I’m not proposing Arrogate is a better alternative because he didn’t race at two. I’m proposing him as a better alternative because he’s faster and can beat mature horses. Zenyatta didn’t race at two and turned into a superlative race horse. Nyquist failed at the end of his three yo year against other 3yos and never ran against mature horses.
At least Uncle Mo beat 3 older horses in the Kelso in his 3yo year.
[QUOTE=vineyridge;8933518]
Buckpasser was injured during a great part of his three old year with hoof problems, but he came back at the end and showed what a great race horse he was during that year and his four year old year. He was champion 2yo, champion 3yo, and champion older male at 4. He ended up a great sire.
Nyquist isn’t anywhere in his league.
Zenyatta didn’t race at two, and turned into a great race horse. Some horses need time to mature.[/QUOTE]
If Buckpasser was around, we’d all be breeding to him (if we could get to him.) Zenyatta is, of course, a mare.
I honestly don’t get it. Is the point to denegrate TB breeders for not breeding to horses that can’t be bred to?
And so far (admittedly from a small group) Zenyatta doesn’t look like she’d be a stallion who would stay popular with breeders for long because she hasn’t produced anything even close to her level.
I’m still confused why Nyquist and Uncle Mo are being discounted for being from an “unsound” line and Arrogate is being pointed to as a better alternative when he had issues that kept him from racing early or often and is from an unsound line as well.
Viney, I don’t understand why you think Nyquist couldn’t/didn’t make it through his 3 year old campaign.
The horse went through a pretty demanding summer/fall for his juvenile campaign, culminating with a BC championship and Eclipse award. He had minimal time off before he had to jump right back in to the Derby preps, again culminating with a 1st and 3rd in the classics.
Yes, he lost some form coming out of that, but had he a lesser resume, the horse would have undoubtedly been brought back as a 4 year old. There is no way to predict what kind of success he might have had as an older horse just because he had two off-form starts at the end of his 3 y/o campaign. But with 5 G1 wins including a KD and BC, he has nothing more to prove. Except to you, apparently.
What part of the Arrogate breeding is from an unsound line? I’ll certainly agree that the Unbridled line has its flaws; but which in the bottom side would be considered an unsound line?
Just as an historical point, KD winners have very, very often failed as sires; but then, so have Triple Crown winners. Oddly enough, the same doesn’t hold for horses from GB/Ireland who have won their classics.
From Equibase, Nyquist had 5 races from June to the end of October last year, then had just under 4 months off before his next race and had only two races before the KY Derby. That just doesn’t look “grueling” by any reasonable standard.
The Unbridled’s Song line is acknowledged as an unsound line. You weren’t picking on Nyquist’s bottom line, you were picking on the top line so it’s only fair you compare like-to-like.
Like others, I don’t understand why you are so set against one horse and breeders and bringing historic horses into the conversation that obviously cannot be bred to anymore. Your argument really isn’t that clear.
ETA: Historically, Unbridled’s Song also isn’t known to be a sire-of-sires. So much so that Headley Bell said on the record that the Unbridled’s Song as a sire was a knock against Keep Up because his sons haven’t really stepped up (Keep Up also spent a large period of his career and even before his career injured).
[QUOTE=vineyridge;8933754]
Just as an historical point, KD winners have very, very often failed as sires; but then, so have Triple Crown winners.[/QUOTE]
Yet Breeders Cup Juvenile winners have had considerably more success. As have eclipse winning two year olds.
I would love to know what you folks think that they “private treaty” terms will be on AP? Twofer’s? Big discounts? How do you keep the momentum up on a horse prior to his first colts hitting the track? TIA!
[QUOTE=ASB Stars;8933808]
I would love to know what you folks think that they “private treaty” terms will be on AP? Twofer’s? Big discounts? How do you keep the momentum up on a horse prior to his first colts hitting the track? TIA![/QUOTE]
I’m guessing they dropped his fee down to the unofficial $100k (or less) he was at in 2016 without publicly showing it. That’s about the ceiling of where he belonged and they did the “if you breed two to him, you get him at $100k each” (I know one breeder who bred three to him and got him at $75k each, I’m guessing he wasn’t the only one).
