The sales season will begin in late January. An article appeared on Breednet during December stating that “transparency in thoroughbred trading is a major issue”.
I'd like to know what open and frank discussion has taken place on this subject in this part of the world?
Perhaps the writer was referring to recent high-profile cases involving shady practices and secret commissions in the USA, resulting in seven-figure settlements in favour of plaintiffs, with auction houses and consignors scurrying to formulate fairly toothless codes of practice.
But no, it was a local reference.
Expecting a loose collection of free enterprisers (I hesitate to use the word ‘industry’) to reform themselves from within is a big and improbable ask, especially as some of the actors and institutions who might be involved in the process may be amongst those most discomfited by the outcomes.
Strengthening the integrity of the sale process can only be in the game’s best interests.
The term ‘horse trading’ was coined a long, long time ago. It still carries an unwholesome connotation. Similarly, vocations such as ‘used car salesman’, ‘lawyer’ or ‘politician’ have been given a life of their own. The connotation goes something like this: be wary, this man may appear to be your servant but, uwittingly, you might be his.
There are Joe Publics who suspect that the inside of the horse business isn’t kosher. There are some within the business who think the same, subscribing to the belief that wads of money and corruption go hand-in-hand.
It’s said that the only people who oppose rorts are those who have never had the chance to be involved in one.
And after years of being around sales, I’ve even encountered a few buffoons who aren’t happy unless someone is ripping them off – they pass it off as a kind of rite of passage into the inner sanctum.
In good times, like the last decade, the wheels of business have been so well lubricated that issues such as propriety, transparency, ethical practices etc have scarcely rated a mention because we’ve all been too busy counting.
If one day, because of a change in political wind or plain bad publicity, a regulator is empowered to take a closer look at the horse business, it may not be a pleasant day.
If you are someone who has been buying and/or selling for any great length of time, chances are you will be aware of or been invited to become part of some practice which in other-world commerce can result in fines or even imprisonment but which goes unchecked in the thoroughbred world - inducements, secret commissions, price fixing, bid rigging.
Commerce is commerce and I can only think of one reason why a blind eye is turned to an activity which turns over hundreds of millions of dollars. I suspect the thinking is, why get in the middle of a game being played only amongst the wealthy? If someone makes a squillion at the expense of someone else who has a squillion, does it really matter? They deserve each other. If sale prices which defy logic are window-dressing, sleight-of-hand or smoke-and-mirrors, who is getting hurt? (well, breeders are, indirectly, but that’s another story).
In Australia, there is regulation at the lower end of the market through the licensing of syndicators. This supposedly protects the man-in-the-street investor (typically someone spending between $4,000 - $20,000 for a share in a horse) as syndicators have to adhere to standards of disclosure. Syndicators require a licence and their paperwork is subject to approval before the offer goes public.
In addition to the purchase price, there are significant costs incurred before a syndicator puts a horse to bed. He may put whatever ‘profit margin’ he likes on the horse and personally I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. Go to a licensed restaurant and you’ll find a difference between the price on the wine list and what you would have paid for the same bottle at the grog shop down the road. A potential share purchaser can decide whether he wants to be involved after he has looked at the prospectus. Just like the restaurant owner and the wine in his cellar, if a syndicator doesn’t want to be left carrying the goods, he has to make the offer attractive enough.
Where there is no protection for the ‘small investor’, however, is if the horse was acquired via a rort in the first place. One example would be a silently-owned horse being put through a sale by the syndicator only to be “bought” by him at a price which, when it’s syndicated subsequently, ensures a fat profit. Or one where a vendor and the syndicator agree on a price before the auction.
(PS: so I don’t get any strongly-worded mail from female syndicators, the word ‘she’ is interchangeable with the word ‘he’ in the above paragraphs).
The auction system is where the thoroughbred business can start some reform.
A high-priced yearling these days costs about the same as a Potts Point townhouse with ‘harbour glimpses’. Housing is a community need so performance standards apply to the real estate agent, the vendor and even bidders at auction. On the other hand, no one needs a horse (just one letter difference, house and horse). Horses are an indulgence, hence Rafferty’s rules.
There are numerous transparency issues. They can’t be rolled into one blog, so I will propose a simple start point:
Why can’t I know exactly who owns the horses that are being offered for sale?
That can’t be too much to ask. How much privacy is the actual owner/s entitled to?
If I am buying a house I search the title. I can see who owns it and what financial obligations exist. As at thoroughbred auctions, the agent is the agent for the vendor but I have the opportunity to know who I am dealing with and what behaviour can be expected of the parties.
If I am looking to buy a big stake in a company I can examine the share register to see who I am falling into bed with.
If I am buying a car, I can check beforehand that everything’s ridgy-didge.
As a horse buyer, I would like the same comfort in the sales ring (or indeed in a private treaty sale). The vendor wants me to hand over my money. Who is the vendor? The sale company should not be shielding that information from me.
The information may colour my attitude to the sale. The reasons may be business or personal. For example, I may hold the view that this vendor has the ability to pervert the bidding in some way and create what I think might be a false market. That shouldn’t be confused with running a horse up to its reserve - I think that’s quite legitimate. In an ideal world the bidding ought to start there!
Or it may be someone with whom I’ve had unsatisfactory dealings and I don’t want to give him the benefit of my custom. Or the horse may be a foal-share arrangement and perhaps I don’t want to bid against those who bid in 50 cent dollars. Or I’d like to know if a sales company employee or bloodstock agent is involved in the ownership thereby possibly creating a conflict of interest. Or perhaps the vendor is the guy who ran off with my wife.
The position of the auction houses is interesting. The proprietorship of Magic Millions are up-front and highly visible traders, but not so some of their operational staff. On the other hand, William Inglis and its staff appear to be at arm’s length, but I couldn’t be 100% sure until I ask them the question or someone tells me. New Zealand Bloodstock is owned by a major consignor and some staff are also involved in ownership. There is a glaring need for transparency when sales companies with vested interests also finance some of their customers – both sellers and buyers - control credit and are responsible for filling buying orders.
So what can I do to find out ownership information?
Firstly, I can rarely find out by looking in the sales catalogue. Most horses are catalogued under draft names.
Secondly, there’s little point looking at the Stud Book website as that only shows who bred the horse. While that might be a guide, it’s ancient history as anything could have happened since foaling.
Thirdly, asking the consignor isn’t always fruitful and shouldn’t be necessary. Many consignors willingly supply the information but others can be coy about it. There are some owners who are happiest when others don’t know they are involved.
Compare this situation with racing. I can pick up the race book or go to a website and find all the owners listed for today’s runners. To have an unregistered interest in a racehorse is a breach of the Rules. It threatens integrity.
Ideally, I would like to see a section of each catalogue – an index of ownership - set aside to list the ownership of each lot, provided by stat dec if necessary. However, a more space-friendly solution would be to have a section of the auctioneer’s website where the information can be referenced.
Furthermore, it should be a condition of sale, as it is now in the USA, that if anything more than 10% of a horse is sold since being catalogued, that a notice to this effect is required and an announcement is made by the auctioneer. Payment of proceeds can be made conditional on these requirements being met.
Any semi-devious human mind can think of ways of getting round these requirements - secret arrangements of the nudge-nudge, wink,wink variety. But there’s no guarantee that the ugly scenarios which have played out in the USA can’t be replicated here. Why wait, we should start changing the culture.
I’d be interested in comments as to why vendors at public auction are entitled to any particular rights of privacy.
Sales companies have the right to ask for my credentials and those of my principals before accepting my bids. Buyers shouldn’t have to resort to the Official Information Act to find out who they are buying a horse from.
Facts And Figures From Blogsville
How many people, on a world scale, do you think are interested in thoroughbred racing? If Googling through Blogspot (the platform this blog's built on) is anything to go by, we're very much in a tiny minority.
There are literally hundreds of thousands of blogs built on Blogspot. When I searched for bloggers who listed thoroughbred racing as one of their interests in their profiles, there were just 37, split 33 based in USA and 4 based in Australia.
When I searched for craps there were 89 results! Leave that to your imagination.
When I searched for horse racing it came up with 774 devotees. When I searched for just horses there were 12,000 bloggers identified. Thousands of Velvet Browns and Thelwell pony owners amongst that lot.
Beer came up with 11,900, which I thought was surprisingly low, crocheting 6,800, scrapbooking 31,400, golf 33,400 and fishing 33,500.
Thoroughbred breeding came up with just 2 - and I'm one of them. The other guy's blog is all about cricket. I thought talking to myself was a sign of old age.
I might try sex next - there's got to be a first time - and see how many are interested in that. For the sake of the future of humanity, I hope more than thoroughbred breeding!
There are literally hundreds of thousands of blogs built on Blogspot. When I searched for bloggers who listed thoroughbred racing as one of their interests in their profiles, there were just 37, split 33 based in USA and 4 based in Australia.
When I searched for craps there were 89 results! Leave that to your imagination.
When I searched for horse racing it came up with 774 devotees. When I searched for just horses there were 12,000 bloggers identified. Thousands of Velvet Browns and Thelwell pony owners amongst that lot.
Beer came up with 11,900, which I thought was surprisingly low, crocheting 6,800, scrapbooking 31,400, golf 33,400 and fishing 33,500.
Thoroughbred breeding came up with just 2 - and I'm one of them. The other guy's blog is all about cricket. I thought talking to myself was a sign of old age.
I might try sex next - there's got to be a first time - and see how many are interested in that. For the sake of the future of humanity, I hope more than thoroughbred breeding!
Treble To Galileo
In an earlier post, It Must Be Something IN The Water … I looked at the relative positions of shuttle sires in the northern and southern hemispheres, voicing the opinion that it would be short-sighted in the case of Galileo to dismiss a stamina-inclined sire down here when his oldest runners have just turned four (and even moreso when many of them have been cooling their heels over EI).
Galileo came up with a treble today, the four-year-old Nairobi in Perth and the three-year-old fillies Skye Gold (Moonee Valley) and Thebe (Kembla Grange). They won like progressive types.
