[QUOTE=Drvmb1ggl3;8089670]
They are no different. Do Steve Asmussen and Todd Pletcher train every horse they have stabled at different tracks around the country? Not unless they have cloned themselves they don’t.[/QUOTE]
They have licensed assistants working for them who who oversee the day to day training.
[QUOTE=Calamber;8089731]
Well that is bizarre, Lucky Pulpit is by Pulpit. Kind of related don’t ya think?[/QUOTE]
Sure, they’re related.
But in people, horses, dogs, etc. it’s not unusual for fathers and sons to have different strengths and/or capabilities. Same is true here.
[QUOTE=Calamber;8089731]
Well that is bizarre, Lucky Pulpit is by Pulpit. Kind of related don’t ya think?[/QUOTE]
Commercial thoroughbred breeding is a bit different than other breeds and disciplines. I hope I can explain this a manner that will be acceptable to the breeding “pros” on this board.
In Quarter Horses, for example, it is almost just as good to be a grandson or great grandson of a famous sire as it is to be by that sire himself. That is not so in commercial thoroughbred race breeding.
Speed and the ability to reproduce speed rarely lie dormant like other equine qualities. Horses often have the ability or they don’t. Ideally in a pedigree you want to see stallions who give us blacktype winners and mares who produce blacktype winners.
Pulpit was a very good sire who threw many brilliant racehorses in his short time at stud. He also threw some average horses and clunkers, like the Baatesh horse you linked to above. The reason that Baatesh horse is available for sport horse breeding today is by virtue of his phenomenal pedigree (and I’m guessing his temperament as well). Otherwise there is zero reason to keep a failed claimer who ended his career at Thistledown at stud. But someone was hoping that horse would be able to return on his investment, as he sold for $400K at one point. Not only is he by Pulpit, who is still extraordinarily popular, but he is out of a graded stakes placed mare who has produced runners and a multiple graded stakes placed winner.
Tapit, son of Pulpit, currently stands for $300K a season and is the most popular stallion in the country. His sons and daughters are winning major races everywhere, and many of his sons have retired to the breeding shed thanks to their race record and pedigree.
Lucky Pulpit, on the other hand, has not enjoyed the success of Tapit. Being a listed stakes winner by Pulpit afforded him the opportunity to keep his jewels, but in California instead of Kentucky. Until California Chrome, he stood for a modest $2,500 his entire career and has not given us any other brilliant racehorses. Out of 246 foals of racing age, less than half of them (46%) made it to race and less than a third of them (31%) won a race. He has given no other graded stakes winners besides Chrome, and only two other listed/restricted stakes winners. For comparison, Pulpit himself gave us 81% starters, 58% winners, and 70 blacktype winners. This is why I referred to Lucky Pulpit as an unsuccessful branch of a popular family tree.
California Chrome’s dam Love The Chase was by the regional sire Not For Love, who was a very good sire for the mid-Atlantic but is virtually unknown outside the area. She was just a claimer and has only had 2 foals. Her dam, Chase It Down, did win a maiden special weight, but failed as an allowance horse and also was running claiming races. She literally produced nothing noteworthy. You have to go back to California Chrome’s third dam before you find any blacktype.
Generally speaking, most potential sires fail because they do not reproduce horses as good as themselves. But the horses that are considered most likely to succeed in the breeding shed have both racing ability plus a strong pedigree (both sire and dam line). The stronger those attributes are, the more money people will pay for a horse as a stallion before he has any foals on the ground. Any stallion is going to have to prove himself through his offspring quickly once he actually starts breeding.
Unfortunately for California Chrome, there is little that can change about his pedigree. Also unfortunately for him, he has proved to be a very good race horse, but not a super horse. His owners are chasing “super horse” status to increase his worth, but there’s not much he can do now that will change his standing in the eyes of American breeders. He’s a multiple G1 Kentucky Derby winner, so he absolutely will have mares to breed… but he’s not going to start off his career bringing in $100K a season or anything crazy like that. He just doesn’t have the pedigree, plus he will be competing for mares that would go to Tapit, Tapit sons, or other more successful Pulpit-line horses.
I hope this clears up the confusion.
