retirement incentive. ABC/TSN, 5 p.m. today (6:30 p.m. post time).
Somewhat critical article in same Saturday Globe:
"…a sport pockmarked by death, drugs and growing disaffection?"
http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080606.wbigbrown0607-sports/GSStory/GlobeSportsOther/home
Thanks, Terry.
I didn't know that horse racing was in such bad shape. I knew attendance had dwindled, and that obviously there is a significant image problem right now, but I didn't know that money being gambled is dwindling, too. As the money goes, so goes "sport."
I do find it ironic that with all of the disgust with the industry, there's still not a scarcity of people at the triple crown events, and they still have plenty of advertisers and a huge audience.
"If you taunt the Racing Gods, they will not only smite you . . . . they will humiliate you". I never wanted a horse to lose a race more than I wanted Big Brown to lose the Belmont. The horse doesn't know he lost. He has no concept of a Triple Crown, but the financial statement of this shady group of investors who own him does. I'm glad he is alright, that he was not injured during the race and that he wasn't being run despite an injury which could have cost him his life. I only hoped we were not being 'Bush-Whacked' (a la WMD's) about his hoof injury. I love the horse but you're known by the company you keep. Sadly, however, the rise of Big Brown has done more to lay bare the sleazy side of US racing than anything in recent memory. His connections have been identified with drugs, dishonesty and a racing culture that seems to disrespect and endanger the animals the public love.
Principal owner Michael Iavarone is a sleaze ball. He had never been an investment banker. His seven-year Wall Street career was limited to selling penny stocks at four now defunct brokerage firms colloquially known as "bucket shops". One of the firms was closed down for enterprise corruption when Iavarone was on the payroll. He was fined and suspended by regulators for trading stocks without client approval, sued by a Kentucky bloodstock agency over horses he bought but failed to pay for, chased over casino debts and assessed a $130,000 lien for unpaid taxes by the Internal Revenue Service.
The blow-hard, druggie trainer Rick Dutrow is another piece of work, boasting that there was no way Big Brown would not win if he was healthy enough to run and that "he could win the Belmont running backwards". He acknowledged giving the horse a monthly shot of Stanozolol, the same steroid used by Ben Johnson at the 1988 Olympics, even though "I don't know what it does. I just like using it."
Everything I heard about this trainer and the ownership group just made me sick. They weren't horse people, they were investment whores. When they looked at Big Brown, they did not see flesh and bone, they saw only dollar signs. They had over 1000 mares lined up for the Triple Crown Winner at $300,000 a pop and watching the outrider dressed in a UPS driver's jacket looked more like NASCAR than the "Sport of Kings". Now that his stud value has plummeted, I only hope that they do not try to run him to death through the rest of the year just to try to improve his stock. I hope that as much of a shot in the arm his Triple Crown win was to have given the 'Sport of Kings', his failure to finish does to it's demise.
Hi Chuck,
I know all about Iavarone and Dutrow. However, what IEAH and Dutrow have in common with every other race horse breeding and training operation is that horses are commodities to them. It's the commodification of the horses that I object to, whether it's done brashly and in full public view like with IEAH, or if it's done under the guise of some kind of honorable sport of kings.
There is no honor in creating sentient nonhumans for the sole purpose of training and racing them for your own gain.