There has been a 42% decline in Galileo's average yearling price from his first crop (sold 2005) to his third crop (sold 2007 when his oldest were three). In 2007, 43 of the 59 Galileo yearlings sold through the ring couldn't make $100,000 (conceived on advertised fee of $35,750 including GST). A further 11 were passed in at bids below that level.
He seemed to suffer badly when his unexpected 11 first-crop two-year-old winners didn’t go on with it at three, reinforcing the entrenched snitch against the Sadler’s Wells male line. But the emphasis in the Australian racing system doesn’t help a sire like Galileo in the early stages of a siring career. Australasia’s greatest sire Zabeel was bagged in Australia when his progeny began racing; some shareholders took notice and bailed out, much to their eternal cost. There is such a quick rush to judgment.
Trainers are only experimenting when a new line of horses comes before them, it's a trial and error process. Based on their lack of success with some sires during the initial stages some breeds can be prematurely condemned. Not that those trainers would ever admit it (I vividly recall several declaring Sackford was the next Sir Tristram when he had left a handful of early two-year-old winners). It's been my observation that as a breed trainers don't have a profound appreciation of pedigree and performance much beyond these shores. And you can't blame them, they're too busy training and forming conclusions based on their slim samples. Every corner I turn at the moment, someone is breathing Lonhro on me. Truth is, I don't have a clue whether he's going to make it or not, but they have only contested five races so far (as at 29 December) so I figure there's a wide margin of error still.
With the market running hot and cold on Galileo, and with him simultaneously starring up north, it wasn’t surprising he didn’t make a reappearance down under in 2007. If he does gather momentum here, there are about 200 yearlings and foals by him still to go through the system.
I, for one, hope he does kick on because on performance and pedigree he represents the pinnacle of the classic breed and as an individual they don’t come much nicer. In an ideal world that's the sort of horse one hopes will perpetuate the breed.
Disclosure: Galileo: I’ve never booked a mare to him, don’t own shares in him, and have only bought one. Lonhro ditto.
Galileo came up with a treble today, the four-year-old Nairobi in Perth and the three-year-old fillies Skye Gold (Moonee Valley) and Thebe (Kembla Grange). They won like progressive types.
There has been a 42% decline in Galileo's average yearling price from his first crop (sold 2005) to his third crop (sold 2007 when his oldest were three). In 2007, 43 of the 59 Galileo yearlings sold through the ring couldn't make $100,000 (conceived on advertised fee of $35,750 including GST). A further 11 were passed in at bids below that level.
He seemed to suffer badly when his unexpected 11 first-crop two-year-old winners didn’t go on with it at three, reinforcing the entrenched snitch against the Sadler’s Wells male line. But the emphasis in the Australian racing system doesn’t help a sire like Galileo in the early stages of a siring career. Australasia’s greatest sire Zabeel was bagged in Australia when his progeny began racing; some shareholders took notice and bailed out, much to their eternal cost. There is such a quick rush to judgment.
Trainers are only experimenting when a new line of horses comes before them, it's a trial and error process. Based on their lack of success with some sires during the initial stages some breeds can be prematurely condemned. Not that those trainers would ever admit it (I vividly recall several declaring Sackford was the next Sir Tristram when he had left a handful of early two-year-old winners). It's been my observation that as a breed trainers don't have a profound appreciation of pedigree and performance much beyond these shores. And you can't blame them, they're too busy training and forming conclusions based on their slim samples. Every corner I turn at the moment, someone is breathing Lonhro on me. Truth is, I don't have a clue whether he's going to make it or not, but they have only contested five races so far (as at 29 December) so I figure there's a wide margin of error still.
With the market running hot and cold on Galileo, and with him simultaneously starring up north, it wasn’t surprising he didn’t make a reappearance down under in 2007. If he does gather momentum here, there are about 200 yearlings and foals by him still to go through the system.
I, for one, hope he does kick on because on performance and pedigree he represents the pinnacle of the classic breed and as an individual they don’t come much nicer. In an ideal world that's the sort of horse one hopes will perpetuate the breed.
Disclosure: Galileo: I’ve never booked a mare to him, don’t own shares in him, and have only bought one. Lonhro ditto.
Remembering Benazir
People of fundamentally peaceful democratic traditions, such as Australians, are appalled at the turmoil and hatred entrenched in the political life of other countries, exemplified again today by the killing of Benazir Bhutto in the troubled nation of Pakistan.
I like to put a bit of thought into the naming of horses and when it came time to name a filly I bred in 1985, in my capacity as managing director of Waikato Stud, I chose Benazir for the daughter of Vice Regal-Hunza, by Pakistan II.
By the greatest coincidence, this Benazir features as the third dam of a rising star three-year-old in New Zealand, Prince Kaapstad (by Kaapstad) who on Boxing Day won the G2 Great Northern Guineas at Ellerslie, his third win from eight starts.
I remember the thoroughbred Benazir well. Her legs were all over the place as a foal and I think she may have had a PE on all four of them. Being a daughter of the irreplaceable mare Hunza, we retained Benazir for the stud and I arranged her lease to clients of Bruce McLachlan’s Brisbane stable from where she won three city races in a 15-start career. I think her sire Vice Regal was standing for $50,000 no live foal guarantee around that time.
In 1985, I decided to keep Hunza at home and put her to our own cheap ($6,000 fee) second-season stallion Pompeii Court (USA), the mating producing the G1 Blue Diamond/Golden Slipper winner Courtza, to this day only the second New Zealand-bred winner of the Golden Slipper. Courtza was one of four Group winners and one Listed winner produced by Hunza, 1989 NZ Broodmare of the Year, three of them by Pompeii Court (USA).
At stud, Benazir has done her bit to perpetuate this branch of the Hebrew Maid family. The last 10 years of her stud career were under the guidance of the Chittick family who rescued Waikato Stud from the shambles it had fallen into back to its status today, virtually without peer as a breeding ground of successful horses. She produced 13 foals of which seven were winners including New Zealand G1 winning mare Critic, by Centaine.
This family is a genetic powerhouse and I hope some of its female members are being given their opportunity with Courtza’s outstanding sire son O’Reilly to see if line-breeding to Hunza can produce something special.
I like to put a bit of thought into the naming of horses and when it came time to name a filly I bred in 1985, in my capacity as managing director of Waikato Stud, I chose Benazir for the daughter of Vice Regal-Hunza, by Pakistan II.
By the greatest coincidence, this Benazir features as the third dam of a rising star three-year-old in New Zealand, Prince Kaapstad (by Kaapstad) who on Boxing Day won the G2 Great Northern Guineas at Ellerslie, his third win from eight starts.
I remember the thoroughbred Benazir well. Her legs were all over the place as a foal and I think she may have had a PE on all four of them. Being a daughter of the irreplaceable mare Hunza, we retained Benazir for the stud and I arranged her lease to clients of Bruce McLachlan’s Brisbane stable from where she won three city races in a 15-start career. I think her sire Vice Regal was standing for $50,000 no live foal guarantee around that time.
In 1985, I decided to keep Hunza at home and put her to our own cheap ($6,000 fee) second-season stallion Pompeii Court (USA), the mating producing the G1 Blue Diamond/Golden Slipper winner Courtza, to this day only the second New Zealand-bred winner of the Golden Slipper. Courtza was one of four Group winners and one Listed winner produced by Hunza, 1989 NZ Broodmare of the Year, three of them by Pompeii Court (USA).
At stud, Benazir has done her bit to perpetuate this branch of the Hebrew Maid family. The last 10 years of her stud career were under the guidance of the Chittick family who rescued Waikato Stud from the shambles it had fallen into back to its status today, virtually without peer as a breeding ground of successful horses. She produced 13 foals of which seven were winners including New Zealand G1 winning mare Critic, by Centaine.
This family is a genetic powerhouse and I hope some of its female members are being given their opportunity with Courtza’s outstanding sire son O’Reilly to see if line-breeding to Hunza can produce something special.
This Horse Got To Me
My passion for horses underpins my involvement in breeding and racing though I have never been sentimental about them in the sense that I don’t fall in love with them. I respect them and care very much that man does the right thing by the animals in his service.
One horse which has come close to melting my apparently stony heart is Cateclipse (6g Catbird-Shadyside, by Vice Regal). On Boxing Day he had his first start since being exported to California earlier this year, finishing 5th in a one mile US$70,000 turf allowance at Santa Anita, beaten just under four lengths. He was the outsider of eight and earned US$1,400.
A G3 winner at Randwick, Cateclipse had become impossibly hard to place in Australia – not good enough to compete with the best but too harshly handicapped if dropped down into lower handicap ranks. So the winner of 8-from-27 has found a new life in the USA where the class system has more flexibility.
Cateclipse was a super individual bred by the Morrisseys at their Retreat Farm on the western outskirts of Scone. When I saw him at the Classic Yearling Sale I urged Gai to buy him – he was tall and balanced, impressively strong, boldly marked, correct with a good action, a great outlook and a beautiful nature. He looked a man amongst boys and Gai duly agreed, paying a high Classic Sale price for the time of $110,000.
With a bankroll of $423,100 in Australia, Cateclipse stands as the third-highest earner to date by Catbird though, essentially, he was quite one-dimensional as a racehorse.
His dam Shadyside resided in New Zealand until sold to Australia in 1998 as a 12-year-old, in foal to Zabeel. Her earlier 1994 colt by Zabeel named Greene Street was at the time starting to get mobile as a racehorse, eventually winning 12-from-65 including G1s as a seven and eight-year-old. Cateclipse was Shadyside's ninth foal. Incidentally, Shadyside and Greene Street were both bred by Peter Kelly to whom I refer in one of my earlier posts, Racing Is Fun.
There were dozens of horses in my years at Gai’s which would have walloped Cateclipse for class and raw talent, but everything about him I admired, especially his physique and his patent honesty. I never tired of visiting him at his stable. I used to say he was one horse for whom I might buy a farm one day, though there was a long queue of people ahead of me who were dying to take him home at the end of his racing days.