Nice explanation, Texarkana. 
I would just like to say however, that the commercial TB market had nothing to do with the popularity of Pulpit and the lack of popularity of Lucky Pulpit. It was all about results.
As you pointed out, Lucky Pulpit has gotten only 46% of his horses to the races with 31% winners and 1% stakes winners. Pulpit’s stats: 81% runners, 58% winners, 7% stakes winners. If someone was going to take the time and spend the money to try and breed a good racehorse which odds of success would most people rather start with?
Fwiw, Pulpit’s career as a stallion wasn’t particularly short. He sired 15 crops (948 foals), the youngest of which are currently 2 year olds.
Pulpit’s career was ended with an untimely death, which I’m only being slightly facetious when I say that is the absolute best way for a stallion to end his career. 
But you’re right, “short” was a poor choice of words.
And I completely agree it’s all about the results and I’m sorry I’m not conveying this well. You are much better at written explanation than I am. Lucky Pulpit is less likely to give someone a runner, let alone a good runner. Pulpit was/is extremely popular because he was highly likely to give you not only a runner, but a darn good one.
You know better than I do that there are many other factors that affect a stallion’s success. But the bottom line: being by Lucky Pulpit hurts the price of California Chrome’s stallion offers because Lucky Pulpit himself has been a mediocre stallion so far.
[QUOTE=LaurieB;8089118]
Last time I checked, California, Meydan and Newmarket were on 3 different continents in 3 different time zones. Maybe you have a different map than I do? 
…[/QUOTE]
Saying Newmarket and Dubai are on different continents sounds like really long distance, especially to those of us on this New World island. But continents have to border up to other continents somewhere, and being close to either side of the border shrinks the distance. Right? That’s what my map shows.
Comparatively, for eventers at least, European horses competing at Rolex Kentucky, and American horses competing in Europe, go over and back in the space of maybe 7-10 days. Not even trying to accommodate twice or more the time difference between Dubai-Newmarket. And in Kentucky the Europeans are kicking American butt, so it isn’t exactly doing them in.
Just not understanding why some of the public is carrying on the way they are over Chrome. He’s a lucky, lucky horse compared to too many suffering real abuse from human meaness, ignorance, greed and indifference.
No clue how he will perform in English races, nor do I care. I have every confidence he will be well cared for while there. That’s all that matter (to me).
Texarkana: Very nice explanation. Lucky Pulpit doesn’t look all that appetizing with or without California Chrome. Note on the link below that LP’s CI is (for the most part) more comparable to stallions listed below the top 50.
https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/thoroughbred-breeding/sire-lists/lifetime-a-e-i
Good explanation. One minor correction - Love the Chase has had three foals, and is carrying a fourth, all by Lucky Pulpit.
California Chrome - 2011
http://archives.harrisfarms.com/foals11/lovethechase.htm
off year in 2012 to recover from problem delivery in 2011
Hope’s Love - 2013 - filly currently in training at GG Fields with Steve Sherman, Art’s son
http://www.harrisfarms.com/index.php/foals/10-foals/98-lucky-pulpit-out-of-love-the-chase-chestnut-filly-foaled-january-13
filly 2014 - this is the one that reportedly looks most like her brother
http://www.harrisfarms.com/index.php/foals/10-foals/419-lucky-pulpit-out-of-love-the-chase-by-not-for-love-filly-foaled-february-22
Love the Chase is due to deliver her fourth foal next month.
Check out this link. Read the responses below the article. The real “Carolyn Coburn” is responding to some of the comments. Now that is very interesting.
Rae Guest agrees that CC might have some problems initially adjusting. As suggested earlier, CC is entered in races that are straight (8f) 1600 m sprints. Unless CC has an inaptitude for certain degrees on the compass, he should be fine. I guess it is all a matter of how he recovered from Dubai. Have noticed, or may have missed, anything about who the jockey will be. It will be a busy time for VE here in the states.
Victor Espinoza has ridden at Ascot before. He had 5 rides at the Royal meeting last year, including a winner on Hooteanny in the Windsor Castle Stakes.
[QUOTE=RainyDayRide;8090427]
Good explanation. One minor correction - Love the Chase has had three foals, and is carrying a fourth, all by Lucky Pulpit.
