You have to hand it to John Messara. If he were to fall down the proverbial, you’d bet he’d come up with a pearl. Not because he would be lucky, but because he'd have foreseen the possibility.
His Arrowfield operation owned yesterday’s Blue Diamond day at Caulfield, not only by dint of its sponsorship but through the Group 1 double achieved by the sons of Arrowfield’s Hussonet (USA). John didn’t hand over all that money to showcase a Darley stallion, thank you very much.
John has been staunch in his belief in Hussonet from day one. Often in the face of doubters who think Chilean form is akin to New Caledonia's. OK, it’s a stallion owner’s job to be staunch and, to be fair, John was probably just as bullish about those unmitigated disasters Fuji Kiseki (whose best Australian progeny, Sun Classique, won a stakes in Dubai over the weekend), Unbridled’s Song and End Sweep. But Hussonet’s figures in eight stud seasons in Chile were freakish.
John mentioned to me last year that in hindsight he didn’t secure enough ‘speed’ mares for Hussonet in his first season in Australia, explaining the steady if unspectacular start the sire made in 2006-2007. But he’s making up for lost time! What an excitement machine Weekend Hussler is – thank God he’s a gelding, we might get to see a bit more of him!
I’m chuffed to see Hussonet coming through as I bought a Group 1 winning daughter of his, La Chiflota, at last November’s Keeneland Breeding Stock Sale for an Australian breeder. Due to foal a filly by Breeder’s Cup winner Silver Train, now six-year-old La Chiflota was champion 2YO filly of her year in Chile then won a stakes in New York when sent north. A beautiful type, she will be landed back in Australia later this year for under $300,000, minus whatever her filly foal is worth – somehow I don’t think we’ll be able to buy any type of G1 winning daughter of Hussonet for that sort of money down here!
You know where to find me if you’d like a similar scoop this year!
Hussonet is yet another example of a top class stallion who wasn’t a G1 winner on the track – he wasn’t even a stakeswinner. It’s a wonder he didn’t find his way to New Zealand when sold out of the USA originally in 1994, he has a similar profile to many stallions which have gone there – by a champion sire out of a champion mare but not quite a top class performer. Stallions were hard enough to come by in New Zealand in the mid-90s; if he was quoted, perhaps it was Hussonet’s lack of turf form which was a negative.
Ironically, his Red Ransom half-brother Ekraar, a considerably more proven racehorse than Hussonet and a turf exponent, is standing in New Zealand, largely unheralded. He has had some decent yearlings and produced a black-type 2YO at the weekend. In these days of triple-digit mare books, he has struggled to attract patronage which probably means he's going to be OK!
Hussonet’s service fee for 2008 will be the subject of conjecture between now and Easter (or presumably late-April, post Sydney sales). Hussonet is now 17 years old. John will go for the jugular for sure.
There was loose talk of Darley’s Exceed And Excel moving up to $200,000 but after Saturday’s eclipse nothing will be set in stone yet I’m picking.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Rock Of Gibraltar has been a bit slow to go with his colts but I note he had at least three male winners over the weekend; perhaps the tide is beginning to turn. It usually does when there’s a perceived early sex bias.
Two of these colts, Domain (ex One Under) and Rockwood (ex Foxwood) were outstanding yearlings sold at Inglis Easter. Their dams were also top class racemares in New Zealand.
When asked by a client to nominate the one horse above all I would like to take home from the 2006 Sydney Easter Yearling Sale, the colt who is now known as Domain was my choice. I thought he was faultless. He was in the Kia Ora Stud draft and went to Lloyd Williams for $300,000. To prove me right he’s got to do a helluva lot more than win a provincial maiden – I’m watching him.
Gai bought Rockwood, who was also in my top five colts of the sale. He made $325,000 but would have made more had his dam Foxwood produced a decent horse before him. She had had a couple of spectacular failures by Danehill so this one, being by a son of Danehill, might not have appealed to everyone. But Rock Of Gibraltar isn’t Danehill and it’s far too simplistic to apply the male line test in cases like these.
Gai bought the colt on spec and some time later I was asked for my opinion about the colt by a group of owners to whom he had been prospected. I gave him a strong recommendation and they went ahead and purchased the majority, so I was delighted with his first-up win on Saturday which, after seeing him trial the week before, I was confident he would achieve. The key to him has been time - the cheapest, most valuable and most under-estimated commodity in racing – thank you, EI - as his family is not precocious. Given firm tracks and patient riding from now on he should extend his record and his distance capabilities.
One of Rockwood’s owners is the client for whom I purchased the above-mentioned La Chiflota at Keeneland. He also has an interest in a two-year-old I bought at last year’s Magic Millions, named Geared Up, by Testa Rossa-Certain, by Rory’s Jester. This colt cost $100,000 and is down to make his debut this week. His barrier trial suggested to me he can gallop, too.
Geared Up is a chestnut with a flaxen – almost white – mane and tail and I was fearful when my principal client looked at him at Magic Millions that he would be aghast at the colour scheme. This client seldom ever buys a chestnut let alone a virtual palomino. However, he could see what I liked about the horse and gave me the go ahead to buy him. We’ve got our fingers crossed. I was relieved to see Light Fantastic is bleached in the mane and tail department!
I doubly hope Geared Up makes a racehorse because we were all set to try and buy All American at the same sale until an adverse vet report deflected us. All American was a cracking type with a mouth-watering pedigree yet made only $220,000.