On the last day of my six-years tenure with Gai, a Saturday raceday at Rosehill in 2005, Cateclipse was my final runner and he obliged by winning the last race on the programme. I felt like all the planets were in alignment and you can imagine what that meant to me at that precise moment, and ever since.
I pray Cateclipse does not suffer the ignominy of Surfers Paradise (Crested Wave-Lady Aythorpe, by Aythorpe), The New Zealand Horse Of The Year, Cox Plate and Derby winner who was bred and reared at Haunui Farm during my time there. When all hope for the horse was gone, he was shipped Stateside as a seven-year-old and raced there until he was 11, without ever winning or placing, in company as low as $4,000 claimers.
Whatever is left in Cateclipse I know he will do his best in California. I just hope his new connections appreciate him and give him all the TLC he deserves. If I win Lotto on Saturday night I'll fly him back home when he's finished. I’ll let you know when he wins one.
One horse which has come close to melting my apparently stony heart is Cateclipse (6g Catbird-Shadyside, by Vice Regal). On Boxing Day he had his first start since being exported to California earlier this year, finishing 5th in a one mile US$70,000 turf allowance at Santa Anita, beaten just under four lengths. He was the outsider of eight and earned US$1,400.
A G3 winner at Randwick, Cateclipse had become impossibly hard to place in Australia – not good enough to compete with the best but too harshly handicapped if dropped down into lower handicap ranks. So the winner of 8-from-27 has found a new life in the USA where the class system has more flexibility.
Cateclipse was a super individual bred by the Morrisseys at their Retreat Farm on the western outskirts of Scone. When I saw him at the Classic Yearling Sale I urged Gai to buy him – he was tall and balanced, impressively strong, boldly marked, correct with a good action, a great outlook and a beautiful nature. He looked a man amongst boys and Gai duly agreed, paying a high Classic Sale price for the time of $110,000.
With a bankroll of $423,100 in Australia, Cateclipse stands as the third-highest earner to date by Catbird though, essentially, he was quite one-dimensional as a racehorse.
His dam Shadyside resided in New Zealand until sold to Australia in 1998 as a 12-year-old, in foal to Zabeel. Her earlier 1994 colt by Zabeel named Greene Street was at the time starting to get mobile as a racehorse, eventually winning 12-from-65 including G1s as a seven and eight-year-old. Cateclipse was Shadyside's ninth foal. Incidentally, Shadyside and Greene Street were both bred by Peter Kelly to whom I refer in one of my earlier posts, Racing Is Fun.
There were dozens of horses in my years at Gai’s which would have walloped Cateclipse for class and raw talent, but everything about him I admired, especially his physique and his patent honesty. I never tired of visiting him at his stable. I used to say he was one horse for whom I might buy a farm one day, though there was a long queue of people ahead of me who were dying to take him home at the end of his racing days.
On the last day of my six-years tenure with Gai, a Saturday raceday at Rosehill in 2005, Cateclipse was my final runner and he obliged by winning the last race on the programme. I felt like all the planets were in alignment and you can imagine what that meant to me at that precise moment, and ever since.
I pray Cateclipse does not suffer the ignominy of Surfers Paradise (Crested Wave-Lady Aythorpe, by Aythorpe), The New Zealand Horse Of The Year, Cox Plate and Derby winner who was bred and reared at Haunui Farm during my time there. When all hope for the horse was gone, he was shipped Stateside as a seven-year-old and raced there until he was 11, without ever winning or placing, in company as low as $4,000 claimers.
Whatever is left in Cateclipse I know he will do his best in California. I just hope his new connections appreciate him and give him all the TLC he deserves. If I win Lotto on Saturday night I'll fly him back home when he's finished. I’ll let you know when he wins one.
Lack Of Performance And Relatives More Important Than The Stallion?
The three big broodmare sales in Australia – Magic Millions National, Easter and Melbourne – are like broodmare sales almost everywhere: the majority of the mares are culls.
I’m always interested in why mares don’t produce runners of quality which might prevent them from ending up in these sales. Most mares possess bloodlines which still give them some hope of leaving a good runner if they happen to meet the stallion whose own genetic contribution is positive.
Because many more stallions prove ineffective than effective, the mare has got a devil of a job to begin with.
Over the years it’s struck me that many of the mares which seem to ‘fail’ have been schlepped around from stallion to stallion, often not given a chance with the same stallion twice.
I was taught that if you think a mating is a particularly good one then it should be executed more than once, because the chance of the gene pairings you seek being delivered first time of asking is a longshot. So by repeating the mating you increase the chances of one of the foals inheriting the goodies because you have had two dips into the well.
I’ve taken out some numbers from this year’s Magic Millions National Broodmare Sale. On the first two days (455 mares catalogued, selected because they possess a very strong page, were good racemares or have been successful producers) there were 137 which had either produced a minimum of four live foals and were carrying a service, or empty mares which had produced five foals or more.
Of these 137, 40, or almost 30%, had never been to the same stallion twice in their stud careers so far.
I didn’t delve into who they visited when they missed or slipped as it’s only live foals which determine whether a mare is successful or not.
Thirty percent is a reasonably high figure.
There are circumstances which prevent a mare returning to a stallion, such as he’s dead, didn’t shuttle again, the service fee doubled or perhaps he’s moved to the other side of the continent. However, I think a minimum of five seasons is a sufficient length of time for a breeder to demonstrate he has the power of his convictions by repeating at least one mating to get a couple of foals on the ground by the sire of his choice.
Because there are many mares who don’t see the same stallion twice suggests their owners are playing sales roulette rather than testing out their beliefs – what was wrong with last year’s stallion choice?
Of the 40 mares in those first two days who had never seen the same stallion twice, one mare had visited eight different stallions in a row. Of the 97 with a repeat mating in their produce record, one mare had revisited only once in 13 years at stud, in other words she had seen 12 different stallions.
Then I looked at the fifth, and last day, of the sale (289 catalogued) on the same basis. These are the tail-end charlies who generally have neither quality performance, imposing pages nor successful produce records.
At first glance, results were surprising: of the 115 eligible mares, only 18% (21) had not been to the same stallion twice. Yet despite this higher incidence of repeat matings these mares were failed producers, tending to disprove my theory. The mares catalogued in this section were predominantly from Queensland studs which stand their own stallions plus a liberal sprinkling of Gerry Harvey’s Baramul Stud culls where presumably sending the mare back to the same stallion twice or three times is more a function of getting the mare in foal, and hoping, than a ‘planned’ mating.
Two factors characterised these fifth day mares compared to the mares in the first two days’ sample.
Overall, they lacked close relationship to other good horses, and they were deficient in racing ability. From this I draw the conclusion that it’s these two factors which counted against them as a group rather than the pattern of matings. So the combination of mares with less successful relations and weak racing ability, coupled with the 80% or thereabouts chance that the stallion serving them will be less than memorable, tends to perpetuate an unsuccessful cycle.
I guess we all knew this in our waters but it’s interesting to look at numbers and see if they support the contention.
Admittedly, my sample is small and the maths probably flawed (see my earlier post ‘Watt Did He Say?’), but I think the general conclusion is fair.
Personally, I'm not keen on the breeder who constantly mates his mare just to minimise sale downside. Much of the time these mares are going to a succession of unproven yet ‘fashionable’ stallions so it’s little surprise they end up in a cull sale sooner or later.
I’m always interested in why mares don’t produce runners of quality which might prevent them from ending up in these sales. Most mares possess bloodlines which still give them some hope of leaving a good runner if they happen to meet the stallion whose own genetic contribution is positive.
Because many more stallions prove ineffective than effective, the mare has got a devil of a job to begin with.
Over the years it’s struck me that many of the mares which seem to ‘fail’ have been schlepped around from stallion to stallion, often not given a chance with the same stallion twice.
I was taught that if you think a mating is a particularly good one then it should be executed more than once, because the chance of the gene pairings you seek being delivered first time of asking is a longshot. So by repeating the mating you increase the chances of one of the foals inheriting the goodies because you have had two dips into the well.
I’ve taken out some numbers from this year’s Magic Millions National Broodmare Sale. On the first two days (455 mares catalogued, selected because they possess a very strong page, were good racemares or have been successful producers) there were 137 which had either produced a minimum of four live foals and were carrying a service, or empty mares which had produced five foals or more.
Of these 137, 40, or almost 30%, had never been to the same stallion twice in their stud careers so far.
I didn’t delve into who they visited when they missed or slipped as it’s only live foals which determine whether a mare is successful or not.
Thirty percent is a reasonably high figure.
There are circumstances which prevent a mare returning to a stallion, such as he’s dead, didn’t shuttle again, the service fee doubled or perhaps he’s moved to the other side of the continent. However, I think a minimum of five seasons is a sufficient length of time for a breeder to demonstrate he has the power of his convictions by repeating at least one mating to get a couple of foals on the ground by the sire of his choice.
Because there are many mares who don’t see the same stallion twice suggests their owners are playing sales roulette rather than testing out their beliefs – what was wrong with last year’s stallion choice?
Of the 40 mares in those first two days who had never seen the same stallion twice, one mare had visited eight different stallions in a row. Of the 97 with a repeat mating in their produce record, one mare had revisited only once in 13 years at stud, in other words she had seen 12 different stallions.
Then I looked at the fifth, and last day, of the sale (289 catalogued) on the same basis. These are the tail-end charlies who generally have neither quality performance, imposing pages nor successful produce records.
At first glance, results were surprising: of the 115 eligible mares, only 18% (21) had not been to the same stallion twice. Yet despite this higher incidence of repeat matings these mares were failed producers, tending to disprove my theory. The mares catalogued in this section were predominantly from Queensland studs which stand their own stallions plus a liberal sprinkling of Gerry Harvey’s Baramul Stud culls where presumably sending the mare back to the same stallion twice or three times is more a function of getting the mare in foal, and hoping, than a ‘planned’ mating.
Two factors characterised these fifth day mares compared to the mares in the first two days’ sample.