California Chrome - 2011
http://archives.harrisfarms.com/foals11/lovethechase.htm
off year in 2012 to recover from problem delivery in 2011
Hope’s Love - 2013 - filly currently in training at GG Fields with Steve Sherman, Art’s son
http://www.harrisfarms.com/index.php/foals/10-foals/98-lucky-pulpit-out-of-love-the-chase-chestnut-filly-foaled-january-13
filly 2014 - this is the one that reportedly looks most like her brother
http://www.harrisfarms.com/index.php/foals/10-foals/419-lucky-pulpit-out-of-love-the-chase-by-not-for-love-filly-foaled-february-22
Love the Chase is due to deliver her fourth foal next month.[/QUOTE]
Thank you for the catch! I meant to type “2 other foals” but that didn’t happen. My bad! And hoping for an uneventful delivery for her next month!
I do like how the mare is bred. Inbreeding to Numbered Account is not something you see frequently, and a dang good family to have top and bottom. :yes:
In hindsight, it’s not a complete surprise she completely outproduced herself for her first foal, but I sure wouldn’t have predicted it on paper beforehand. It will be interesting to see what her other foals do.
[QUOTE=OverandOnward;8090251]
Saying Newmarket and Dubai are on different continents sounds like really long distance, especially to those of us on this New World island. But continents have to border up to other continents somewhere, and being close to either side of the border shrinks the distance. Right? That’s what my map shows.
Comparatively, for eventers at least, European horses competing at Rolex Kentucky, and American horses competing in Europe, go over and back in the space of maybe 7-10 days. Not even trying to accommodate twice or more the time difference between Dubai-Newmarket. And in Kentucky the Europeans are kicking American butt, so it isn’t exactly doing them in.
Just not understanding why some of the public is carrying on the way they are over Chrome. He’s a lucky, lucky horse compared to too many suffering real abuse from human meaness, ignorance, greed and indifference.
No clue how he will perform in English races, nor do I care. I have every confidence he will be well cared for while there. That’s all that matter (to me). :)[/QUOTE]
I both agree and disagree with you. I do think he’s a lucky horse who and I have no doubt he will be “fine” physically. But I don’t think you can compare an American race horse to a European eventer at all. It is SO different.
Horses do jump continents all the time for racing and competition. Some horses handle it well, but some horses don’t. CC has been carefully managed by Art Sherman to this point and has thrived. Art Sherman says Dubai took a lot out of Chrome and he was hoping to give him a rest. No one knows the horse better than Art Sherman. If he thinks the horse needs a rest, then I 100% agree with his opinion.
Sure, Newmarket may be a shorter distance by plane. But flying is stressful on an animal, whether it’s 5 hours or 12 hours. And then to unload in a new barn in a new country with new people and new methods of training and horse care… again, that’s stressful. Especially to a race horse whose daily life is extremely regimented. Some horses handle it fine, others are slower to adapt. ALL of the people involved with Chrome’s daily care have expressed concern over the transition.
I’m not upset about Chrome racing in England at all. It just disappoints me how and why the decision appears to have been made-- solely to increase his worth, without consulting the trainer. That last part especially rubs me the wrong way when Art Sherman has done so right by the horse. And I’m still skeptical at how much his “worth” will increase with this venture, but I’ll be happy to see him succeed regardless.
[QUOTE=Texarkana;8090730]
I both agree and disagree with you. I do think he’s a lucky horse who and I have no doubt he will be “fine” physically. But I don’t think you can compare an American race horse to a European eventer at all. It is SO different.
Horses do jump continents all the time for racing and competition. Some horses handle it well, but some horses don’t. CC has been carefully managed by Art Sherman to this point and has thrived. Art Sherman says Dubai took a lot out of Chrome and he was hoping to give him a rest. No one knows the horse better than Art Sherman. If he thinks the horse needs a rest, then I 100% agree with his opinion.
Sure, Newmarket may be a shorter distance by plane. But flying is stressful on an animal, whether it’s 5 hours or 12 hours. And then to unload in a new barn in a new country with new people and new methods of training and horse care… again, that’s stressful. Especially to a race horse whose daily life is extremely regimented. Some horses handle it fine, others are slower to adapt. ALL of the people involved with Chrome’s daily care have expressed concern over the transition.