Stop Press: Rock Of Gibraltar's Australian-bred colt Seventh Rock continued his winning ways in South Africa at the weekend, adding a further G3 to his record. He's clearly a good one.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Good to see Victory Chant starting to fulfil his early promise with a Listed win in Adelaide Saturday. The three-year-old by General Nediym was, predictably when you saw him, the top priced yearling at the 2006 Adelaide Magic Millions. That sale is on the back foot being sandwiched between Melbourne Premier and (this year) the Gold Coast Magic Millions, so it’s a boost that they can proclaim a successful recent sale-topper. More than can be said for some of the headliners which have ‘topped’ other sales of recent times. If you believe all those prices are an indication of true market value then you’ve got a bit to learn. I might do a piece on that subject in a later blog.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Zarita was a yearling I bid on at the 2006 Karaka Premier Sale but my buyer came up well short of the $190,000 it took to buy her. She was a first class individual. Though he’s not everyone’s cup of tea – because they don’t win the Golden Slipper! – what a good sire Pentire is. His figures are impressive. Buyers are starting to cotton on, however, as they were in strong demand in New Zealand this year. I was underbidder there on one of his colts, out of Palace Lady, losing out to Rob McAnulty. Rob offered the horse to my buyer and I straight afterwards but by the time we had made up our minds to say yes, he had changed his!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Top New Zealand three-year-old Alamosa (by O’Reilly) won a G1 WFA 1600m against older horses on Friday, clocking 1:32.69 at the Otaki track, his third G1 victory. That’s scooting. Last winter I bought a maiden three-quarter sister to his dam for next to nothing and sent her over to O’Reilly. She looked at him and got in foal. Years ago, I was responsible for the naming of Alamosa's grandam, Logical Miss (by Sound Reason), a useful mare who was raced on lease from Te Parae Stud by some close friends of mine. Their imagination for dreaming up names was, unbelievably, more barren than mine.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I’ve arrived in Melbourne in readiness for tackling the Premier Sale and hope to start inspecting on Tuesday. On past form it might be a bit much expecting all the Victorian horses to be there that early! I’ve got a couple of orders, let’s see how we go. I think it will be an exceedingly healthy sale.
Question: which world-famous buyer signed for $9,555,000 worth of yearlings in ANZ between 1997 and 2004 (the youngest are now five so they're all fully exposed) for a total return on the racetrack of $830,000? He has signed for a further $11 million worth since then but as they’re four-year-olds and younger we must wait a few years for the outcome.
TLC For Your RSI
For those of you planning on doing the rounds at Magic Millions Gold Coast next month .... through a friend, I can put you onto a great physio in Brisbane if your hand/arm/shoulder/back needs TLC after lugging that 2,000-page catalogue around for a couple of weeks.
My friend rationalises why MM haven't split the book into two manageable tomes: "The world according to GH is Harvey Norman. 100 choices of fridges, leg waxers, nasal hair removers – with 24 choices of plasma thrown in as well. Big is better. The buzzing, cluttered marketplace that man evolved in. The bazaar buried deep in the DNA."
Can't argue with that. GH has a billion reasons to show why one book's best.
My friend rationalises why MM haven't split the book into two manageable tomes: "The world according to GH is Harvey Norman. 100 choices of fridges, leg waxers, nasal hair removers – with 24 choices of plasma thrown in as well. Big is better. The buzzing, cluttered marketplace that man evolved in. The bazaar buried deep in the DNA."
Can't argue with that. GH has a billion reasons to show why one book's best.
Shane, Richard and Gai
Why am I unexcited about Shane Dye’s return to Sydney’s riding ranks?
It might have something to do with the memory that he reversed the instructions on the filly I bought and managed, Courtalista, in the 1989 AJC Oaks, contributing to her unjust defeat in the classic by Research. Now, before all you people holler “But Research was a champion!”, go look at the film.
Just a couple of weeks earlier the same R S Dye provided me with a moment of supreme satisfaction when winning the Golden Slipper on the filly whose creation I was directly responsible for, Courtza, the second and the last New Zealand-bred to win the race.
As a father of two (now adult) sons who haven’t lived in the same city as me for over 10 years – my fault, not theirs - I wholeheartedly relate to Dye’s anticipation at being back with his own children and wish him all the joy and fulfillment that can bring.
But over the last few months I’ve thought the Sydney jockey colony has been doing quite nicely, thanks. Apart from the annoying way, so often, they timidly surrender the tempo to the leader (usually a Waterhouse horse making Shinn or Rawiller look even better than they are) they seem to be going about their business keenly and professionally. Newcomer Jeff Lloyd, especially, is a real craftsman; I think this man is the real horse whisperer.
We’ll always have room for Darren Beadman who is on another level to most and rides for the glory of God as well as man. Sebastian Murphy, William Pike and Michael Rodd might like to bring their tack here just to make things more interesting. Then I think you could literally throw your silks into the jockeys’ room and not worry about who picked them up. I wouldn’t be fretting too much about Glen, Zac or Shane.
Jockeys are lionized in Australia. Read the press: horses always have a celebrity jockey, they sometimes have a trainer, they almost never have an owner and definitely don’t have a breeder. Jockeys are fantastic athletes, no one denies that for a moment. They control a 600 kg beast at 60 k.p.h., something I’ve never been able to do at twice their weight and half the speed. (Before you smart asses press the comment button, that's twice the jockey's weight, not the horse's). They ultimately determine the winning and losing of races but they cannot get a wonky-bred, sparely-fed or ill-educated horse to go faster. There would be no moments in the sun for them if it were not for the small army of people who contribute each of the links in the chain which makes up a winning performance.
In all my years of mounting yard attendance in my capacity with the Waterhouse stable I was only able to count on the fingers of one hand (minus the amputated fingers) the occasions a jockey openly admitted after a race that they got it wrong.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The rumour-mill last week had it that Richard Freedman would be on 450 big ones in his newly-announced role at the AJC. Gee.
I support modernizing the business model at the AJC and for having a vision of the future, though I think proprietary racing is long overdue in this country.
It’s great to see all the departmental heads with their newly-branded corporate monikers. From now on, not every buck need stop at Kevin. If there was a job going, like Executive Manager, Perving (Champagne Lawn), or Chief Sampling Officer (Chips and Party Pies), I’d like to apply. I’d do them for a hundred.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The days of Gooree Stud runners from the Freedman Melbourne stable look numbered. They’re down to a trickle now. Gai has done a monumental job with the red-and-black since they first came into the stable in late 1999, clearly outpointing the southerners, and if she’s to get the lion’s share in future she deserves it.
Gooree are a success story. They have a proven system of rearing, developing and monitoring their horses. They are never in a hurry; they go in and out of the stable as many times as required while waiting to achieve maturity. The Boss breeds his mares to the stallions he thinks suit them without worrying too much about meeting other peoples’ approval and Andrew Baddock and his team do the rest. It's just not about chucking a mountain of money at it to make it work.
It’s a tragedy that their colt Snowland (not a homebred, but bred by Stratheden) has proved a shy breeder. He’s had 18 runners to date and 11 have won, including on Saturday the 2YO Crevasse at the Gold Coast and my selection from the 2006 Magic Millions, Absolut Glam, who trotted up in the G2 at Moonee Valley. Snowland has served only 63 mares in the last four breeding seasons combined but I believe he has about 10 currently in foal up at Gooree.
