One Mile Is the "Stallion Maker"

[Rackonteur]

American breeders now target the one-mile distance and breed for it. I just heard this from a commentator at Belmont. I was surprised.

Why one mile? One mile seems a very short distance for horses IMO. It used to be the classic distances, a mile and a half, for instance. I mean, human beings run a mile.

Why has this changed? IMO “the stallion maker” being just a mile sounds kind of like “the colt maker,” not worthy of classic mature horses, let alone breeding stallions. It reminds me of “Rhett Butler’s People” and the “huge” mistake of Rhett riding down the road on an 11-hand stallion.

What has happened to US horse breeding? What am I not getting?

[findeight]

Not many distance races left to breed for-it is a business.

[Rackonteur]

Thanks, findeight.

I just heard them call the Belmont the Test of Champions because of its distance – didn’t go with the “Stallion Maker” comment they made earlier, but your post makes sense to me.

[halo]

The mile distance has been proven for decades and decades to be a stallion maker. It shows a horse has enough speed, yet the stamina to carry that speed a mile. Its a difficult distance to win at. Sprinters cant win going a mile, and true distance horses cant win going a mile. It shows brilliance. Horses that are strictly distance horses are generally very poor stallions.

[mommy_peanut]

It’s not a new concept. The Met has been known as the Stallion Maker for some time.

[Rackonteur]

Back when I started following racing I didn’t hear it called the Met Mile but the Metropolitan Handicap (was run at the mile). Of course, back then it wasn’t shown on TV, all we got were the Derby and Preakness and Belmont. Nothing from Saratoga was shown on TV either. The Breeders Cup didn’t exist.

I never before heard the mile as a “stallion maker” distance until this year. I just looked at the list of winners and I’m seeing some big names there but nothing to compare with the list of Belmont winners (and so far I’m not seeing any names from both lists). Granted, the Belmont is a much older race, so would have have more winners, but the big names I know are definitely on that list.

[Drvmb1ggl3]

This is hardly new. For the better part of the last 60-80 years Milers have been considered the best stallion prospects. A proven miler that is also a G1 winner at 10f is gold.

[Texarkana]

[QUOTE=Rackonteur;8700013]
Back when I started following racing I didn’t hear it called the Met Mile but the Metropolitan Handicap (was run at the mile). Of course, back then it wasn’t shown on TV, all we got were the Derby and Preakness and Belmont. Nothing from Saratoga was shown on TV either. The Breeders Cup didn’t exist.

I never before heard the mile as a “stallion maker” distance until this year. I just looked at the list of winners and I’m seeing some big names there but nothing to compare with the list of Belmont winners (and so far I’m not seeing any names from both lists). Granted, the Belmont is a much older race, so would have have more winners, but the big names I know are definitely on that list.[/QUOTE]

It’s not “just” the Met Mile. There are other G1 mile races in the world. For example, the 2000 Guineas has always been a huge stallion maker.

[Zevida]

I’ve heard about a mile being the magic distance for what the breeders want in a stallion, but I agree, looking at the list of Met Mile winners there are not many superstar studs. I think the mile tends to be a distance where a stallion prospect not fast enough for sprints but always missing at longer distances can get his G1. It also does require some versatility, it’s a bit of a specialist distance that shows they are speedy but can carry it a little, which is what breeders want.

[Texarkana]

The Met Mile is a poor basis for comparison IMO because we don’t love older horses in this country. It’s hard to get anyone excited about them unless they are truly exceptional, breeders included. Look at something like the Champagne instead…

We also love 8.5f on the dirt, especially for our classic bound three year olds. Does that 330 ft make a big difference in terms of ability and genetic makeup? I personally don’t think so. But I do think the numerous 8.5f winners topping the sire lists can be used to support the claim more than the Met Mile.

[Flying_Fox]

[QUOTE=halo;8699981]
The mile distance has been proven for decades and decades to be a stallion maker. It shows a horse has enough speed, yet the stamina to carry that speed a mile. Its a difficult distance to win at. Sprinters cant win going a mile, and true distance horses cant win going a mile. It shows brilliance. Horses that are strictly distance horses are generally very poor stallions.[/QUOTE]

“The Thoroughbred exists because its selection has depended, not on experts, technicians, or zoologists, but on a piece of wood: the winning post of the Epsom Derby. If you base your criteria on anything else, you will get something else, not the Thoroughbred.” [Federico Tesio]

What was Tesio talking about? Quite simply, he
meant that the Epsom Derby was the standard and the goal of breeders around the world, and those runners that achieve this highest of standard of classic performance consistently proved to be outstanding breeding stock. Male and Female

[Drvmb1ggl3]

[QUOTE=Flying Fox;8700353]
“The Thoroughbred exists because its selection has depended, not on experts, technicians, or zoologists, but on a piece of wood: the winning post of the Epsom Derby. If you base your criteria on anything else, you will get something else, not the Thoroughbred.” [Federico Tesio]

What was Tesio talking about? Quite simply, he
meant that the Epsom Derby was the standard and the goal of breeders around the world, and those runners that achieve this highest of standard of classic performance consistently proved to be outstanding breeding stock. Male and Female[/QUOTE]

No offense to Tesio, but that proclamation was made the better part of a century ago at this point.