I’m not upset about Chrome racing in England at all. It just disappoints me how and why the decision appears to have been made-- solely to increase his worth, without consulting the trainer. That last part especially rubs me the wrong way when Art Sherman has done so right by the horse. And I’m still skeptical at how much his “worth” will increase with this venture, but I’ll be happy to see him succeed regardless.[/QUOTE]
Also it is not all about miles. Climate and the length of stay has to factor in too. Dubai and Newmarket may just be a short hop by plane but they are really different climates.
[QUOTE=LaurieB;8090038]
Nice explanation, Texarkana.
I would just like to say however, that the commercial TB market had nothing to do with the popularity of Pulpit and the lack of popularity of Lucky Pulpit. It was all about results.
As you pointed out, Lucky Pulpit has gotten only 46% of his horses to the races with 31% winners and 1% stakes winners. Pulpit’s stats: 81% runners, 58% winners, 7% stakes winners. If someone was going to take the time and spend the money to try and breed a good racehorse which odds of success would most people rather start with?
Fwiw, Pulpit’s career as a stallion wasn’t particularly short. He sired 15 crops (948 foals), the youngest of which are currently 2 year olds.[/QUOTE]
The lack of “popularity” with Lucky Pulpit may have had to do with his record as he contracted a virus and could not breathe early on in his career. He also started out in Idaho and went to California for stud duty. I cannot imagine he pulled in the kind of mares that Pulpit did with a far better race record which earned him study duty in Kentucky.
[QUOTE=Calamber;8092381]
The lack of “popularity” with Lucky Pulpit may have had to do with his record as he contracted a virus and could not breathe early on in his career. He also started out in Idaho and went to California for stud duty. I cannot imagine he pulled in the kind of mares that Pulpit did with a far better race record which earned him study duty in Kentucky.[/QUOTE]
I’m confused about the Idaho comment. He has zero record of ever racing or breeding any mares in Idaho. That is the first I’ve ever heard that.
The Jockey Club report from his first year at stud, listed as standing in CA:
http://www.thejockeyclub.com/default.asp?section=Resources&area=13&report=LF&reportyear=2007&letter=L
No mention of Idaho in his announcement of entering stud:
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/36660/stakes-winner-lucky-pulpit-to-harris-farms
Wind problem or not, he has 8 crops of foals on the ground and 6 currently racing that could have proven him as a strong sire-- and they haven’t.
I totally agree that Pulpit saw better mares than Lucky Pulpit will ever see. But the thing is, regional sires can still be successful and prove themselves as good regional sires, even if they never make it to the big leagues. Not For Love, for example, has a wonderful pedigree but an even weaker race record than Lucky Pulpit’s. Yet he proved himself in the shed and had meteoric success in Maryland during a time when Maryland’s breeding scene was spiraling down the toilet uncontrollably. Though recently retired, Not For Love is currently sitting at 80% starters, 64% winners, and 8% blacktype winners. Yet Lucky Pulpit has 46% starters, 31% winners, and 1% blacktype winners. That’s a drastic difference in results between two regional stallions, neither of whom see top mares.
[QUOTE=Calamber;8092381]
The lack of “popularity” with Lucky Pulpit may have had to do with his record as he contracted a virus and could not breathe early on in his career. He also started out in Idaho and went to California for stud duty. I cannot imagine he pulled in the kind of mares that Pulpit did with a far better race record which earned him study duty in Kentucky.[/QUOTE]
Are there any nice, easy-to-access stats which show the quality of mares bred to a stallion? In other words, can you look at a stallion’s book and see info on the mares which were bred to him? As Calamber pointed out, Lucky Pulpit’s mares were not the top black-type winners and producers of champions. If one compares the lower-quality mares bred to Pulpit, mares of a similar quality to those bred to Lucky Pulpit, what do the stats show?
[QUOTE=danceronice;8089377]
Depends on your definition of ‘short amount of time.’ If anything this is smarter than the timing on shipping to Dubai (which Martin was against)–he had very little time to acclimate to a radical climate shift. Now he’ll have weeks with a local trainer who knows how to prep horses in the UK in a much milder climate.