Overall, they lacked close relationship to other good horses, and they were deficient in racing ability. From this I draw the conclusion that it’s these two factors which counted against them as a group rather than the pattern of matings. So the combination of mares with less successful relations and weak racing ability, coupled with the 80% or thereabouts chance that the stallion serving them will be less than memorable, tends to perpetuate an unsuccessful cycle.
I guess we all knew this in our waters but it’s interesting to look at numbers and see if they support the contention.
Admittedly, my sample is small and the maths probably flawed (see my earlier post ‘Watt Did He Say?’), but I think the general conclusion is fair.
Personally, I'm not keen on the breeder who constantly mates his mare just to minimise sale downside. Much of the time these mares are going to a succession of unproven yet ‘fashionable’ stallions so it’s little surprise they end up in a cull sale sooner or later.
Why Would I Ask This Question?
Will anyone at RacingNSW confirm that the formula by which stallion nominators participate in the much-loved and much-needed BOBS scheme is the same for all of them?
Roads To Ruination
On my frequent journeys to the Hunter Valley from Sydney, my preferred route is via New South Wales’s most ostentatious tax shelter, Pokolbin, just outside Cessnock.
All those hectares of regimentally planted vines appeal to my Capricornian side. I marvel at the architectural masterpieces like Tempus Two’s and Hungerford Hills’s, the plethora of exquisite eateries, exclusive lodges, spas and retreats, fine arts galleries, the local crafts emporia, the tasting, the spitting … what the desperate and dateless on RSVP refer to as “the good things life has to offer”.
Tell me why then, with all this opulence, are the much-travelled roads and laneways in and around Pokolbin a bunch of rivet-loosening goat tracks? If the council can’t afford to fix them up, surely the burghers can.
All those hectares of regimentally planted vines appeal to my Capricornian side. I marvel at the architectural masterpieces like Tempus Two’s and Hungerford Hills’s, the plethora of exquisite eateries, exclusive lodges, spas and retreats, fine arts galleries, the local crafts emporia, the tasting, the spitting … what the desperate and dateless on RSVP refer to as “the good things life has to offer”.
Tell me why then, with all this opulence, are the much-travelled roads and laneways in and around Pokolbin a bunch of rivet-loosening goat tracks? If the council can’t afford to fix them up, surely the burghers can.
How Green Is My Valley!
In the Hunter Valley this weekend where the rain has been flopping down. We were promised a La Nina this summer - if it's not a La Nina it's wet anyway. Grass everywhere. With many hundreds of yearlings staying put instead of departing for the Gold Coast around New Year, as has been the case for the last 20 years, and similar numbers being held over those additional weeks for the Inglis Sydney series, the sward is going to come in mighty handy.
At least one stud farm in the upper valley is changing hands, the new owner believed to be one of those relatively new players who has been collecting highly-priced mares overseas lately. There's new management in place at John Cornish's Torryburn Stud following the departure of Don and Dawn Mackinnon to Queensland and the former Alabama Stud (under new ownership and retaining the same name) has undergone a transformation. The Tasmanian owner is a breeder of Arabians. Hard to imagine, being sandwiched between Vinery, who I understand have assisted in project management, Kia Ora and Alanbridge, that there won't be a thoroughbred or two on the place soon enough. Tasmania is clearly no poor cousin of the mainland, also being the stamping ground of Bruce Neill, developer of Cressfield which is a massive work in progress.
At least one stud farm in the upper valley is changing hands, the new owner believed to be one of those relatively new players who has been collecting highly-priced mares overseas lately. There's new management in place at John Cornish's Torryburn Stud following the departure of Don and Dawn Mackinnon to Queensland and the former Alabama Stud (under new ownership and retaining the same name) has undergone a transformation. The Tasmanian owner is a breeder of Arabians. Hard to imagine, being sandwiched between Vinery, who I understand have assisted in project management, Kia Ora and Alanbridge, that there won't be a thoroughbred or two on the place soon enough. Tasmania is clearly no poor cousin of the mainland, also being the stamping ground of Bruce Neill, developer of Cressfield which is a massive work in progress.
Stating The Bleeding Obvious
A research conclusion released this week from the University of Edinburgh, that ‘breeding’ is responsible in only small measure – as little as 10% - for ultimate racing outcome, comes as little surprise to me.
Nor would it, I venture, to most people.
We can quibble about the percentage but it’s stating the bleeding obvious – and the researcher presumably got paid for his trouble!
The findings were summarized in an article appearing on today’s ANZ Bloodstock News.
I must stress that I have only read this report and not the actual report per se.
The researcher’s ‘discovery’, that paying a bucket-load for a stud fee or an untried young horse doesn’t guarantee you anything – does anyone reading this blog not know that? !!
Perhaps the news has taken a while to filter through Hadrian’s Wall, or has been up till now a secret known only to the Irish and the Arabs.
Of course the jockey has a huge bearing on it. If he insists on running up the bums of the other runners then it doesn't matter if he's riding Phar Lap.
The research conclusion, simply stated, is: give a horse the best opportunity and you'll have a greater chance of a positive outcome. Rocket science.
My mantra for years has been that breeding accounts for 40% and what I call ‘man management’ – everything from gestation to the starting gate - accounts for the other 60%.
However, differing from the scientists, I believe the 40% is crucial. If the breeder doesn’t get that ‘right’ - whether by design or by accident - then it won’t matter how good the 60% is, the horse’s mechanical, constitutional and mental/moral limitations as determined genetically will prevent it getting to the top. Therefore, cleverly-bred horses, all other things being equal, start with an edge.
Just from the news release, there seems to be an obsession with the stallion’s influence when discussing pedigree. Apart from those who stand stallions who might have us believe otherwise, the rest of us have known for ages that their influence has been over-stated, over-rated and over-charged.
The report summary also states that the researcher found we should “worry less about studs and concentrate on what happens after”.
There's a semantic problem here. I presume the researcher is non-American and would use the word 'stud' in the way we do, meaning 'farm', whereas in American the word 'stud' commonly means 'stallion'. The context is not entirely clear in the article.
If it's the former, I would dispute that forever. I’ve found a definite correlation between rearing (the environment and management) and success – as diligent participants in the game, we have come to learn where the good horses come from with regularity and, on the other hand, we know the farms where, despite their best efforts, they can't crack it.
If it's the latter, I would dispute it less. However, trying to select a good physical match and avoiding crazy genetic experiments still seem important to me. Countless good horses have been bred by random selection - because the stallion "stands just down the road".
I look forward to reading the findings in their entirety some time. However, I'm in no rush; if the article in ANZ Bloodstock News is anything to go by I don’t expect to be enlightened much.
Nor would it, I venture, to most people.
We can quibble about the percentage but it’s stating the bleeding obvious – and the researcher presumably got paid for his trouble!
The findings were summarized in an article appearing on today’s ANZ Bloodstock News.
I must stress that I have only read this report and not the actual report per se.
The researcher’s ‘discovery’, that paying a bucket-load for a stud fee or an untried young horse doesn’t guarantee you anything – does anyone reading this blog not know that? !!
Perhaps the news has taken a while to filter through Hadrian’s Wall, or has been up till now a secret known only to the Irish and the Arabs.
Of course the jockey has a huge bearing on it. If he insists on running up the bums of the other runners then it doesn't matter if he's riding Phar Lap.
The research conclusion, simply stated, is: give a horse the best opportunity and you'll have a greater chance of a positive outcome. Rocket science.
My mantra for years has been that breeding accounts for 40% and what I call ‘man management’ – everything from gestation to the starting gate - accounts for the other 60%.
However, differing from the scientists, I believe the 40% is crucial. If the breeder doesn’t get that ‘right’ - whether by design or by accident - then it won’t matter how good the 60% is, the horse’s mechanical, constitutional and mental/moral limitations as determined genetically will prevent it getting to the top. Therefore, cleverly-bred horses, all other things being equal, start with an edge.
Just from the news release, there seems to be an obsession with the stallion’s influence when discussing pedigree. Apart from those who stand stallions who might have us believe otherwise, the rest of us have known for ages that their influence has been over-stated, over-rated and over-charged.
The report summary also states that the researcher found we should “worry less about studs and concentrate on what happens after”.
There's a semantic problem here. I presume the researcher is non-American and would use the word 'stud' in the way we do, meaning 'farm', whereas in American the word 'stud' commonly means 'stallion'. The context is not entirely clear in the article.
If it's the former, I would dispute that forever. I’ve found a definite correlation between rearing (the environment and management) and success – as diligent participants in the game, we have come to learn where the good horses come from with regularity and, on the other hand, we know the farms where, despite their best efforts, they can't crack it.
If it's the latter, I would dispute it less. However, trying to select a good physical match and avoiding crazy genetic experiments still seem important to me. Countless good horses have been bred by random selection - because the stallion "stands just down the road".
I look forward to reading the findings in their entirety some time. However, I'm in no rush; if the article in ANZ Bloodstock News is anything to go by I don’t expect to be enlightened much.
First Off The Plane
The first shuttle stallion? I reckon it was Pretendre (GB) who succumbed to the rigours of duty in New Zealand in September 1972. Any other contenders? His visionary owner Nelson Bunker Hunt is still quietly involved in the thoroughbred business in the USA.
What About The Breeder?
Something I find increasingly tiresome is the PR battle between the sales companies (all of them) over who sells more good horses.
I can live with a heightened focus on past results as the sale season approaches and the companies need to shore up their market share and secure their buying bench, but it’s become a never-ending year-round assault in every newsletter, publication, advert, email, etc, complete with hyperlinks back to their websites and the whole nine yards.
It's got to the point where, skimming ahead, if I see it coming I go right on by to the next, more useful, subject. Does anyone else feel similarly irritated, or am I just a cranky old man?
Fact is, most horses which go through a sale ring don’t measure up. Are we ever told what percentage of their throughput end up winning a black-type race, for instance? No, because you wouldn’t want to know.
If, out of thousands, a couple of dozen good ones happen to be sold, beats me why any sales company should assume almost proprietary rights. They are just lucky the clever breeder decided to put them in their catalogue.
Sales companies are about turnover. Derived from both the good and the not-so-good.
