Was the Belmont stakes race fixed?

Question

Seems strange to me that the trainer would pull brown off the steriods in the most important race. Of course the horse was going to perform like c**p without the dose of steriods. Everyone could figure that out. To finish dead last is the biggest flop Ive ever seen. Also, when the trainer guarenteed a win, that was also a joke. No, the fool cant even face the media. complete deadbeat

Answer 1

I believe it was fixed. Although Big Brown connections gained more from him winning in stud fees and overall value of the horse, many more people gained by him losing. Among those who gained were stud farms in competition with Big Brown in stud, betting interests who made a killing on the payoffs. If it were possible to following the betting money on the winning tickets, it would explain alot.

Answer 2

I disagree with Ron.  Big Brown's schedule this past 5 weeks was not much different from Da'Tara.

DaTara raced the week before the Derby in the Derby Trial and he raced the day of the Preakness in the Barbaro Stakes.

It just was not in the cards fof Big Brown to win. It could have been the distance with the heat.  And it very well could have the lack of the steroids that he previously had been given.

Answer 3

There was obviously more money to be won betting against Big Brown and I think that there were plenty of shady, greedy people behind the scenes who were pulling strings. Something's fishy for sure...

Answer 4

no...not fixed.....what part of "it's been 30 years since a horse

has won those 3 races in 5 week" you don;t get....it takes a special horse, and the 73-77-78 champs...all ran against the same old tired horses in each race.

Answer 5

Horse-racing, like boxing, is a "sport" with a deep, deep history of rigging to line the pockets of Dah Big Playah's at the expense of the gazillions of ordinary schmoes who buy all those millions of "to win" and "to place" tickets.

How the "rig" works: Set up a horse to win the first two legs of the Triple and get a lot of hype going about a potential "Triple Crown", make it seem like that horse cannot possibly lose, and just rake in bucketloads of cash at the betting windows. Then, have the horse fail to "place" (doesn't make 1st, 2nd or 3rd), and you'll have more money than God -- because 99% of the betting slips are for the "sure-fire winner" to win or place (while the big money bets *against* that horse and for the other nags shooed in to the winning slots).

Ticket-sales and TV-rights are piddly; the huge money is in taking schmucks to the cleaners.

Rinse & repeat every few years.

People you should never trust at a horse-race:

1) The owner.

2) The jockey.

3) The media.

4) The "betting line".

5) Anybody else talking about the race.

4) The horse (if it can talk too).

Answer 6

If Big Brown had won the Belmont stakes and thus the triple crown, his value as a stallion would have gone up by at least $50 Million. So I don't think it was fixed. No one is paying the trainer and the jockey $50 Million to fix the race. It just wasn't Big Brown's day. All his competitors have had an easier schedule. Bug Brown has a much tougher back to back to back races in 5 weeks. It just wasn't Big Brown's day. He'll come back to fight another day.

Answer 7

I thought it was a fix There was nothing with Big Brown after the race he looked like he was ready for another mile and a half.

Answer 8

I honestly think it was. I knew something was up. I think about what if somebody paid the trainer or the jockey off or maybe the raced was really fixed like a WWF match.

Answer 9

There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that it was fixed.  

A -The jockey first thing out of the gate turned him hard right into another horse quite possibly trying to get disqualified.

B- This was the first race ever out of all races that he went straight to the front and ran with the leaders, he was trying to wear him out

C- He never once used the whip to try and get the horse to move faster despite doing so with a huge lead in the preakness where he didnt need to use it.

D- He pulled him up saying he wasnt going to finish better than last despite being in a solid third, that horse wouldnt have finished worse than 2nd  even without the whip.

E-  the winning horse recieved 1 million.  If you were a track facing a 12 million $ loss if he won wouldnt you think about paying him 2-3 million to lose the race ?

   That race was fixed and I will never again waste my time with racing again unless this guy is prosecuted for it.

Answer 10

#1 The Belmont is too big of a race to fix.

#2 Anything can happen and most of the time does in a horse race.

#3 The Triple Crown is the hardest thing to do in sports.

#4 Big Brown had never ran in three races in 5 weeks.

#5 Big Brown actually was eased.

#6 Big Brown had been off steroids since before the Derby.

Why did he run so well in The Preakness?

#7 Mr. Dutrow guarenteed victory in the Derby and Preakness also. Would you face the public after what happened before you knew anything?

I think I have covered all your concerns.

.

Answer 11

h**l yes it was fixed. They had already sold his stud rights over 2 weeks ago!!! for 50 million dollars, It would not have mattered if he won or lost, he already made his money on the stud fee. As always ABC over hypes this c**p and everybody makes money off of it. I did not place a bet on BB, for this very reason, sorry to say my horse didn't win, but he sure as h**l didn't come in last!