There are two different War of Wills competing in Saturday’s Belmont Stakes. There is War of Will, the sporting proposition, and there is War of Will, the betting proposition. War of Will, the sporting proposition, is extremely easy to root for if for no other reason that he will be the only horse this year to start in all three legs of the Triple Crown. The only one. As if racing race horses isn’t a priority anymore. As if running in all three legs of the Triple Crown will automatically ruin a horse’s career beyond the Belmont. Yeah. Right. It “certainly” compromised American Pharoah in the Haskell and in the Breeders’ Cup Classic. And he not only ran in all three legs of the Triple Crown just four short years ago, he won them. All of them. But there is more to the sporting proposition War of Will in the Belmont than that. War of Will will also be attempting to become only the 12th horse to win the Preakness and Belmont after being beaten in the Kentucky Derby since the Triple Crown became a widely recognized entity in 1930. And, War of Will will be attempting to join a list of seven others who won the Preakness and Belmont before the Triple Crown really became a thing – a list that includes none other than Man o’ War. Anyway, Bimelech (1940), Capot (1949), Native Dancer (1953), and Nashua (1955), were the first to win the Preakness and Belmont after losing in the Derby, in which all four finished second. (As an aside, Native Dancer was beaten a head by Dark Star in the Derby, but was about four days the best. He must be right at the top of anyone’s list of those who should have been Triple Crown winners.) Damascus (1967) won the Preakness and Belmont after finishing third in the Derby. Little Current (1974) was the next to turn this double, and might also have won the Derby instead of finishing fifth had he not been forced to rally from 23rd. Risen Star (1988) joined this group after finishing third in the Derby and Hansel (1991) followed after finishing 10th in Louisville. Tabasco Cat (1994) landed the Preakness-Belmont double after finishing sixth in the Derby. Point Given (2001) did the same after finishing fifth in the Derby, and Afleet Alex (2005) was the most recent to do it after finishing a close third in the Derby. :: Belmont Stakes one-stop shop: Get Clocker Reports, PPs, packages, and more What stands out about the list of Preakness-Belmont winners from Bimelech to Afleet Alex – and what must be of major interest to War of Will’s connections – is 10 of these 11 dual classic winners were voted champion 3-year-old male. The only exception was Tabasco Cat. Holy Bull was voted champion 3-year-old male in 1994. I know times change, and so do Eclipse Award voters. But wins in the Preakness and Belmont Stakes would still be an enormous chip for War of Will or any 3-year-old male to play when it comes to year-end divisional championship voting. Then there is War of Will, the betting proposition, and he is one every wise guy in the game seemingly can’t wait to bet against. Hey, I liked War of Will in the Preakness, and I totally get it. War of Will not only had an absolute dream inside trip in the Preakness, he was also on a part of the Pimlico main track that seemed to get extremely good as the day wore on. For proof of the Preakness Day track bias, you needn’t look any further than Preakness runner up Everfast. Somehow, Everfast astonishingly went off at only 29-1 in the Preakness instead of closer to 129-1. That’s how overmatched he was on paper. The point, however, is Everfast got the place in the Preakness because he rallied up an inside part of the track that by that stage of the afternoon appeared golden. But back to War of Will. After his mugging in the Kentucky Derby, he had a great trip coming to him, if only just to even the scales of justice. That is not the matter at hand now, though. The issue now is, do you want to take a short price on War of Will in the Belmont off a perfect-trip, track-bias-aided Preakness victory? In most instances, few, if any horseplayers worth their salt would. But be careful about this one. Although betting War of Will in the Belmont might contradict many things horseplayers believe in, he can still win. War of Will can absolutely still win this Belmont because he is one of the two best horses in this race. In fact, he and Tacitus simply tower over this Belmont field on paper. Even the most imaginative handicapper would have to seriously stretch to make anything remotely resembling a heartfelt case for any of the others to win. So what happens if the others in this Belmont indeed prove to be in over their heads like it appears on paper? And what happens if Tacitus doesn’t bring his “A” game? No one should go into this Belmont actually expecting that because all indications are Tacitus is sitting on a good race. But it happens. Or, what if Tacitus runs into trouble, or has difficulty with the 1 1/2-mile distance? Sure, you’re not supposed to bet horses coming off perfect trip, bias-aided wins at short prices. Yet despite all of that, War of Will still has a great chance to win. In fact, I’m picking War of Will over Tacitus in this Belmont with a partial rationalization being that after connecting with him at a nice price in the Preakness, I have the right to go back to him. But more importantly, War of Will’s tactical running style, which put him in position to pull such a perfect trip in the Preakness, actually puts him in the position of drawing a perfect trip every time he runs. Except, of course, when front-runners bear out in his path and almost drop him. War of Will will be close early Saturday behind likely pacesetter Joevia, and maybe also Spinoff and Intrepid Heart. War of Will figures to get first run on Tacitus, and he is just as likely, if not more so, than anyone else in this Belmont to see out the 12-furlong trip. My clever idea – at least I hope it’s clever – is to use Bourbon War and Sir Winston under War of Will and Tacitus in vertical wagers. Bourbon War didn’t run a step in the Preakness, finishing eighth. That said, he was moved away from the gold rail early on the backstretch, and that couldn’t have helped. Bourbon War’s late kick was as compromised by a walking pace when fourth in the Florida Derby two starts back as it was helped by a supersonic pace when he finished a gaining second in the Fountain of Youth three back. I just feel Bourbon War is better than his last two races look at first glance and he might be overlooked in the betting ring. Sir Winston was certainly aided by a fast pace in the Peter Pan most recently, but his gaining second-place finish to the talented Global Campaign was easily the best performance of his career. The Peter Pan was also Sir Winston’s first start on Belmont’s main track, which may or may not be a coincidence, but it sure doesn’t hurt.