I can live with a heightened focus on past results as the sale season approaches and the companies need to shore up their market share and secure their buying bench, but it’s become a never-ending year-round assault in every newsletter, publication, advert, email, etc, complete with hyperlinks back to their websites and the whole nine yards.
It's got to the point where, skimming ahead, if I see it coming I go right on by to the next, more useful, subject. Does anyone else feel similarly irritated, or am I just a cranky old man?
Fact is, most horses which go through a sale ring don’t measure up. Are we ever told what percentage of their throughput end up winning a black-type race, for instance? No, because you wouldn’t want to know.
If, out of thousands, a couple of dozen good ones happen to be sold, beats me why any sales company should assume almost proprietary rights. They are just lucky the clever breeder decided to put them in their catalogue.
Sales companies are about turnover. Derived from both the good and the not-so-good.
Racing Is Fun
It is when you're winning!
The title of this post refers specifically, however, to a stallion of the same name I was associated with in my years at Haunui Farm.
It's interesting to see him feature as the sire of the grandam of two recent high-profile stakeswinners, Cat's Fun (Catbird-She's Zeel, by Zabeel-She's Fun, by Racing Is Fun), winner yesterday of the G2 C B Cox Stakes in Perth, and Tears I Cry (Lacryma Cristi-Cassazione, by Salieri-Weekend Delight, by Racing Is Fun), winner of the G1 VRC Emirates Stakes at Flemington.
Giving Zabeel credit for Cat's Fun's stamina is almost certainly where it's due - what other Catbird looks like going 3200m except in a float? Only 10% of Catbird's winners have won at any distance beyond 1600m at any level. Zabeel will go down in history as one of the all-time great stamina influences. But the grandam She's Fun might be the source of some of Cat's Fun's racing class as she was a top rate perfomer in New Zealand, winning six Group and Listed races during her career. Weekend Delight, grandam of Tears I Cry, won two races including the G1 VRC Oaks. She was a good thing beaten in the G2 Wakeful Stakes the weekend before and among her later performances were fourths in races such as the G1 VATC Underwood Stakes and G2 Memsie Stakes.
They typified the best progeny of Racing Is Fun [USA], they were seldom one race wonders. His stock tended to be only medium height but they had length and were as tough as nails. He was that way himself, long to the point of almost being dip-backed and extremely straight through the hocks.
Racing Is Fun, whose fourth dam Constant was Australian-bred, won the G1 Hollywood Derby and sired 12 stakeswinners, eight of them fillies. Fun On The Run, which we took to two sales, failing to get a bid ($20,000 would have bought her) won 12 stakes races including G1 amongst her 18 wins. She was only a pony but nevertheless outstanding until you spat on the track - her incredibly long, low action was rendered useless and she lost her balance. Her dam was a poor specimen named Frenichie [Ire], an unraced, almost twin-like, slip of a thing by Jim French [USA] from a very tough family, bought for a pittance under the tree at Newmarket and sent to New Zealand. The late, great bloodstock auctioneer and race caller, Peter Kelly, leased Fun On The Run and exercised the right-of-purchase soon after she began racing. Another tinytot filly by Racing Is Fun was Nat The Brat who won five Group and Listed races.
Racing Is Fun, as a stallion, had moments of popularity but was only truly 'commercial' for a season or two while these good fillies were strutting their stuff. His pedigree was from left field - by Olympiad King [by Curragh King, a son of Nasrullah]-Flower Box, by Windy Sands [by Your Host] - no one at Coolmore, Darley or Arrowfield is hyperventilating with excitement, I can assure you. One of his half-sisters produced Toledo (At Talaq), also a top-of-the-ground horse who won a G1 Stradbroke Handicap. Because of the physical types he left - they were seldom hulking, gleaming sales yearlings - the Racing Is Funs never threatened any sales records. They were all bays and browns, he was colour dominant.
Tough, nuggety little things. I believe they made excellent polo ponies. Don't knock polo ponies. The sixth dam of Weekend Hussler was one of them.
The title of this post refers specifically, however, to a stallion of the same name I was associated with in my years at Haunui Farm.
It's interesting to see him feature as the sire of the grandam of two recent high-profile stakeswinners, Cat's Fun (Catbird-She's Zeel, by Zabeel-She's Fun, by Racing Is Fun), winner yesterday of the G2 C B Cox Stakes in Perth, and Tears I Cry (Lacryma Cristi-Cassazione, by Salieri-Weekend Delight, by Racing Is Fun), winner of the G1 VRC Emirates Stakes at Flemington.
Giving Zabeel credit for Cat's Fun's stamina is almost certainly where it's due - what other Catbird looks like going 3200m except in a float? Only 10% of Catbird's winners have won at any distance beyond 1600m at any level. Zabeel will go down in history as one of the all-time great stamina influences. But the grandam She's Fun might be the source of some of Cat's Fun's racing class as she was a top rate perfomer in New Zealand, winning six Group and Listed races during her career. Weekend Delight, grandam of Tears I Cry, won two races including the G1 VRC Oaks. She was a good thing beaten in the G2 Wakeful Stakes the weekend before and among her later performances were fourths in races such as the G1 VATC Underwood Stakes and G2 Memsie Stakes.
They typified the best progeny of Racing Is Fun [USA], they were seldom one race wonders. His stock tended to be only medium height but they had length and were as tough as nails. He was that way himself, long to the point of almost being dip-backed and extremely straight through the hocks.
Racing Is Fun, whose fourth dam Constant was Australian-bred, won the G1 Hollywood Derby and sired 12 stakeswinners, eight of them fillies. Fun On The Run, which we took to two sales, failing to get a bid ($20,000 would have bought her) won 12 stakes races including G1 amongst her 18 wins. She was only a pony but nevertheless outstanding until you spat on the track - her incredibly long, low action was rendered useless and she lost her balance. Her dam was a poor specimen named Frenichie [Ire], an unraced, almost twin-like, slip of a thing by Jim French [USA] from a very tough family, bought for a pittance under the tree at Newmarket and sent to New Zealand. The late, great bloodstock auctioneer and race caller, Peter Kelly, leased Fun On The Run and exercised the right-of-purchase soon after she began racing. Another tinytot filly by Racing Is Fun was Nat The Brat who won five Group and Listed races.
Racing Is Fun, as a stallion, had moments of popularity but was only truly 'commercial' for a season or two while these good fillies were strutting their stuff. His pedigree was from left field - by Olympiad King [by Curragh King, a son of Nasrullah]-Flower Box, by Windy Sands [by Your Host] - no one at Coolmore, Darley or Arrowfield is hyperventilating with excitement, I can assure you. One of his half-sisters produced Toledo (At Talaq), also a top-of-the-ground horse who won a G1 Stradbroke Handicap. Because of the physical types he left - they were seldom hulking, gleaming sales yearlings - the Racing Is Funs never threatened any sales records. They were all bays and browns, he was colour dominant.
Tough, nuggety little things. I believe they made excellent polo ponies. Don't knock polo ponies. The sixth dam of Weekend Hussler was one of them.
Laud Byron
I welcome the news that Byron Rogers is returning next month to take up the role of National Sales Manager for William Inglis.
I welcome the news even though he’ll probably put a lazy sod like me out of business.
With his experience, he’ll galvanise the Inglis team. He’s a guru (his own blog said so), a good, strategic thinker and an excellent writer when he turns his hand to it.
Byron’s sire, Chris, is a good bloke, too. The man to see if you have an eye problem. Just thought I’d say that, it cost me nothing.
So far, I’ve been impressed with Inglis supremo Mark Webster. He seems to have nous and sharp commercial vision. Under his stewardship we are witnessing the re-invigoration of this venerable company.
I welcome the news even though he’ll probably put a lazy sod like me out of business.
With his experience, he’ll galvanise the Inglis team. He’s a guru (his own blog said so), a good, strategic thinker and an excellent writer when he turns his hand to it.
Byron’s sire, Chris, is a good bloke, too. The man to see if you have an eye problem. Just thought I’d say that, it cost me nothing.
So far, I’ve been impressed with Inglis supremo Mark Webster. He seems to have nous and sharp commercial vision. Under his stewardship we are witnessing the re-invigoration of this venerable company.
Free Speech
Need reassurance that free speech is alive and well in some parts of the world at least?
Check out Indian Charlie's newsletters which come out of Kentucky sporadically.
You don’t have to know the people he's talking about to get the picture - just read the words!
I met Indian Charlie very briefly 10 years ago at Churchill Downs. Looked your typical knockabout racetrack player. He gets the big stud outfits paying for advertising space in his scandal sheet so he’s earned respect. Not sure which came first – Indian Charlie himself or the fairly successful USA stallion of the same name.
Check out Indian Charlie's newsletters which come out of Kentucky sporadically.
You don’t have to know the people he's talking about to get the picture - just read the words!
I met Indian Charlie very briefly 10 years ago at Churchill Downs. Looked your typical knockabout racetrack player. He gets the big stud outfits paying for advertising space in his scandal sheet so he’s earned respect. Not sure which came first – Indian Charlie himself or the fairly successful USA stallion of the same name.
Rooted In The Past But Ahead Of His Time
Biography is my favourite form of literature. I don’t count obituary as biography. Unless someone wants to write it now, I’ll never see mine.
That said, I wish to note the passing in New Zealand a few weeks ago of Jack Glengarry who was into his seventies.
For the uninitiated in Australia, Jack was a former member of the racing press, a specialist thoroughbred books seller, originator of the ‘Tesio’ pedigree service, athlete, arch-conservative, hail-fellow-well-met, royalist, Scotsman in drag and the guy who played the bagpipes at Karaka to signal the start of each year’s Premier Yearling Sale. And he was married to the lovely Heather who had predeceased him.
Google Jack Glengarry and you’ll probably find an obit somewhere on the net or go to the website for his own colourful account of his family history.
My reason for writing about Jack is that I acknowledge with hindsight that he was a pioneer in the technological revolution as it applies to thoroughbred breeding.