His fast full brother Snippetson has no such problems. He covered 150 in his first season at Widden and 174 in his second. Declaration of interest: mine was one of the 174.
It might have something to do with the memory that he reversed the instructions on the filly I bought and managed, Courtalista, in the 1989 AJC Oaks, contributing to her unjust defeat in the classic by Research. Now, before all you people holler “But Research was a champion!”, go look at the film.
Just a couple of weeks earlier the same R S Dye provided me with a moment of supreme satisfaction when winning the Golden Slipper on the filly whose creation I was directly responsible for, Courtza, the second and the last New Zealand-bred to win the race.
As a father of two (now adult) sons who haven’t lived in the same city as me for over 10 years – my fault, not theirs - I wholeheartedly relate to Dye’s anticipation at being back with his own children and wish him all the joy and fulfillment that can bring.
But over the last few months I’ve thought the Sydney jockey colony has been doing quite nicely, thanks. Apart from the annoying way, so often, they timidly surrender the tempo to the leader (usually a Waterhouse horse making Shinn or Rawiller look even better than they are) they seem to be going about their business keenly and professionally. Newcomer Jeff Lloyd, especially, is a real craftsman; I think this man is the real horse whisperer.
We’ll always have room for Darren Beadman who is on another level to most and rides for the glory of God as well as man. Sebastian Murphy, William Pike and Michael Rodd might like to bring their tack here just to make things more interesting. Then I think you could literally throw your silks into the jockeys’ room and not worry about who picked them up. I wouldn’t be fretting too much about Glen, Zac or Shane.
Jockeys are lionized in Australia. Read the press: horses always have a celebrity jockey, they sometimes have a trainer, they almost never have an owner and definitely don’t have a breeder. Jockeys are fantastic athletes, no one denies that for a moment. They control a 600 kg beast at 60 k.p.h., something I’ve never been able to do at twice their weight and half the speed. (Before you smart asses press the comment button, that's twice the jockey's weight, not the horse's). They ultimately determine the winning and losing of races but they cannot get a wonky-bred, sparely-fed or ill-educated horse to go faster. There would be no moments in the sun for them if it were not for the small army of people who contribute each of the links in the chain which makes up a winning performance.
In all my years of mounting yard attendance in my capacity with the Waterhouse stable I was only able to count on the fingers of one hand (minus the amputated fingers) the occasions a jockey openly admitted after a race that they got it wrong.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The rumour-mill last week had it that Richard Freedman would be on 450 big ones in his newly-announced role at the AJC. Gee.
I support modernizing the business model at the AJC and for having a vision of the future, though I think proprietary racing is long overdue in this country.
It’s great to see all the departmental heads with their newly-branded corporate monikers. From now on, not every buck need stop at Kevin. If there was a job going, like Executive Manager, Perving (Champagne Lawn), or Chief Sampling Officer (Chips and Party Pies), I’d like to apply. I’d do them for a hundred.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The days of Gooree Stud runners from the Freedman Melbourne stable look numbered. They’re down to a trickle now. Gai has done a monumental job with the red-and-black since they first came into the stable in late 1999, clearly outpointing the southerners, and if she’s to get the lion’s share in future she deserves it.
Gooree are a success story. They have a proven system of rearing, developing and monitoring their horses. They are never in a hurry; they go in and out of the stable as many times as required while waiting to achieve maturity. The Boss breeds his mares to the stallions he thinks suit them without worrying too much about meeting other peoples’ approval and Andrew Baddock and his team do the rest. It's just not about chucking a mountain of money at it to make it work.
It’s a tragedy that their colt Snowland (not a homebred, but bred by Stratheden) has proved a shy breeder. He’s had 18 runners to date and 11 have won, including on Saturday the 2YO Crevasse at the Gold Coast and my selection from the 2006 Magic Millions, Absolut Glam, who trotted up in the G2 at Moonee Valley. Snowland has served only 63 mares in the last four breeding seasons combined but I believe he has about 10 currently in foal up at Gooree.
His fast full brother Snippetson has no such problems. He covered 150 in his first season at Widden and 174 in his second. Declaration of interest: mine was one of the 174.
Traders' Paradise At The Select
When the third and final day of Karaka’s Select Yearling Sale finished on 1 February I wondered why so many people were smiling at me. It's not the normal reaction; I presumed it was because they were pleased that they’d be seeing the last of me.
But after dissecting the results of the Select Sale the reason for all the smilers became evident – they were Select Sale pinhookers who couldn’t hide their delight at their good fortune.
The strong middle market at the Select Sale rewarded pinhookers hand over fist.
In the post below this one, I look at the success or otherwise of pinhookers at the Premier Yearling Sale held earlier that week. The losers probably outnumbered the winners, though the victories were spectacular in many instances.
Using the same formula to calculate returns as described in the post below, here are the impressive Select Sale pinhooking results:
Sold at a clear profit: 42
Sold at a clear loss: 11
Sold at break-even: 4
Passed in: 10
The biggest profits by dollars (all NZ$) were:
Lot 575 Van Nistelrooy-Concert Party c (Lime Country T’breds) + $105,000
Lot 560 Lucky Owners-Chinese Whispers c (Poplar Lodge) + $95,000
Lot 662 Lion Heart-Flapper c (Esker) + $78,000
Lot 865 Cape Cross-Osmolite c (Maara Grange) + $74,500
Lot 969 Bel Esprit-Serious Drink (Seaton Park) + $59,700
Lot 615 Don Eduardo-Distinction (Phoenix Park) + $55,000
The sale began like a runaway train. Its strength can be measured by the fact that of the first 21 pinhooks to go through the ring, 15 sold for substantial five-figure profits.
At least 10 of the pinhooks in the sale gave a return on investment (after costs) of 200% or more with Lots 575 and 560 (see above) topping 400% and Lots 662 and 615 (also see above) returning in excess of 300%.
The biggest losses were sustained by:
Lot 1031 Charge Forward-Sunshine c (Bluegables) - $17,600
Lot 698 Octagonal-Grand Orient c (Phoenix Park) - $16,500
Lot 894 Indian Danehill-Pink Melody c (O’Hara) - $16,500
Lot 709 Strategic-Herbal (Poplar Lodge) - $14,700
Significant enough amounts but unlikely to send anyone to the poorhouse. And chicken-feed compared with several in the Premier Sale.