It definitely doesn’t help that both his sire and grandsire had a fee drop in 2017 too.
[QUOTE=vineyridge;8933754]
From Equibase, Nyquist had 5 races from June to the end of October last year, then had just under 4 months off before his next race and had only two races before the KY Derby. That just doesn’t look “grueling” by any reasonable standard.[/QUOTE]
Saying that Nyquist had 4 months off between his last race at 2 and his first race at 3 is like saying that Olympic athletes get 4 years off between competitions. It doesn’t work that way.
Nyquist “only” had 2 races before the Derby (at 3) because his trainer decided that was the best schedule to get him to the race at peak form. It had nothing to do with his soundness level. The horse remained in training (daily galloping, weekly breezing) during that time.
I’m wondering if you’re aware that when horses are racing that they don’t only train and/or run on race day? 
The fitness level of most racehorses would put Rolex horses to shame.
Sadly, whatever position you take on the early retirement of grade 1 winning colts to stud, it isn’t going to stop or slow it down. Its just business. Big business!
http://www.drf.com/news/breeders-cup-juvenile-stallion-making-race
[QUOTE=Shammy Davis;8934028]
Sadly, whatever position you take on the early retirement of grade 1 winning colts to stud, it isn’t going to stop or slow it down. Its just business. Big business!
http://www.drf.com/news/breeders-cup-juvenile-stallion-making-race[/QUOTE]
With what can be made in the breeding shed, I’m surprised that some stallions run as long as they do.
Racing has become not about racing, but a simple breeding industry with racing as a qualification for breeding. It can’t survive that way because it will (and is) losing its spectators/bettors to other forms of gambling. Horse go into the shed so quickly that the average bettor/spectator doesn’t form attachments. Commercial breeding is killing racing. Once racing is dead here, what will happen to the breeders?
Is the rest of the world like this?
It reminds me of llama breeding where people bred llamas to sell llamas to breed. There was no end use, just breeding.
[QUOTE=gotpaints;8933780]
The Unbridled’s Song line is acknowledged as an unsound line. You weren’t picking on Nyquist’s bottom line, you were picking on the top line so it’s only fair you compare like-to-like.
Like others, I don’t understand why you are so set against one horse and breeders and bringing historic horses into the conversation that obviously cannot be bred to anymore. Your argument really isn’t that clear.
ETA: Historically, Unbridled’s Song also isn’t known to be a sire-of-sires. So much so that Headley Bell said on the record that the Unbridled’s Song as a sire was a knock against Keep Up because his sons haven’t really stepped up (Keep Up also spent a large period of his career and even before his career injured).[/QUOTE]
Respectfully, Unbridled’s Song is considered a sire of sires.
Unbridled (and Unbridled Song) are, IMHO, not considered a fragile line; rather, they sire precocious individuals that look more mature than they are, which can lead to breakdown when indiscretion is used.
Both have many, many sons/daughters producing successful race horses.
You really need to stop posting as you starting to sound silly at this point.
Horses have been retired young on light schedules for over 200 years. The original intent of the original Classic races was to determine who the best 3yos were so you could pack them of to stud to get them pumping out babies for the betterment of the breed.
Every horse by a top stallion is bred with the intention of someday RACING. The short goal may be to sell as a yearling and make a profit, but the person that is buying the yearling is doing so to RACE that horse. If it performs exceptionally well as a 2yo and 3yo it may well be retired to stud at the end of it’s 3yo year, if it has the right combination of pedigree and race record. The majority will not go to stud but will race as older horses, maybe not all at the top level, but generally they will perform above average, because, that’s what they are, racehorses.
As to the rest of the world. The leading sire in the world, Galileo, was retired as a 3yo. Coolmore has plenty of horses on it’s stallion roster retired as 3yos. For godsakes they even have one that they retired as a perfectly healthy 2yo. Yet those sires produce some damn fine racehorses.
For somebody who does not follow day to day racing, or even top end racing with regularity, you have awful strong opinions on what racing is and isn’t.
[QUOTE=Drvmb1ggl3;8934438]
You really need to stop posting as you starting to sound silly at this point.