Jack was an idiosyncratic individual. We first came into contact in the late sixties and in the early seventies, when I was editing ‘Best Bets’ in New Zealand. Jack was contracted to supply the form lines from the race meetings in the central districts of the North Island. Jack’s descriptions of how horses performed were sometimes very colourful, frequently inaccurate, usually brief and lacking in meaningful detail. Mixing with him in the press room and being on the receiving end of his work, I came to regard Jack as a ‘once over lightly’ merchant.
I don’t know exactly how he morphed into the breeding consultant/journalist he became in the early nineties. Our careers had taken different paths and I never asked him about it. Apart from being well read – books must have been his passion, he sold thousands of them – I don’t think he was ever involved in breeding horses.
Jack’s rise to influence coincided with the recession which beset New Zealand in the late-80s/early-90s which saw yearling prices plummet about 60% in two years. (Things go in cycles folks; you bright young things who have never had to take a backwards step in life, keep your eyes on the credit crisis).
That recession sent some breeders to the wall while many others just decided to opt out of breeding altogether and quit their mares. Pre-recession, in times of high inflation (sounds ominous) most breeders who presented a yearling at sale received a civilized return on investment irrespective of how ordinary its dam was. When money became tight and the guts fell out of the market, the few cashed-up buyers could concentrate on the quality end of the market and disregard the rest – there were no other buyers! So owners of marginal, weak-paged mares found they couldn’t sell their yearlings any more, spat the dummy and bailed out of the mares.
That experience taught me for all time that it is quality mares that are the key to survival in the commercial market, not stallions.
While all this was unfolding, Jack perceived he could offer a lifeline of sorts to those breeders who were worst affected by the recession.
In conjunction with a programmer named Simon Morris (I think that is his name) Jack worked on creating a database which had the ability in a nanosecond to throw up on one of those new fandangled computer screens a seven generation pedigree, highlighting duplication of ancestors.
Jack had a love affair with the long-dead Federico Tesio, admiring his deeds as a breeder and selling stacks of his famous little books on the subject. Being to the right of Genghiz Khan, Jack would have wished Tesio was Italian royalty. Jack reasoned that, through his database, if he could encourage breeders to replicate the inbreeding patterns which Tesio apparently applied successfully then those breeders might be able to turn their spurned half-page pedigree broodmares into the producers of champions.
At a time when many breeders were looking for any justification for staying in the game, along came Jack Tesio. He struck a rich vein. "OK," said the cow-cocky who owned Daisy the mare, "Wrightsons don’t want her yearling in their sales any more but I’ll mate her like Tesio would, breed a champion then they’ll beg me to let them sell the next one."
All of a sudden, Jack exerted an influence which every stallion stud in New Zealand felt keenly. Personally, I think Tesio would have turned in his grave having his name and so-called methods bandied about like that for common commercial gain. At one point in his book The Tesio Myth, author Franco Varola disavows that Tesio used the type of simplistic approach Jack Glengarry later attributed to him. People forget what a great trainer, meticulous observer and natural horseman Tesio was. I also think Jack knew as much about breeding at grass roots level as I know about splitting the atom.
Nevertheless, the insecurity of marginalised breeders was manifested in a steady stream of mares’ names being submitted to Jack, along with cheques for $35 each so Jack could run them through his programme and recommend a choice of mates Tesio would have been proud of.
I also seem to recall that stallion owners had to subscribe to have their stallions put in the programme otherwise there was no chance of your stallion being one of those recommended.
I regarded it as a praiseworthy theoretical attempt horribly distorted by commercialism and came to regard Jack as something of a charlatan. And I told him so.
As I was a seller of stallion nominations – in those days I was general manager at Haunui Farm where we stood five or six stallions – Jack was making my life hell. Clients, many of them practical people of the land who had previously bred truck loads of good horses, were now asking before committing to a booking, “Have you run it through the computer? What does the computer say, how does it look?” I would retort, “Bob, you’ve bred stakeswinners for years, why aren’t you sticking to the principles you’ve always used?” But the seeds of doubt had been sewn by Jack’s widely advertised claims that adherence to Tesio’s ‘methods’, via his programme, would help upgrade bloodlines. So it was difficult-to-impossible to be a stallion marketer and turn your back on your client’s perceived needs. The $35 was depatched with increased frequency; Jack’s service flourished.
All the while, Jack was still writing articles in the racing media, unmistakeable with his unique, florid style matched only by Australia's Ross du Bourg. He had space in the now-defunct weekly Friday Flash (the poor man's Sportsman or Winning Post) which he would use relentlessly to promote his voodoo. He would make outlandish, unsustainable pronouncements which would make professional breeders seethe. However, because people on the outside couldn't command access to editorial space the opportunity to present a rebuttal or balancing view was seldom if ever granted. Blogs didn’t exist in those days.
Jack’s favourite saw was his weekly dire warning about inbreeding to Northern Dancer, especially through two sons. He hammered that even as evidence to the contrary rolled in. It would slow horses down, he continued to claim simplistically. I don't know about the horses but his campaign sure slowed down a lot of stallion owners at the time! Thank heavens the breeders of Fastnet Rock didn’t listen to him.
All that said, I take my hat off to Jack. To me, his major achievement was not that he ran at least once around every racetrack in New Zealand, all 57 of them. Though his approach was superficial and fluffy he was able to perceive a niche in the market and in collaboration embrace the fledgling technology we now all take for granted. He was a man ahead of his time in that respect, a pioneer. His Tesio product has been refined and upgraded and rightly takes its place as one of the most useful weapons in today’s breeding armory.
It hit home to me just how much sway it has when I was out at Rosehill on the day Polar Success won the Golden Slipper. A prominent breeder who had a beaten runner in the event was sitting with me (odd: Rosehill has a glass-walled losers’ room where the public can see people in pain close up, but a closed-in room where the winners celebrate- shouldn't it be the other way around?). Anyway, this breeder said to me, “Have you put Polar Success’ pedigree on Tesio? It’s got nothing”. My reply went along the lines of: “It might have nothing but whatever it's got I want it! I just saw it win the Golden Slipper! We should be up all night studying it!”
Jack was a character. Curiously, he always called me "St Steven". It was just another of his idiosyncracies, and I'll miss it.
That said, I wish to note the passing in New Zealand a few weeks ago of Jack Glengarry who was into his seventies.
For the uninitiated in Australia, Jack was a former member of the racing press, a specialist thoroughbred books seller, originator of the ‘Tesio’ pedigree service, athlete, arch-conservative, hail-fellow-well-met, royalist, Scotsman in drag and the guy who played the bagpipes at Karaka to signal the start of each year’s Premier Yearling Sale. And he was married to the lovely Heather who had predeceased him.
Google Jack Glengarry and you’ll probably find an obit somewhere on the net or go to the website for his own colourful account of his family history.
My reason for writing about Jack is that I acknowledge with hindsight that he was a pioneer in the technological revolution as it applies to thoroughbred breeding.
Jack was an idiosyncratic individual. We first came into contact in the late sixties and in the early seventies, when I was editing ‘Best Bets’ in New Zealand. Jack was contracted to supply the form lines from the race meetings in the central districts of the North Island. Jack’s descriptions of how horses performed were sometimes very colourful, frequently inaccurate, usually brief and lacking in meaningful detail. Mixing with him in the press room and being on the receiving end of his work, I came to regard Jack as a ‘once over lightly’ merchant.
I don’t know exactly how he morphed into the breeding consultant/journalist he became in the early nineties. Our careers had taken different paths and I never asked him about it. Apart from being well read – books must have been his passion, he sold thousands of them – I don’t think he was ever involved in breeding horses.
Jack’s rise to influence coincided with the recession which beset New Zealand in the late-80s/early-90s which saw yearling prices plummet about 60% in two years. (Things go in cycles folks; you bright young things who have never had to take a backwards step in life, keep your eyes on the credit crisis).
That recession sent some breeders to the wall while many others just decided to opt out of breeding altogether and quit their mares. Pre-recession, in times of high inflation (sounds ominous) most breeders who presented a yearling at sale received a civilized return on investment irrespective of how ordinary its dam was. When money became tight and the guts fell out of the market, the few cashed-up buyers could concentrate on the quality end of the market and disregard the rest – there were no other buyers! So owners of marginal, weak-paged mares found they couldn’t sell their yearlings any more, spat the dummy and bailed out of the mares.
That experience taught me for all time that it is quality mares that are the key to survival in the commercial market, not stallions.
While all this was unfolding, Jack perceived he could offer a lifeline of sorts to those breeders who were worst affected by the recession.
In conjunction with a programmer named Simon Morris (I think that is his name) Jack worked on creating a database which had the ability in a nanosecond to throw up on one of those new fandangled computer screens a seven generation pedigree, highlighting duplication of ancestors.
Jack had a love affair with the long-dead Federico Tesio, admiring his deeds as a breeder and selling stacks of his famous little books on the subject. Being to the right of Genghiz Khan, Jack would have wished Tesio was Italian royalty. Jack reasoned that, through his database, if he could encourage breeders to replicate the inbreeding patterns which Tesio apparently applied successfully then those breeders might be able to turn their spurned half-page pedigree broodmares into the producers of champions.
At a time when many breeders were looking for any justification for staying in the game, along came Jack Tesio. He struck a rich vein. "OK," said the cow-cocky who owned Daisy the mare, "Wrightsons don’t want her yearling in their sales any more but I’ll mate her like Tesio would, breed a champion then they’ll beg me to let them sell the next one."
All of a sudden, Jack exerted an influence which every stallion stud in New Zealand felt keenly. Personally, I think Tesio would have turned in his grave having his name and so-called methods bandied about like that for common commercial gain. At one point in his book The Tesio Myth, author Franco Varola disavows that Tesio used the type of simplistic approach Jack Glengarry later attributed to him. People forget what a great trainer, meticulous observer and natural horseman Tesio was. I also think Jack knew as much about breeding at grass roots level as I know about splitting the atom.
Nevertheless, the insecurity of marginalised breeders was manifested in a steady stream of mares’ names being submitted to Jack, along with cheques for $35 each so Jack could run them through his programme and recommend a choice of mates Tesio would have been proud of.