Amongst the 10 pinhooks passed-in, the most costly to get to the sale was Lot 511 Dubai Destination-Be Our Honey (Ellendene Farms) which had clocked up a bill of about $47,000. It failed to meet a $40,000 reserve.
All thus suggests that the Kiwi punhookers wull be here again en masse for the autumn/wunter weanling sales uf they are not already combing the paddocks feverushly for next year’s profut-makers.
(And if you Aussie's don't think you've got a shocking accent, too, you're wrong).
But after dissecting the results of the Select Sale the reason for all the smilers became evident – they were Select Sale pinhookers who couldn’t hide their delight at their good fortune.
The strong middle market at the Select Sale rewarded pinhookers hand over fist.
In the post below this one, I look at the success or otherwise of pinhookers at the Premier Yearling Sale held earlier that week. The losers probably outnumbered the winners, though the victories were spectacular in many instances.
Using the same formula to calculate returns as described in the post below, here are the impressive Select Sale pinhooking results:
Sold at a clear profit: 42
Sold at a clear loss: 11
Sold at break-even: 4
Passed in: 10
The biggest profits by dollars (all NZ$) were:
Lot 575 Van Nistelrooy-Concert Party c (Lime Country T’breds) + $105,000
Lot 560 Lucky Owners-Chinese Whispers c (Poplar Lodge) + $95,000
Lot 662 Lion Heart-Flapper c (Esker) + $78,000
Lot 865 Cape Cross-Osmolite c (Maara Grange) + $74,500
Lot 969 Bel Esprit-Serious Drink (Seaton Park) + $59,700
Lot 615 Don Eduardo-Distinction (Phoenix Park) + $55,000
The sale began like a runaway train. Its strength can be measured by the fact that of the first 21 pinhooks to go through the ring, 15 sold for substantial five-figure profits.
At least 10 of the pinhooks in the sale gave a return on investment (after costs) of 200% or more with Lots 575 and 560 (see above) topping 400% and Lots 662 and 615 (also see above) returning in excess of 300%.
The biggest losses were sustained by:
Lot 1031 Charge Forward-Sunshine c (Bluegables) - $17,600
Lot 698 Octagonal-Grand Orient c (Phoenix Park) - $16,500
Lot 894 Indian Danehill-Pink Melody c (O’Hara) - $16,500
Lot 709 Strategic-Herbal (Poplar Lodge) - $14,700
Significant enough amounts but unlikely to send anyone to the poorhouse. And chicken-feed compared with several in the Premier Sale.
Amongst the 10 pinhooks passed-in, the most costly to get to the sale was Lot 511 Dubai Destination-Be Our Honey (Ellendene Farms) which had clocked up a bill of about $47,000. It failed to meet a $40,000 reserve.
All thus suggests that the Kiwi punhookers wull be here again en masse for the autumn/wunter weanling sales uf they are not already combing the paddocks feverushly for next year’s profut-makers.
(And if you Aussie's don't think you've got a shocking accent, too, you're wrong).
Not All Beer And Skittles In Pinhooksville, But Lots Of Champagne For Some
Even in a bull market – and the recent NZ yearling sales at Karaka couldn’t be described any other way – there are winners and losers.
The sale featured numerous pinhooks. I identified 52 bought at public auction which went through the ring at the Premier Session.
Over half of them either made a clear loss or weren’t able to be sold on the day at the values placed on them.
While no loss is ever welcome, the losses were relatively restrained compared with many of the profits which in some cases were quite spectacular (but nothing rivaling Green Monkey).
I’ve crunched some numbers, calculating the cost of each weanling in NZ dollars, adding on an ultra-conservative figure for transport and keep costs, and calculating the sale proceeds net of commission.
Possibly the only significant costs not factored in are insurance and the cost of money which, if they were, would certainly wipe out the notional profits shown by three of the 21 which finished in the black.
Here’s how the Premier pinhooks fared:
Sold at a clear profit: 21
Sold at a clear loss: 14
Sold at break-even: 3
Passed in: 14
Here are the biggest profits by dollars, based on my method. All amounts hereafter are in New Zealand dollars:
Lot 41 Flying Spur-Chicago Wonder c (Ascot) + $483,200.
Lot 64 Fastnet Rock-Custodial c (Curraghmore) + $190,000.
Lot 403 Danehill Dancer-Taravain f (Wellfield) + $177,800.
Lot 407 Encosta de Lago-That Kind Of Girl c (Ascot) + $162,200.
Lot 200 Cape Cross-Khun Achara f (Haunui) + $129,000.
Lot 344 Charge Forward-Sensuous c (Hallmark) + $124,600.
Lot 435 Red Ransom-Tully Tango f (Haunui) + $122,600.
There were two lots whose profits were between $50,000 - $100,000.
The biggest returns on investments (reiterating that finance costs and insurance are not factored in):
Lot 403 Danehill Dancer-Taravain f (Wellfield) – 416%
Lot 41 Flying Spur-Chicago Wonder c (Ascot) – 271%
Lot 275 Cape Cross-Noble Air c (Ascot) – 260%
Lot 64 Fastnet Rock-Custodial c (Curraghmore) – 252%
Lot 344 Charge Forward-Sensuous c (Hallmark) – 236%
Lot 200 Cape Cross-Khun Achara f (Haunui) – 204%
Lot 435 Red Ransom-Tully Tango f (Haunui) – 183%
Lot 407 Encosta de Lago-That Kind Of Girl c (Ascot) – 182%
What of the losers? The yearlings sold which represented the biggest cash losses were:
Lot 212 Iglesia-Lady Min c (O’Hara) $89,080 loss
Lot 404 General Nediym-Tatham c (Tamgaly) $47,600 loss
Lot 84 Redoute’s Choice-Donna Dior f (Phoenix) $42,200 loss
(I fancy lot 84 might have been a buy-back, a yearling which cost about $530,000 to put into the ring).
The costliest yearlings passed in on the day were:
Lot 20 Rock Of Gibraltar-Bobsleigh c (Esker) – owed $338,000, reserve $500,000.
Lot 448 Elvstroem-Way Cool c (Chesterfields) – owed $148,000, reserve $180,000.
Lot 287 Footstepsinthesand-Passing Hope c (Fairdale) - owed $144,000, reserve $150,000.
Lot 221 Encosta de Lago-La Veine c (Trelawney) – owed $125,000, reserve $200,000.
Lot 397 Exceed And Excel-Swinburn f (Soliloquy) – owed $97,000, reserve $100,000.