Frankly I’m not sure what people want. Put the horse on a plane for twenty hours back to California, sit around there, look for a spot against sparse fields in Cali (and get slammed for running against ‘nothing’; see complaints about his turf win), ship east and get people complaining they’re shipping him all over to chase money in THIS country (see PA Derby), retire him to stud in the US and get called chicken for not doing either of the above because they’re “scared” of Shared Belief AND get no money for him because he could win the Prix de l’Arc and the Japan Cup and still no stud farm here would want him anyway so he’d end up in California standing for maybe $25k if they’re lucky? Or race him (and he appears to be completely sound and handles change and varied conditions just fine) overseas the way Europe races their horses in America? He’s a racehorse, not a lawn ornament.
I mean, really, the worry that he’s going to break like he’s some sort of fragile flower is absurd. He’s never taken a bad step and his only injury has been someone stepping on him and he came back fine. If people want to wring their hands over horses made of glass, they should worry about this year’s Derby field and how they’re dropping like flies. Another one just joined the list (Dubai Sky fractured a leg and is out. No word on just out for now or done for good.)[/QUOTE]
THIS^^^
I don’t understand why people get so bent out of shape when a race horse is actually expected to… oh I don’t know… RACE.
In just about every other discipline horses are shipped all over the world to compete & often with much shorter time frames(not as much rest/acclimation). You don’t hear people bitching about those horses…
[QUOTE=mommy peanut;8092531]
THIS^^^
I don’t understand why people get so bent out of shape when a race horse is actually expected to… oh I don’t know… RACE.
In just about every other discipline horses are shipped all over the world to compete & often with much shorter time frames(not as much rest/acclimation). You don’t hear people bitching about those horses…[/QUOTE]
A racehorse, especially one that will go to stud, has a lot more to do in a much shorter career than a show horse. If a show horse doesn’t ship well and performs poorly, oh well, on to the next one. If a racehorse goes somewhere and doesn’t do well, it’s judged much more harshly and it is much harder to “redeem” their reputation.
If a show horse has a bad ship and a bad show or event, they can take time off with no consequence, their careers can and usually do span for several years, and the stallions don’t have to retire in order to breed. Generally a racehorse has one or two years at the top before retirement.
An international show horse’s campaign and travel schedule is carefully planned out at LEAST a year in advance by the horse’s entire team. That was obviously not the case here, Martin may claim to have had this in his head for some time now but the people that would actually know how to implement such a plan in a way that would be the best for the horse were left in the dark. As far as planning things out goes, this England thing is pretty darn spontaneous. We all know spontaneous management is not a good idea with high powered performance horses.
For a show horse, you do have to go across the pond to gain your notoriety, however, you don’t necessarily have to win or even place all that well. An American racehorse does not have to travel to other continents, some of the best racing in the world happens right here, but in order for participation in it to mean anything to anyone, you have to win or come very close.
Like other posters have said, CC’s owners are desperately grasping for “super horse” here. Any horseman that has spent any length of time in the game is shaking their heads at this “international” (I want to puke every time Martin uses that word) dog and pony show. A horse only has so many races in him, a good horsemen wouldn’t be wasting any of them.
Actually many top show horses ship and compete international without much lead time. I’ve never known one that was planned a year in advance. In fact for many team competition, you only have a few weeks notice. I’ve also known several who have shipped to compete in an international 4* events as individuals and most were not planned more than a few months ahead…and that was just because they needed to fund raise. Horses competed a couple of weeks (or less) following shipping. And they all were trying to win. Most only have one shot to do it and do well.
That said …I don’t really have an opinion on CC other than they are doing something different. He is training out of a top facility and the horse may really like the care in England. This really doesn’t seem like a big risk. If the horse doesn’t do well…it probably will not impact him at all as a stud as everyone will just say “Of course he is not competitive on turf in England”. He doesn’t need to win either. If he just has a good showing that is all he needs and it will have a positive or no impact. They could also be considering standing him in the UK. I’m curious to see how he does but my opinion doesn’t matter.
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