I also seem to recall that stallion owners had to subscribe to have their stallions put in the programme otherwise there was no chance of your stallion being one of those recommended.
I regarded it as a praiseworthy theoretical attempt horribly distorted by commercialism and came to regard Jack as something of a charlatan. And I told him so.
As I was a seller of stallion nominations – in those days I was general manager at Haunui Farm where we stood five or six stallions – Jack was making my life hell. Clients, many of them practical people of the land who had previously bred truck loads of good horses, were now asking before committing to a booking, “Have you run it through the computer? What does the computer say, how does it look?” I would retort, “Bob, you’ve bred stakeswinners for years, why aren’t you sticking to the principles you’ve always used?” But the seeds of doubt had been sewn by Jack’s widely advertised claims that adherence to Tesio’s ‘methods’, via his programme, would help upgrade bloodlines. So it was difficult-to-impossible to be a stallion marketer and turn your back on your client’s perceived needs. The $35 was depatched with increased frequency; Jack’s service flourished.
All the while, Jack was still writing articles in the racing media, unmistakeable with his unique, florid style matched only by Australia's Ross du Bourg. He had space in the now-defunct weekly Friday Flash (the poor man's Sportsman or Winning Post) which he would use relentlessly to promote his voodoo. He would make outlandish, unsustainable pronouncements which would make professional breeders seethe. However, because people on the outside couldn't command access to editorial space the opportunity to present a rebuttal or balancing view was seldom if ever granted. Blogs didn’t exist in those days.
Jack’s favourite saw was his weekly dire warning about inbreeding to Northern Dancer, especially through two sons. He hammered that even as evidence to the contrary rolled in. It would slow horses down, he continued to claim simplistically. I don't know about the horses but his campaign sure slowed down a lot of stallion owners at the time! Thank heavens the breeders of Fastnet Rock didn’t listen to him.
All that said, I take my hat off to Jack. To me, his major achievement was not that he ran at least once around every racetrack in New Zealand, all 57 of them. Though his approach was superficial and fluffy he was able to perceive a niche in the market and in collaboration embrace the fledgling technology we now all take for granted. He was a man ahead of his time in that respect, a pioneer. His Tesio product has been refined and upgraded and rightly takes its place as one of the most useful weapons in today’s breeding armory.
It hit home to me just how much sway it has when I was out at Rosehill on the day Polar Success won the Golden Slipper. A prominent breeder who had a beaten runner in the event was sitting with me (odd: Rosehill has a glass-walled losers’ room where the public can see people in pain close up, but a closed-in room where the winners celebrate- shouldn't it be the other way around?). Anyway, this breeder said to me, “Have you put Polar Success’ pedigree on Tesio? It’s got nothing”. My reply went along the lines of: “It might have nothing but whatever it's got I want it! I just saw it win the Golden Slipper! We should be up all night studying it!”
Jack was a character. Curiously, he always called me "St Steven". It was just another of his idiosyncracies, and I'll miss it.
Thank You, New Zealand
My first job in racing was when I became a racing statistician for 'Best Bets' in Auckland in 1968 at the tender age of 19. In those days, each horse had a file card handwritten onto which were details of each performance. When we had to publish the book, twice weekly back then, that card would be sent out to the linotype operator who would key in the information and produce a 'slug' of type from his pot of molten lead. These 'slugs' were then arranged on metal trays known as 'galleys', ink was rolled over the top of them, paper pressed against them and, voila! you had a page proof. Not much different from Gutenberg in the 15th century and a far cry from today's unimaginable digital age.
An old man like me is allowed these nostalgic rambles. I had another when I was skimming through some literature and again came across the name of Bill Oppenheim, for decades one of the most respected breeding and racing analysts and commentators in the USA and sire, amongst other things, of the useful APEX ratings.
It's a little-known fact that the young Bill used to work in New Zealand, at the same time and in the same organisation as I did. One of us went on to greater deeds.
Bill was a stickler for facts. I'm reminded of him as I compile this blog because I've no doubt that some people will be irritated by some of the things I write, especially where vested interest is involved. Unfortunately we are so badly served by the lack of racing journalism these days, as distinct from racing and breeding 'publicity', that some stakeholders feel threatened if there's any objective critique floating around the marketplace.
As I recall, it was about 1970 when Bill really got up the nose of a stallion owner who at the time was importing a bunch of ponies from California to stand at his rather opulent stud farm south of Auckland. In those pre-internet days information wasn't so easy to come by and hard research was often needed to present a more rounded picture of a stallion prospect than the stallion promoter was sometimes willing to provide.
The late Eric Hayden was not at all pleased when Bill wrote some home truths about Eric's boat-load of young Cal-bred stallion prospects. The heat generated by his ire plus the pulling of advertising from the publications, must have led to Bill thinking there had to be a life beyond thin-skinned New Zealand. Soon after, he packed his pens and pocket calculator and took himself back to the USA whence he came, there crafting out the guru status he has enjoyed for many years. Hayden had a close association with Americans Hastings Harcourt and the now-famous Monty Roberts who fell out so spectacularly over Flag Is Up Farm.
Bill Oppenheim, yet another famous New Zealand export - like Robbie Deans.
An old man like me is allowed these nostalgic rambles. I had another when I was skimming through some literature and again came across the name of Bill Oppenheim, for decades one of the most respected breeding and racing analysts and commentators in the USA and sire, amongst other things, of the useful APEX ratings.
It's a little-known fact that the young Bill used to work in New Zealand, at the same time and in the same organisation as I did. One of us went on to greater deeds.
Bill was a stickler for facts. I'm reminded of him as I compile this blog because I've no doubt that some people will be irritated by some of the things I write, especially where vested interest is involved. Unfortunately we are so badly served by the lack of racing journalism these days, as distinct from racing and breeding 'publicity', that some stakeholders feel threatened if there's any objective critique floating around the marketplace.
As I recall, it was about 1970 when Bill really got up the nose of a stallion owner who at the time was importing a bunch of ponies from California to stand at his rather opulent stud farm south of Auckland. In those pre-internet days information wasn't so easy to come by and hard research was often needed to present a more rounded picture of a stallion prospect than the stallion promoter was sometimes willing to provide.
The late Eric Hayden was not at all pleased when Bill wrote some home truths about Eric's boat-load of young Cal-bred stallion prospects. The heat generated by his ire plus the pulling of advertising from the publications, must have led to Bill thinking there had to be a life beyond thin-skinned New Zealand. Soon after, he packed his pens and pocket calculator and took himself back to the USA whence he came, there crafting out the guru status he has enjoyed for many years. Hayden had a close association with Americans Hastings Harcourt and the now-famous Monty Roberts who fell out so spectacularly over Flag Is Up Farm.
Bill Oppenheim, yet another famous New Zealand export - like Robbie Deans.
Holiday Reading
Figuring on a few quiet days indoors this Xmas/New Year? The Sydney weather is charming at the moment, isn't it? For some entertainment emanating from a deathly serious subject, you could read through the Callinan Inquiry so far. It's adjourned until January 24. I ask the same question as everyone else in the horse business: what the heck was going on there?
The Silly Season?
Did you read Richard Zachariah's article in the Sunday Telegraph last Sunday (December 16)? I didn't, I don't buy the Sunday Telegraph. Sorry Richard. You probably don't read my blog. But it was mentioned to me so I Googled and read it.
The Silver Haired One reported that Paul Fleming plans to sue the government over the lost prizemoney-winning opportunities suffered by his mare Just Dancing last spring on account of the EI outbreak. His trainer told him she would have been competitive in five valuable races. Competitive, that is, as long as Just Dancing didn't have a stone bruise, wasn't in season, didn't bleed, hadn't bowed a tendon, wasn't cut back too far by the farrier, didn't slip on the float, flip over in the barrier, didn't hold its breath, didn't go in the wind, didn't find the tracks too hard, wasn't drawn off the track, wasn't blocked for a run, hadn't trained off.... good luck.
There have been thousands of owners, rich and 'aspirational' (it's not nice to say 'working class' any more) deprived of the same opportunity. When Germany lost World War I it was made to pay, through the Treaty of Versailles, reparations to the victor nations for all the damage caused (which, incidentally, is credited with preparing the ground for the rise of Hitler). The Australian Government has made and is making EI reparations, even before the verdict's in.
If Paul Fleming's position has been correctly reported, his claims seem to me to be entirely speculative and indeed they hold true for every other would-be runner, including my useless twice-raced three-year-old filly that I was diligently setting for a maiden at Scone. If you take the proposition to its logical conclusion, the Government should be paying out prizemoney compensation to the connections of every possible runner eligible for the same races who might wish to claim. I'll stop there.
The EI outbreak has been the most hurtful occurrence in Australian racing. But we can't undo what's done. Remember that the racing clubs are basically still sitting on all that undistributed prizemoney and are going to have to dole it out - so we will still get a crack at it, plenty of it if you have a good horse like Just Dancing.
STOP PRESS: Racing NSW announces prizemoney increases.
The Silver Haired One reported that Paul Fleming plans to sue the government over the lost prizemoney-winning opportunities suffered by his mare Just Dancing last spring on account of the EI outbreak. His trainer told him she would have been competitive in five valuable races. Competitive, that is, as long as Just Dancing didn't have a stone bruise, wasn't in season, didn't bleed, hadn't bowed a tendon, wasn't cut back too far by the farrier, didn't slip on the float, flip over in the barrier, didn't hold its breath, didn't go in the wind, didn't find the tracks too hard, wasn't drawn off the track, wasn't blocked for a run, hadn't trained off.... good luck.
There have been thousands of owners, rich and 'aspirational' (it's not nice to say 'working class' any more) deprived of the same opportunity. When Germany lost World War I it was made to pay, through the Treaty of Versailles, reparations to the victor nations for all the damage caused (which, incidentally, is credited with preparing the ground for the rise of Hitler). The Australian Government has made and is making EI reparations, even before the verdict's in.