The fact that the reserves were set, for the most part, realistically suggests these vendors paid yearling prices as weanlings, given conformation and other market factors.
Bruce and Maureen Harvey’s Ascot Farm have long been the darlings of the pinhook market. Their draft was much smaller than usual this year. Four of the five yearlings they presented were pinhooks and whilst I’m not certain they owned them all outright, the quartet produced a cool net profit in excess of $700,000. Not Green Monkey territory, but enough to make us green with envy.
It’s a matter of wonderment that almost every year they pick the right ones (not afraid to pay for quality has a lot to do with it) then mesmerize the buyers with their preparation and presentation skills. We just love giving them money and I’m as guilty as anyone as I was involved behind the scenes in the purchase last year of their Lonhro-Palme d’Or colt for an outrageous $1,050,000.
The sale featured numerous pinhooks. I identified 52 bought at public auction which went through the ring at the Premier Session.
Over half of them either made a clear loss or weren’t able to be sold on the day at the values placed on them.
While no loss is ever welcome, the losses were relatively restrained compared with many of the profits which in some cases were quite spectacular (but nothing rivaling Green Monkey).
I’ve crunched some numbers, calculating the cost of each weanling in NZ dollars, adding on an ultra-conservative figure for transport and keep costs, and calculating the sale proceeds net of commission.
Possibly the only significant costs not factored in are insurance and the cost of money which, if they were, would certainly wipe out the notional profits shown by three of the 21 which finished in the black.
Here’s how the Premier pinhooks fared:
Sold at a clear profit: 21
Sold at a clear loss: 14
Sold at break-even: 3
Passed in: 14
Here are the biggest profits by dollars, based on my method. All amounts hereafter are in New Zealand dollars:
Lot 41 Flying Spur-Chicago Wonder c (Ascot) + $483,200.
Lot 64 Fastnet Rock-Custodial c (Curraghmore) + $190,000.
Lot 403 Danehill Dancer-Taravain f (Wellfield) + $177,800.
Lot 407 Encosta de Lago-That Kind Of Girl c (Ascot) + $162,200.
Lot 200 Cape Cross-Khun Achara f (Haunui) + $129,000.
Lot 344 Charge Forward-Sensuous c (Hallmark) + $124,600.
Lot 435 Red Ransom-Tully Tango f (Haunui) + $122,600.
There were two lots whose profits were between $50,000 - $100,000.
The biggest returns on investments (reiterating that finance costs and insurance are not factored in):
Lot 403 Danehill Dancer-Taravain f (Wellfield) – 416%
Lot 41 Flying Spur-Chicago Wonder c (Ascot) – 271%
Lot 275 Cape Cross-Noble Air c (Ascot) – 260%
Lot 64 Fastnet Rock-Custodial c (Curraghmore) – 252%
Lot 344 Charge Forward-Sensuous c (Hallmark) – 236%
Lot 200 Cape Cross-Khun Achara f (Haunui) – 204%
Lot 435 Red Ransom-Tully Tango f (Haunui) – 183%
Lot 407 Encosta de Lago-That Kind Of Girl c (Ascot) – 182%
What of the losers? The yearlings sold which represented the biggest cash losses were:
Lot 212 Iglesia-Lady Min c (O’Hara) $89,080 loss
Lot 404 General Nediym-Tatham c (Tamgaly) $47,600 loss
Lot 84 Redoute’s Choice-Donna Dior f (Phoenix) $42,200 loss
(I fancy lot 84 might have been a buy-back, a yearling which cost about $530,000 to put into the ring).
The costliest yearlings passed in on the day were:
Lot 20 Rock Of Gibraltar-Bobsleigh c (Esker) – owed $338,000, reserve $500,000.
Lot 448 Elvstroem-Way Cool c (Chesterfields) – owed $148,000, reserve $180,000.
Lot 287 Footstepsinthesand-Passing Hope c (Fairdale) - owed $144,000, reserve $150,000.
Lot 221 Encosta de Lago-La Veine c (Trelawney) – owed $125,000, reserve $200,000.
Lot 397 Exceed And Excel-Swinburn f (Soliloquy) – owed $97,000, reserve $100,000.
The fact that the reserves were set, for the most part, realistically suggests these vendors paid yearling prices as weanlings, given conformation and other market factors.
Bruce and Maureen Harvey’s Ascot Farm have long been the darlings of the pinhook market. Their draft was much smaller than usual this year. Four of the five yearlings they presented were pinhooks and whilst I’m not certain they owned them all outright, the quartet produced a cool net profit in excess of $700,000. Not Green Monkey territory, but enough to make us green with envy.
It’s a matter of wonderment that almost every year they pick the right ones (not afraid to pay for quality has a lot to do with it) then mesmerize the buyers with their preparation and presentation skills. We just love giving them money and I’m as guilty as anyone as I was involved behind the scenes in the purchase last year of their Lonhro-Palme d’Or colt for an outrageous $1,050,000.
E & E Not A Throw-Back To Carry Back
It’s held to be true that high class speed is the most reliably transmitted trait in breeding.
More good sprinters will sire winners more reliably (leaving aside the question of class) than will, say, mile-and-a-half racers.
Therefore it’s no great surprise to see Exceed And Excel, a great specimen and a sprinting son of Danehill, bounce away to a good start with his first crop though it’s far too early to determine what the ultimate depth and breadth of his siring performance is going to be.
Scanning through his first four stakeswinners for common themes, I see that three of them are out of good racemares, all daughters of speed sires. Exceedingly Good is out of stakes-placed Common Smytzer (Snippets/Damascus cross); Wilander is out of multiple Group winner Scandinavia (Snippets/Vain cross); Sugar Babe is out of multiple Group winner On Type (Zeditave/Marauding cross). The fourth stakeswinner, Believe’n’Succeed is out of the minor USA winner Arctic Drift (Gone West/Storm Cat cross – the grandam was a dual G1 winner).
(Incidentally, the average price of this quartet as yearlings was $456,250).
Primarily an American product in Australian clothing, Exceed And Excel seems at this early stage to like American strains including more Raise A Native/Native Dancer.
Just as well he didn’t take after nor relies for his prowess on further strains of Carry Back, who is the sire of his third dam Back Britches. Carry Back, whose own sire wore the hugely masculine name Saggy, is described in Richard Ulbrich’s Peerage Of Racehorses as “thin and rather lightly-built, particularly through the quarters, and weighing only 960 lbs (about 430 kgs) and full of conformation faults – as one observer wrote ‘high-headed, narrow, long-backed, herring-gutted and sickle-hocked’.” Said to stand 15.1, Carry Back was out of an unplaced mare while the next four dams were unraced.