Horses have been retired young on light schedules for over 200 years. . . For somebody who does not follow day to day racing, or even top end racing with regularity, you have awful strong opinions on what racing is and isn’t.[/QUOTE]
I might agree with you if this were 50 or 60 years ago, but not today. North American horse racing is collapsing. The data along with the reality is there for everyone to see. The bloodlines are becoming so narrow as to be indistinguishable. There are less than five states with remarkable breeding industries in NA. The wealth of that sector is invested primarily in KY. Unsoundness is no longer an issue of consequences for owners and stallion syndicates with juvenile and derby colt retirements though injury is the most often used excuse for cashing in.
You may see these posts as silliness but actually history has shown that in North American a collapse of an industry the remains of which might exist only in a few states like KY, CA, FL, NY, and MD in a few decades.
Flooding the market with young colts in developing years maybe big business for the breeding and sales sector but it is bad business for the breed and racing. Vineyridge has made some thoughtful comments.
You trying to staunch the comments by one individual doesn’t change nor improve on the facts, the current circumstances, nor the reality that racing is in terrible decline and the only benefactors are a small number of very rich individuals who can afford to piss money away while monopolizing every sector of the game.
Sadler’s Wells also retired at 3 and that turned out great. On a non-Coolmore level, Dubawi (one of the top stallions in the world) retired at 4, Shamardal (No. 3 on Europe’s sire list) retired at 3. In Australia, top sire Redoute’s Choice retired at three (owned by neither Coolmore or Darley) and that was back in 2000.
I don’t have time to look up other stallions right now but early retirements are not ruining racing. And I’ve heard “racing is dying” since I got into the sport 15 years ago (and even before that), yet it’s still here.
As for breeding just to breed, you realize that MANY horses run as older horses, right (including graded stakes horses)? Just because someone who doesn’t watch racing all the time doesn’t mean the horses aren’t there. This year, just in North America on recognized tracks, 30,022 horses four and older made at least one start (straight from Equibase numbers).
In some respects the controversy surrounding California Chrome was a good thing. I used to be disappointed by it, but now if that’s what led to him being raced for a few more years then it was worth it IMO. I wish more horses would race beyond their three year old year, but I can see why stallion owners would not do it.
[QUOTE=SnicklefritzG;8934624]
In some respects the controversy surrounding California Chrome was a good thing. I used to be disappointed by it, but now if that’s what led to him being raced for a few more years then it was worth it IMO. I wish more horses would race beyond their three year old year, but I can see why stallion owners would not do it.[/QUOTE]
I think the unknown of the pedigree was a blessing in disguise for Chrome (followed by the aborted campaign last year). There was no way he’d get the support he will now if he retired at three and he’s done a great job convincing people he’s the real deal. I wish more of the top horses would race longer but with the economics of breeding vs. 4yo purchases (and the risk taken on the track to both the resume and soundness), I understand why they don’t.
[QUOTE=gotpaints;8934604]
Sadler’s Wells also retired at 3 and that turned out great. On a non-Coolmore level, Dubawi (one of the top stallions in the world) retired at 4, Shamardal (No. 3 on Europe’s sire list) retired at 3. In Australia, top sire Redoute’s Choice retired at three (owned by neither Coolmore or Darley) and that was back in 2000.
I don’t have time to look up other stallions right now but early retirements are not ruining racing. And I’ve heard “racing is dying” since I got into the sport 15 years ago (and even before that), yet it’s still here.
As for breeding just to breed, you realize that MANY horses run as older horses, right (including graded stakes horses)? Just because someone who doesn’t watch racing all the time doesn’t mean the horses aren’t there. This year, just in North America on recognized tracks, 30,022 horses four and older made at least one start (straight from Equibase numbers).[/QUOTE]
I appreciate your decade and a half of industry experience and observation but it hardly time to get a true recognition on the declining health of North American horse racing. Although flooding the stallion barns with prematurely talented colts is not the sole cause, it is problematic. Vineyridge is correct that the breeding and sales sector has taken precedence over the vitality and health of the sport. For reference, the following observation might give you an idea of how different the industry is now as opposed to its hay days after WWII.
A great read, published in 2009, is Jim Squires’ HEADLESS HORSEMEN, particularly chapter 6 titled “Subprime Salesmanship.” Full of information and often hilariously honest observations, I recommend it.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
