Jockey Club Limits Stallion Books to 140 Mares

[Mara]

@LaurieB

When the question was initially asked, I wasn’t sure of the answer. Actually, the way the question was phrased, I wasn’t sure of the question. :lol:

But I went to the Blood Horse stallion register to look up the answer. On each stallion’s page, they provide a statistical summary of results for northern hemisphere foals, and southern hemisphere foals (if applicable). Flatter has both summaries, so I glanced at it and saw that he’d had 1 southern hemisphere foal crop. But you’re right, I should have taken a closer look. Because that one foal crop only lists one foal. So he most likely did not shuttle anywhere. So my answer should have been “All but one.”

I promise I wasn’t trying to play “gotcha!” :lol:

How would that have worked? Will some stallion owners allow a select few mares to ship in and breed on southern hemisphere time?

[LaurieB]

@Mara

I promise I wasn’t trying to play “gotcha!” :lol:

How would that have worked? Will some stallion owners allow a select few mares to ship in and breed on southern hemisphere time?

Actually you can breed to a number of (non-shuttling) Kentucky stallions on southern hemisphere time (usually considered to be after August 1st.) Farms usually offer them at a very reduced rate since there’s not much demand.

[Where_sMyWhite]

@LaurieB

Actually you can breed to a number of (non-shuttling) Kentucky stallions on southern hemisphere time (usually considered to be after August 1st.) Farms usually offer them at a very reduced rate since there’s not much demand.

So a stallion bred on southern hemisphere season but located in KY be counted as one of the 140 covers (I assume so).

If the mare is then shipped from US to, say OZ, prior to birth, is the foal registered Australian JC?

[Where_sMyWhite]

@LaurieB

This is a well written and well thought out OP/Ed piece about the breeding cap from TDN: https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/op-ed-what-is-the-goal-behind-the-cap/

Very interested read, thanks for posting the link (as I don’t usually read TDN).

I would agree with the opinions and suggestions that Jon Green mentioned. Where did the 140 cap come from? What was the real driver (statistics, reports, etc) in making this cap.

I like the idea of a clear definition of an outcross and then marking a foal as such. Yes, could be both races focused specifically on outcrosses similar to many of the tracks that offer state-bred races.

:encouragement:

[skydy]

@LaurieB It was an interesting opinion piece.

What do think the odds are that any of his questions about the reasoning behind the rule, and the the statistics used, to come up with the 140 mare cap (in the name of genetic diversity) will be answered by the Jockey Club?

I think transparency regarding the decision making process would be a good thing and possibly (though not probably) an education for us all.

Do I think it will happen? No. Perhaps if enough owners and breeders demand answers they’ll have to say something to them, but holding your breath would probably be a mistake.

[LaurieB]

I highly doubt that the JC will justify their decision. I’m sure they don’t feel the need.

[skydy]

I’m sure they don’t.

[Texel]

@Where'sMyWhite

Very interested read, thanks for posting the link (as I don’t usually read TDN).

I would agree with the opinions and suggestions that Jon Green mentioned. Where did the 140 cap come from? What was the real driver (statistics, reports, etc) in making this cap.

I like the idea of a clear definition of an outcross and then marking a foal as such. Yes, could be both races focused specifically on outcrosses similar to many of the tracks that offer state-bred races.

:encouragement:

The 140 number is the exact same number that the USTA settled on when they decided to limit their books. However, the USTA hired a geneticist to determine a good estimate first. There’s a good article on it here: https://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/ten-years-later-how-the-stud-book-cap-has-affected-harness-racing/

Maybe the JC got a little too inspired by the USTA?

[Where_sMyWhite]

A bit off topic but… Spendthrift announced that both Omaha Beach (War Front) and Vino Rosso (Curlin) will be shuttling to Australia this season.

Spendthrift Australia will be supporting both from their broodmare band as well as acquiring additional mares that would be complimentary to both stations.

https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/241191/omaha-beach-vino-rosso-to-shuttle-to-australia

[SonnysMom]

@halo

Im really confused by this whole thing. When they originally stated they were going to try something like this, it was the total opposite of what they did. Originally, they were going to allow first and second year sires unlimited mares, and limit all other stallions to 140. Now they did the total opposite, allowing all stallions older than 2020 unlimited mares, and limiting stallions born 2020 and after. How exactly is that supposed to help genetic diversity, when Tapit had 30 or more sons breeding mares, with several more graded stakes horses in the pipeline. Im sure they have an agenda for doing this, but Im thinking genetic diversity has little to do with it. Maybe more like “farm” diversity.

My guess is that it is to help keep them from being sued. If last year you bought a stallion and you figured that you could breed 200 mares for the next 2 or 3 years to recoup your costs if you suddenly lose the income of 60 mares per year that is really going to put a crimp in your business plan. You likely can’t raise the rates on those 140 breedings to make up for the lost 60 breedings. US Jockey club has just tanked your investment.

However for stallions born 2020 and after nobody knows if they will race, race well enough to become a breeding stallion let alone one that would breed more than 140 mares a year. If they are that successful then any sales to go from a race stallion to a breeding stallion take into consideration the 140 mare a year limit. His entire career will take into account that limit.

Disclaimer- I only read part of page 1 and will go back and read the other pages now.

[halo]

That was a good article. In a nice way, he called out the Jockey Club for them claiming this rule is for genetic diversity. I think its painfully obvious that its the last thing the JC was looking at, but they are claiming thats the reason so as not to be called out for the very thing they are promoting, which is diversity for FARMS. I really dont think their interest is in genetics, but in keeping their Lexington farms in business, which keeps them in business. We wont see this rule take effect for a few years, but when it does, it will be interesting to watch.

I think it will be hilarious if in one of these 2020 or 2021 crops, there is a colt who is a total outcross, who wins everything in sight, who will be limited to 140 mares. Yeah, hows that genetic diversity working out.