Exceed And Excel’s grandam Gladiolus is the second-best product sired by G1 winner Watch Your Step, a low-brow son of the champion but weak sire Citation. (Carry Back and Citation between them had 106 raceday starts, winning exactly 50% of them). Gladiolus produced a good runner in Swamp King who divided stud duties between Canada and Victoria, siring here 273 live foals in six seasons of which only two were stakeswinners.
With the help of Danehill and good mares, Exceed And Excel appears to be rising above the pack.
More good sprinters will sire winners more reliably (leaving aside the question of class) than will, say, mile-and-a-half racers.
Therefore it’s no great surprise to see Exceed And Excel, a great specimen and a sprinting son of Danehill, bounce away to a good start with his first crop though it’s far too early to determine what the ultimate depth and breadth of his siring performance is going to be.
Scanning through his first four stakeswinners for common themes, I see that three of them are out of good racemares, all daughters of speed sires. Exceedingly Good is out of stakes-placed Common Smytzer (Snippets/Damascus cross); Wilander is out of multiple Group winner Scandinavia (Snippets/Vain cross); Sugar Babe is out of multiple Group winner On Type (Zeditave/Marauding cross). The fourth stakeswinner, Believe’n’Succeed is out of the minor USA winner Arctic Drift (Gone West/Storm Cat cross – the grandam was a dual G1 winner).
(Incidentally, the average price of this quartet as yearlings was $456,250).
Primarily an American product in Australian clothing, Exceed And Excel seems at this early stage to like American strains including more Raise A Native/Native Dancer.
Just as well he didn’t take after nor relies for his prowess on further strains of Carry Back, who is the sire of his third dam Back Britches. Carry Back, whose own sire wore the hugely masculine name Saggy, is described in Richard Ulbrich’s Peerage Of Racehorses as “thin and rather lightly-built, particularly through the quarters, and weighing only 960 lbs (about 430 kgs) and full of conformation faults – as one observer wrote ‘high-headed, narrow, long-backed, herring-gutted and sickle-hocked’.” Said to stand 15.1, Carry Back was out of an unplaced mare while the next four dams were unraced.
Exceed And Excel’s grandam Gladiolus is the second-best product sired by G1 winner Watch Your Step, a low-brow son of the champion but weak sire Citation. (Carry Back and Citation between them had 106 raceday starts, winning exactly 50% of them). Gladiolus produced a good runner in Swamp King who divided stud duties between Canada and Victoria, siring here 273 live foals in six seasons of which only two were stakeswinners.
With the help of Danehill and good mares, Exceed And Excel appears to be rising above the pack.
He Made A Monkey Of Them All
He has been removed from public view. Green Monkey is going to stud, in 2009.
Green Monkey is probably the most infamous non-winning horse of all time. But it's not his fault.
Because he ran one furlong in 9.75 seconds at a 2YO HIT sale in Florida in 2006, two people took it into their heads that they'd like to own him. Through their surrogates Demi O'Byrne and John Ferguson they pushed his 'value' at auction to US$16 million at which figure the Coolmore interests had the last say. Not a bad twist on the US$425,000 the colt had cost as a yearling and rivalling the best excesses perpetrated prior to the fall of the Roman Empire.
I have a lot of trouble with the concept that a painting can be worth $50 million or more, but I know no unraced horse is worth US$16 million. At least a painting is a thing of permanence, unless thieves walk into your art gallery in broad daylight and steal it from under your nose, which seems to be happening frequently these days.
Meantime, human beings are being hacked to death and raped in Darfur and dying for a square meal elsewhere.
Green Monkey ran three times, finishing third and fourth twice. Under the USA's leading trainer Todd Pletcher, he banked $10,440. He is, roughly speaking, a 50% blood relation to a multiple G2 winning filly. His sire Forestry (Storm Cat) has sired 30 stakeswinners, three G1 winners amongst them. His dam Magical Masquerade (Unbridled) won one race. There is an Australian connection - her winless first foal is named Byron Bay.
It's been announced Green Monkey will stand at the Florida stud operated by the guys who sold him at that HIT sale. They could hardly decline the offer. I'm sure they will be knocked over with applications.
Personally, I reckon he is the Arabs' revenge for the now second-most-famous winless horse of all time, Snaafi Dancer. They waited 23 years.
Green Monkey is probably the most infamous non-winning horse of all time. But it's not his fault.
Because he ran one furlong in 9.75 seconds at a 2YO HIT sale in Florida in 2006, two people took it into their heads that they'd like to own him. Through their surrogates Demi O'Byrne and John Ferguson they pushed his 'value' at auction to US$16 million at which figure the Coolmore interests had the last say. Not a bad twist on the US$425,000 the colt had cost as a yearling and rivalling the best excesses perpetrated prior to the fall of the Roman Empire.
I have a lot of trouble with the concept that a painting can be worth $50 million or more, but I know no unraced horse is worth US$16 million. At least a painting is a thing of permanence, unless thieves walk into your art gallery in broad daylight and steal it from under your nose, which seems to be happening frequently these days.
Meantime, human beings are being hacked to death and raped in Darfur and dying for a square meal elsewhere.
Green Monkey ran three times, finishing third and fourth twice. Under the USA's leading trainer Todd Pletcher, he banked $10,440. He is, roughly speaking, a 50% blood relation to a multiple G2 winning filly. His sire Forestry (Storm Cat) has sired 30 stakeswinners, three G1 winners amongst them. His dam Magical Masquerade (Unbridled) won one race. There is an Australian connection - her winless first foal is named Byron Bay.
It's been announced Green Monkey will stand at the Florida stud operated by the guys who sold him at that HIT sale. They could hardly decline the offer. I'm sure they will be knocked over with applications.
Personally, I reckon he is the Arabs' revenge for the now second-most-famous winless horse of all time, Snaafi Dancer. They waited 23 years.
Now That's Unusual
I often wonder how some horses end up where they end up.
Take for instance a New Zealand-bred mare named Penpont, by Crested Wave (USA), who is distinguishing herself at stud in California.
Yesterday her 3YO filly Golden Doc A scored in the G1 Las Virgenes Stakes, a US$250,000 mile for 3YO fillies at Santa Anita.