If you look at the list of leading European sires of the last decade or two, the lion’s share have been sprinters of milers, and Epsom Derby winners have by and large proven to be less successful at stud than 2000 Guineas winners. The notable exception of course is the supersire Galileo, who was an out and out 10-12f horse. But he himself was by the Champion miler Sadlers Wells (undoubtedly one of the greatest sires, if not the greatest sire, of the latter part of the 20th century and early 21st century).

In fact a Derby winner, or top class 12f horse, is more likely to end up as much a leading National Hunt sire as he is a flat sire over the fullness of his career. A look at the leading NH sires shows them to predominately be horses that were G1 horses over 12f.

Here’s a look at the last 20 Derby winners. Most were sired by Milers. Now Galileo and Montjue, both proven 12f horses, do account for 8 of those winners, but both were by the aforementioned Sadlers Wells, a confirmed miler. Also the damsires of the horses they sired that won the Derby tended to be milers also.
I’ve highlighted sires and grandsires that were noted milers or sprinters.

1997 Benny the Dip – Silver Hawk - Rascal Rascal by Ack Ack
1998 High Rise – High Estate - High Tern by High Line
1999 Oath – Fairy King - Sheer Audacity by Troy
2000 Sinndar – Grand Lodge - Sinnatara by Lashkari
2001 Galileo – Sadler’s Wells - Urban Sea by Miswaki
2002 High Chaparral – Sadler’s Wells - Kasora by Darshaan
2003 Kris Kin – Kris S. - Angel in My Heart by Rainbow Quest
2004 North Light – Danehill - Sought Out by Rainbow Quest
2005 Motivator – Montjeu (Sadlers Wells) - Out West by Gone West
2006 Sir Percy – Mark of Esteem - Percy’s Lass by Blakeney
2007 Authorized – Montjeu (Sadlers Wells) - Funsie by Saumarez
2008 New Approach – Galileo (Sadlers Wells) - Park Express by Ahonoora
2009 Sea the Stars – Cape Cross - Urban Sea by Miswaki
2010 Workforce – King’s Best - Soviet Moon by Sadlers Wells
2011 Pour Moi – Montjeu (Sadlers Wells) - Gwynn by Darshaan
2012 Camelot – Montjeu (Sadlers Wells) - Tarfah by Kingmambo
2013 Ruler of the World – Galileo (Sadlers Wells) - Love Me True by Kingmambo
2014 Australia – Galileo (Sadlers Wells)- Ouija Board by Cape Cross
2015 Golden Horn – Cape Cross - Fleche d’Or by Dubai Destination
2016 Harzand – Sea the Stars (Cape Cross) - Harariya by Xaar

[Flying_Fox]

I know time has changed. But with the majority of races in the U.S
have become shorter. And the statement was that

"One Mile Is the “Stallion Maker”

Not Sprinter miler. How would you classify (Mr. Prospector)
or was Seattle slew a sprinter or miler or a router. Can you tell
me was Northern Dancer a sprinter or miler. I think he would have won the Belmont if not for being sore.

“Now Galileo and Montjue, both proven 12f horses, do account for 8 of those winners.”

So did there dams influence in the siring ability.
Miswaki, Kingmambo and Gone west all by Mr. Prospector (sprinter) I sure Tesio would not take offense.

[halo]

I think your missing the point. Seattle Slew was a champion who could sprint, and stay the Belmont distance. The point that milers make the best stallions, doesnt mean that its the only distance a horse can win at. Horses that are the total package nowadays are exceedingly rare, those sprinters who can also win at the Belmont distance. The Met Mile is not the only mile stakes race.

Your argument for Galileo and Montjue being proven 12 f horses, doesnt include the fact that both won as 2 year olds at a flat mile, Galileo winning by nearly 15 lengths. As far as Mr. Prospector goes, its hard to know what he could have done had he been sound. He fractured a cannon bone when he ran second in the Derby Trial (at a flat mile), came back to run a few more times the following year, but was retired due to injuries again.