If Paul Fleming's position has been correctly reported, his claims seem to me to be entirely speculative and indeed they hold true for every other would-be runner, including my useless twice-raced three-year-old filly that I was diligently setting for a maiden at Scone. If you take the proposition to its logical conclusion, the Government should be paying out prizemoney compensation to the connections of every possible runner eligible for the same races who might wish to claim. I'll stop there.
The EI outbreak has been the most hurtful occurrence in Australian racing. But we can't undo what's done. Remember that the racing clubs are basically still sitting on all that undistributed prizemoney and are going to have to dole it out - so we will still get a crack at it, plenty of it if you have a good horse like Just Dancing.
STOP PRESS: Racing NSW announces prizemoney increases.
It must be something IN the water ...
Looking at northern hemisphere sire figures through 2007, as published by Bloodstock Journal in the USA today (18 December 2007) , it's proof positive that the equator divides two separate worlds.
BJ's charts include, I believe, all NH countries except Japan, and the stallions are ranked by progeny earnings.
Six of the top 10 on the Leading Sires list have stood in Australasia. Behind record-breaking Smart Strike (Mr Prospector), at No. 2, comes Danehill (Danzig), his international influence still pervasive well after his demise.
At No. 4 is Distorted Humor (Forty Niner), definitely unloved by breeders when standing at Grand Lodge Thoroughbreds in Victoria - but, then, he wasn't a G1 winner which experts/major studs keep telling me is essential in a sire prospect but which is just bulldust. (One day I'll publish a list of outstanding non-G1 winning sires). And Grand Lodge Thoroughbreds, not being an Establishment establishment, probably lacked for an Establishment clientele.
At No. 5 is Langfuhr (Danzig), a Vinery shuttler who got handy gallopers but no G1 winners out here. He's followed at No. 6 by the enigmatic six times G1 winner Giant's Causeway (Storm Cat). After serving the creme de la creme and with his ANZ oldest progeny now four-year-olds, Giant's Causeway has five stakeswinners - four of them fillies. Only five horses have earned as much as his initial service fee cost and his winners-to-runners stats are under 50%. Increasingly it's looking like 'The Iron Horse' might become 'A Train Wreck'; bring the jury in in another 12 months. But we won't be seeing him again.
Position No. 7 is held by the beautiful and magnificent Galileo (Sadler's Wells) who blazed into Coolmore the same year as Giant's Causeway. Galileo is somewhat stouter than Giant's Causeway and it would be short-sighted to dismiss any stamina-inclined sire when his oldest runners have just turned four (though Australian breeders and trainers have been doing exactly that for the last 50 years). But, basically, Galileo has already been declared dead in the water out here. His colts definitely need to get busy. Two of his good northern hemisphere sons Purple Moon and Mahler filled the placings in this year's G1(R) Melbourne Cup, something his Australian sons don't yet look like doing even if they run the 3200m as a relay.
In at No. 10 comes Montjeu (Sadler's Wells), the classicist who brought his sublime six-times G1 winning record to New Zealand in 2001, so his oldest are five-year-olds. This guy has five stakeswinners which is 3.2% of his starters but barely one per crop on average, including one G1 winner, Sharvasti - but if you knew that you're probably the Trivial Pursuit champion down at your local.
So, apart from water swirling down the sink in reverse directions, why is there such a dramatic difference between the expression of genes in the two hemispheres? If you thought you were about to have the answer spelled out for you, you're wrong. I'm not even going to attempt to run through the possible reasons except to say: (a) I'm not altogether convinced of the popular "local horses for local conditions" postulation, and (b) it's only since the advent of the shuttle that this phenomenon has occurred because, prior to that of course, stallions stayed put in one place. And in those days they did not cover 150+ mares in a season, twice.
Going back to Bloodstock Journal's charts, seeing aforementioned Galileo atop the Leading International Juvenile Sires list has to be, in Australasian terms, an extract from Ripley's.
Moving on to Leading International Second Crop Sires, it's headed by Darley's Street Cry (Machiavellian) who thus far in Australasia has sired two stakes-placegetters. Underwhelming, but of course it must be stressed that the EI outbreak has given these second-croppers no chance yet - unless they were lucky enough to have lots of Victorian runners during that shallow Melbourne spring. When I look at Street Cry's pedigree and race record I see later maturing middle distance aptitude, so his time may come though he's probably now too 'valuable' in the north to come back (just have a look at what went straight back home when the Eastern Creek gates were opened post-EI - officially opened that is! - or, just as enlighteningly, what didn't go straight back home).
Next to Street Cry on the Second Crop Sires list is Johannesburg (Hennessy), Coolmore's quadruple G1 winning two-year-old marvel. This guy has got one stakes-placegetter so far and just 33% winners-to-runners: it's early days but he's got a lot to do. Fellow Coolmore inmate Rock Of Gibraltar (Danehill) is third and he, at least, is doing it well here with 10 southern hemisphere-conceived stakeswinners already, albeit only three of them are colts. Fourth-ranked Invincible Spirit (Green Desert) has only had 16 runners in Australasia at time of writing, so what does that say? And sixth-placed Orientate (Mt Livermore) has had just one more, and my mail is he won't be applying for his passport again!
So what a weird and wondrous world it is. The only thing you can say with a degree of confidence is that when many of the stallions mentioned above - the world's elite we're told - pack their bags for the trip down under, they forget to pack their 'run genes'.
BJ's charts include, I believe, all NH countries except Japan, and the stallions are ranked by progeny earnings.
Six of the top 10 on the Leading Sires list have stood in Australasia. Behind record-breaking Smart Strike (Mr Prospector), at No. 2, comes Danehill (Danzig), his international influence still pervasive well after his demise.
At No. 4 is Distorted Humor (Forty Niner), definitely unloved by breeders when standing at Grand Lodge Thoroughbreds in Victoria - but, then, he wasn't a G1 winner which experts/major studs keep telling me is essential in a sire prospect but which is just bulldust. (One day I'll publish a list of outstanding non-G1 winning sires). And Grand Lodge Thoroughbreds, not being an Establishment establishment, probably lacked for an Establishment clientele.
At No. 5 is Langfuhr (Danzig), a Vinery shuttler who got handy gallopers but no G1 winners out here. He's followed at No. 6 by the enigmatic six times G1 winner Giant's Causeway (Storm Cat). After serving the creme de la creme and with his ANZ oldest progeny now four-year-olds, Giant's Causeway has five stakeswinners - four of them fillies. Only five horses have earned as much as his initial service fee cost and his winners-to-runners stats are under 50%. Increasingly it's looking like 'The Iron Horse' might become 'A Train Wreck'; bring the jury in in another 12 months. But we won't be seeing him again.
Position No. 7 is held by the beautiful and magnificent Galileo (Sadler's Wells) who blazed into Coolmore the same year as Giant's Causeway. Galileo is somewhat stouter than Giant's Causeway and it would be short-sighted to dismiss any stamina-inclined sire when his oldest runners have just turned four (though Australian breeders and trainers have been doing exactly that for the last 50 years). But, basically, Galileo has already been declared dead in the water out here. His colts definitely need to get busy. Two of his good northern hemisphere sons Purple Moon and Mahler filled the placings in this year's G1(R) Melbourne Cup, something his Australian sons don't yet look like doing even if they run the 3200m as a relay.
In at No. 10 comes Montjeu (Sadler's Wells), the classicist who brought his sublime six-times G1 winning record to New Zealand in 2001, so his oldest are five-year-olds. This guy has five stakeswinners which is 3.2% of his starters but barely one per crop on average, including one G1 winner, Sharvasti - but if you knew that you're probably the Trivial Pursuit champion down at your local.
So, apart from water swirling down the sink in reverse directions, why is there such a dramatic difference between the expression of genes in the two hemispheres? If you thought you were about to have the answer spelled out for you, you're wrong. I'm not even going to attempt to run through the possible reasons except to say: (a) I'm not altogether convinced of the popular "local horses for local conditions" postulation, and (b) it's only since the advent of the shuttle that this phenomenon has occurred because, prior to that of course, stallions stayed put in one place. And in those days they did not cover 150+ mares in a season, twice.
Going back to Bloodstock Journal's charts, seeing aforementioned Galileo atop the Leading International Juvenile Sires list has to be, in Australasian terms, an extract from Ripley's.
Moving on to Leading International Second Crop Sires, it's headed by Darley's Street Cry (Machiavellian) who thus far in Australasia has sired two stakes-placegetters. Underwhelming, but of course it must be stressed that the EI outbreak has given these second-croppers no chance yet - unless they were lucky enough to have lots of Victorian runners during that shallow Melbourne spring. When I look at Street Cry's pedigree and race record I see later maturing middle distance aptitude, so his time may come though he's probably now too 'valuable' in the north to come back (just have a look at what went straight back home when the Eastern Creek gates were opened post-EI - officially opened that is! - or, just as enlighteningly, what didn't go straight back home).
Next to Street Cry on the Second Crop Sires list is Johannesburg (Hennessy), Coolmore's quadruple G1 winning two-year-old marvel. This guy has got one stakes-placegetter so far and just 33% winners-to-runners: it's early days but he's got a lot to do. Fellow Coolmore inmate Rock Of Gibraltar (Danehill) is third and he, at least, is doing it well here with 10 southern hemisphere-conceived stakeswinners already, albeit only three of them are colts. Fourth-ranked Invincible Spirit (Green Desert) has only had 16 runners in Australasia at time of writing, so what does that say? And sixth-placed Orientate (Mt Livermore) has had just one more, and my mail is he won't be applying for his passport again!
So what a weird and wondrous world it is. The only thing you can say with a degree of confidence is that when many of the stallions mentioned above - the world's elite we're told - pack their bags for the trip down under, they forget to pack their 'run genes'.
My New Year's Resolution
I resolve to occasionally jot down - here - my thoughts and opinions on matters thoroughbred, and to invite comment and critique from readers, get a conversation happening. Breeding topics, racing matters, the sales scene. No holds barred, no gilding of the lily (but hopefully on the right side of the libel laws). However, it's a work in progress. I won't have anything on the blog for a little while yet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