Golden Doc A is the second graded stakes winner produced by Penpont; her 4YO brother Unusual Suspect is a G3 winner of six races and almost half a million dollars.
In fact, Penpont has had five foals, all winners and all sired by an obscure stallion (outside California) named Unusual Heat who stands at Olde English Rancho in California.
Unusual Heat is a now 18-year-old son of Nureyev out of the Danish mare Rossard who was the champion 3YO in Scandinavia, winning five classics. In 1994, Unusual Heat won Listed races at Fairyhouse and Leopardstown in Ireland.
Penpont, the mare, was bred in 1994 by Tony Cook from Ashburton who had a share in Crested Wave in the latter half of that stallion's stud career. She was a sibling of nothing in particular but her dam Imposing Star was a daughter of the fine filly Black Willow (Sobig), dam also of English Charm (Noble Bijou).
Penpont was trained and part-owned for racing by Sam Ballantyne, a Christchurch-based Scotsman who was, and may still be for all I know, a big wheel in the trotting business. She raced twice in New Zealand for a second placing then for some reason was exported to the USA where she was a one-time winner.
Perhaps it was through Sam's standardbred connections that an outlet was found for Penpont in the States, but it would be interesting to know why/how an apparently modestly credentialled filly ended up being sent there.
She is certainly doing one heck of a job at stud. Her G1 daughter changed ownership not long before Saturday's victory and is now owned by Lexington, Kentucky connections so it's reasonable to surmise that she will go east when her racing days are over.
Take for instance a New Zealand-bred mare named Penpont, by Crested Wave (USA), who is distinguishing herself at stud in California.
Yesterday her 3YO filly Golden Doc A scored in the G1 Las Virgenes Stakes, a US$250,000 mile for 3YO fillies at Santa Anita.
Golden Doc A is the second graded stakes winner produced by Penpont; her 4YO brother Unusual Suspect is a G3 winner of six races and almost half a million dollars.
In fact, Penpont has had five foals, all winners and all sired by an obscure stallion (outside California) named Unusual Heat who stands at Olde English Rancho in California.
Unusual Heat is a now 18-year-old son of Nureyev out of the Danish mare Rossard who was the champion 3YO in Scandinavia, winning five classics. In 1994, Unusual Heat won Listed races at Fairyhouse and Leopardstown in Ireland.
Penpont, the mare, was bred in 1994 by Tony Cook from Ashburton who had a share in Crested Wave in the latter half of that stallion's stud career. She was a sibling of nothing in particular but her dam Imposing Star was a daughter of the fine filly Black Willow (Sobig), dam also of English Charm (Noble Bijou).
Penpont was trained and part-owned for racing by Sam Ballantyne, a Christchurch-based Scotsman who was, and may still be for all I know, a big wheel in the trotting business. She raced twice in New Zealand for a second placing then for some reason was exported to the USA where she was a one-time winner.
Perhaps it was through Sam's standardbred connections that an outlet was found for Penpont in the States, but it would be interesting to know why/how an apparently modestly credentialled filly ended up being sent there.
She is certainly doing one heck of a job at stud. Her G1 daughter changed ownership not long before Saturday's victory and is now owned by Lexington, Kentucky connections so it's reasonable to surmise that she will go east when her racing days are over.
The Vexed Question Of Tracks
Providing suitable racing surfaces, and the preparation of tracks, is a subject of worldwide interest and seemingly never-ending difference of opinion.
The interests of horses, their owners, jockeys and trainers and the punters need to be married to produce a racing product which is fair and delivers full benefits to all.
It’s a serious but vexed issue. Vast amounts of money are spent in research and trial and error to come up with hoped-for ideal solutions.
We read repeatedly about the installation of artificial surfaces and subsequent maintenance problems – recently, Santa Anita had to stop racing on its new artificial surface to allow it to be doctored back to health – and we know only too well the frustrating problems experienced on many of our own turf courses in recent times.
Racing Victoria’s policy announced a couple of years ago to produce tracks no better than a Good 3 (defined as an ‘ideal track with some give’) was mildly controversial at the time (come on down, Maykbe Diva) though it was assumed that this would be beneficial to participants. But, if anything, inconsistency and bias has become more commonplace, something which sends punters up the wall.
Recently Racing Victoria undertook a review of this policy and submissions were invited on the subject. I noticed on Gai’s website a submission forwarded by Rob Waterhouse which I thought contained a number of interesting points and which challenged the common wisdom – hardly a novelty for Rob. With Rob’s permission, I reproduce it here and invite comments.
The interests of horses, their owners, jockeys and trainers and the punters need to be married to produce a racing product which is fair and delivers full benefits to all.
It’s a serious but vexed issue. Vast amounts of money are spent in research and trial and error to come up with hoped-for ideal solutions.
We read repeatedly about the installation of artificial surfaces and subsequent maintenance problems – recently, Santa Anita had to stop racing on its new artificial surface to allow it to be doctored back to health – and we know only too well the frustrating problems experienced on many of our own turf courses in recent times.
Racing Victoria’s policy announced a couple of years ago to produce tracks no better than a Good 3 (defined as an ‘ideal track with some give’) was mildly controversial at the time (come on down, Maykbe Diva) though it was assumed that this would be beneficial to participants. But, if anything, inconsistency and bias has become more commonplace, something which sends punters up the wall.
Recently Racing Victoria undertook a review of this policy and submissions were invited on the subject. I noticed on Gai’s website a submission forwarded by Rob Waterhouse which I thought contained a number of interesting points and which challenged the common wisdom – hardly a novelty for Rob. With Rob’s permission, I reproduce it here and invite comments.
--------------------------------------
I have read the very detailed RVL Racecourse Maintenance Guideline (RMG) and the November 2005 Track Preparation Policy (TPP).
I believe the Track Preparation Policy is of huge importance to the racing industry.
I further believe the policy is pernicious to racing.
The current TPP can be summed by the belief that tracks should be prepared with “some give in the ground”, erring on the soft side.
It’s often said “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Similarly, the current TPP is well intentioned but, in my view, very harmful.
The arguments for the current TPP appear self evident and seem “motherhood statements”:
- kinder to the horses
- produces a more sustainable product (by not breaking horses down)
- produces bigger fields
- fairer to owners
I say these arguments are fallacious and the TPP is very damaging. I will deal with the arguments later.