The list of winners for the Met Mile includes some top stallions, including Fappiano, In Reality, Buckpasser, Native Dancer and Tom Fool. Kelso won the Met Mile, but also won the Jockey Club Gold Cup 5 times when it was at 2 miles.

[Rackonteur]

Native Dancer also won longer races, the Preakness, the Belmont, the Dwyer, the Travers …

Buckpasser also won longer races, as did his sire Tom Fool. I’m leaving out Kelso, for the obvious reason!

So to hold up the Metropolitan as the maker for those stallions isn’t really accurate; might as well name the longer races they won as stallion makers as well.

[Texarkana]

I feel like the point is still being missed. I’m wondering if maybe people are getting bogged down in semantics?

No owner or breeder is out there specifically searching for an elusive Met Mile win, saying, “He got it! NOW he can retire to stud!” Nor are the majority of breeders saying, “I really like that stallion, but he doesn’t have a win at a mile, no dice.” History is unlikely to have been rewritten if Buckpasser didn’t win the Met.

It’s not that literal.

But over decades, there has been a strong correlation between having enough sustained speed to win at a mile and success in the shed. Yeah, many could go much longer… or maybe they were really good at going shorter. But of all the distances a horse can race at in graded company, the mile has consistently been a better predictor than other distances.

That’s all.

Obviously, there are MANY things breeders consider when selecting a stallion besides just the distances at which he won. But when all the other boxes are checked, the ability to win in good company at a mile might be the differentiator that makes an unproven first year sire slightly more appealing to breeders when compared to peers who were strictly routers or sprinters.

[Shammy_Davis]

We yanks don’t have a clue when it comes to the progeny of our stallions. We put our colts to stud well before their potential is truly recognized. It is a total numbers game in the states. It is all about marketing derby crop colts. Very few American stallions cover enough mares to know what their progeny potential is on a race course. JMHO.

[Flying_Fox]

[QUOTE=halo;8701038]
I think your missing the point. Seattle Slew was a champion who could sprint, and stay the Belmont distance. The point that milers make the best stallions, doesnt mean that its the only distance a horse can win at. Horses that are the total package nowadays are exceedingly rare, those sprinters who can also win at the Belmont distance. The Met Mile is not the only mile stakes race.

Your argument for Galileo and Montjue being proven 12 f horses, doesnt include the fact that both won as 2 year olds at a flat mile, Galileo winning by nearly 15 lengths. As far as Mr. Prospector goes, its hard to know what he could have done had he been sound. He fractured a cannon bone when he ran second in the Derby Trial (at a flat mile), came back to run a few more times the following year, but was retired due to injuries again.

The list of winners for the Met Mile includes some top stallions, including Fappiano, In Reality, Buckpasser, Native Dancer and Tom Fool. Kelso won the Met Mile, but also won the Jockey Club Gold Cup 5 times when it was at 2 miles.[/QUOTE]

Halo, your correct
There’s an old adage or saying or cliche in racing about horses known as milers eventually becoming top stallions. Unfortunately no in-depth Google search can come up with exactly who said it first — and when (theories seem to bounce from John Nerud to John Gaines and even Bobby Frankel) — but races like the Metropolitan Handicap seem to prove the theory and prove it beyond any reasonable doubt.

Depending on perspective, the saying either goes: “great milers make good stallions” or “good milers make great stallions” and it doesn’t take a pedigree expert to know that the Met Mile absolutely lives up to both. It is quite simply a sire-making race.

Now if we could just figure out which race makes the female better producers (Acorn) and mated them. We could corner the market on Champions.

[Palm_Beach]

[QUOTE=Rackonteur;8699925]
American breeders now target the one-mile distance and breed for it. I just heard this from a commentator at Belmont. I was surprised. [/QUOTE]

Which commentator? There is a vast difference in experience among them. And I don’t know any of them who are big time commercial breeders. Where are they getting their statistics? IMHO, there are not many races written at a flat mile. Most of them are <mile. Maybe the commentator meant that if the progeny don’t get At LEAST a mile, the stallion will not be as successful, no matter how many winners or what the earnings?

[halo]

[QUOTE=Rackonteur;8701182]
Native Dancer also won longer races, the Preakness, the Belmont, the Dwyer, the Travers …

Buckpasser also won longer races, as did his sire Tom Fool. I’m leaving out Kelso, for the obvious reason!

So to hold up the Metropolitan as the maker for those stallions isn’t really accurate; might as well name the longer races they won as stallion makers as well.[/QUOTE]

But they dont. Stallions who are only distance specialists, without the speed to win shorter races, general are failures as sires. You HAVE to have speed. Have to.