The reality is, I say, that this TPP:
- diminishes betting turnover markedly and consequently reduces revenue to the industry
- creates biased tracks which undermine punters’ confidence
- is a disadvantage to breeders of tough, colonial stock
- makes racing bland
- undermines the integrity of racing
- is a large cost burden to the industry
To deal with these:
Diminishes Betting Turnover
1. With my bookmaking business, my turnover falls once a track is dead or worse. Punters won’t bet as freely on affected tracks. My first hand experience is echoed by all bookmakers.
2. I am involved in a business taking exotics with various totes with about $50m turnover per annum. As much as possible is bet based on models with a view to maximizing profit. These models reduce the turnover by about 20 per cent on affected tracks because firstly, the public turnover is smaller and secondly, the randomness makes it harder to find value. The senior partner of the world’s largest punting syndicate told me they adopt the same strategy.
3. Every punter I know dislikes dead and slow tracks. They know these goings are more random. Only Racing could not realize its only ‘customers’ are punters and force on them what they don’t want.
4. I am indebted to Mr Doug Freeman of the TAB for the table below. It shows how much less is bet with TABCorp on affected tracks. I draw your attention to Victorian Metropolitan drop off – over 20 per cent.
% Average Turnover Impact By Track Condition – FY07 (compared to Good)
DOW - Region - Dead - Slow - Heavy
Saturday NSW – Metro -0.4% -17.3% -20.7%
VIC – Metro -24.4% -15.5% -32.5%
Other Days NSW – Metro -9.0% -0.3% -20.6%
QLD – Metro -14.2% -12.0% -33.4%
VIC – Metro -26.0% -21.2% -21.7%
All NSW – Country -1.8% -11.9% -2.3%
NSW – Provincial -14.2% -13.8% -26.4%
QLD – Country 0.9% -18.0% 23.0%
VIC – Country -6.4% -3.7% -16.0%
Total VIC/NSW/QLD -6.2% -9.6% -8.2%
Creates Biased Tracks
I hope it is generally recognized that watering creates biases. The fence is often worse because of natural drainage. Irrigation inhibits root growth so parts of tracks give way. The man in charge of the gallops and racecourses at Newmarket (UK) told me that irrigation of a ‘gallop’ reduced the type of grasses there from about 100 to three.
There are many instances if biased tracks in Victoria, notwithstanding the recent dry conditions. I am obliged to professional punter, owner, breeder, journalist Peter Lawrence for some recent examples:
* “Werribee Cup Day: no winner drawn outside four, no winner three wide or wider on the turn…”
* “Werribee 28/11: meeting abandoned before any races run, no rain for seven days, parts of the track slow to heavy…”
* Geelong 2/12: again no rain, track downgraded to slow before the first, and jockeys to outside fence in the straight…”
* Sandown Lakeside latest two meetings, track DEAD all day…”
* Turnbull Stakes Day and Final Day Flemington Cup carnival where winners were seemingly random horses and form irrelevant…”
The casino laws make it a jailable offence to create bias in any way in, say, a roulette wheel. I, for one, would support severe sanctions against course curators who create biased tracks. Perhaps a public flogging in the betting ring after the last? There would be no difficulty finding floggers.
It is notworthy in the UK, where there is proprietary racing, course curators are sacked by track owners if they produce what punters hate – biased tracks. They know it attacks turnover and their profits.
Our worst Sydney track for bias was Gosford. The course curator was sacked and God was placed in charge. Within a short period the track was perfect. God was free.
Colonial Breeders
Australian-bred breeding stock are disadvantaged by this TPP. Soft-boned imported stock are advantaged. Progeny of the imported stock have reduced racing lives – in the UK they have a handful of starts each year. The current TPP jeopardizes our future breed. I think it will have a marked effect on racing in the future – we’ll have a lot of horses who can’t stand up to racing.
Blandness
Denying racing of fast (1) and Good (2) tracks robs racing of its diversity.
Cost of Implementation
Reading the marvelously detailed RMG and the TPP, I am struck at the money it must cost to implement these misguided policies. They say in excess of $20 million has been squandered at Randwick in replacing the best track in Australia with two well-below-par courses. In my mind, it is a tragedy that racing has been able to afford these wastes. To me, the current TPP is an expensive exercise which is very detrimental to racing. I refer you to the Gosford example above.
I’d be interested in knowing the cost of this high-tech TPP? I suspect that it is a very large sum.
Integrity
The results of races are very much affected by this TPP and it must damage racing’s reputation. Pity help the owner of a horse ‘best on firm going’, he never gets a turn.
It is a clear lack of honesty in that no tracks are described as 1s, 2s or 10s even though they are many, according to my figures. The TPP even appears to instruct course curators to misreport firm tracks (on page 5 at point 7 of the RMG).
Kinder To Horses
Well, horses don’t like it. It is a fallacy to say they do. They won’t stretch out as they do on fast/good tracks. The best mudlark runs slower times in wet going – he just dislikes it less than others.
A More Sustainable Product
My wife Gai, a trainer, says: My horses are more likely to break down on affected tracks than dry. It is a myth that softer tracks are kinder to horses. They only race for a minute or two but soft tracks can wreak havoc with them. I hate these over-watered tracks”.
A vet of Gai’s says: “you could expect more fetlock hyper-extension injuries like tendon injuries, avulsion injuries of sesamoids etc”.
John Hawkes replied to an email I sent him: “I agree, I do not like the water policy and prefer firmer tracks.”
I concede some trainers think they like affected tracks. Were they asked: “Would you prefer to race on the current softer tracks for the current prizemoney or on firmer tracks for 10% or 20% extra prizemoney?” not one would say the former. Those trainers should study the TAB figures.
I am indebted to Mr Len Loveday, a prominent punter and statistician. His research (1995 to 2005) shows clearly horses with a high number of career starts have a higher percentage of dry track starts. Dry tracks last longer.
Produces Bigger Fields
Loveday also shows that (1995 to now, a total of 273,000 races) in Victoria, field sizes have been bigger when the trcks were fast and good as against dead, slow, heavy. I concede this, on his figures, is no reflected Australia-wide, I’d argue that is because places (like outback places) where fast and good track predominate, fields are normally smaller.
Fairer To Owners
I speak from personal experience, I regularly hear my wife Gai trying to convince owners to let their horses start when the going is affected. They hate wet tracks for “their” horse.
For the sake of fullness, may I add:
I note the TPP and RMG advocate rolling. Leading world track expert Michael Dickinson told me that no turf track should ever be rolled. “Rolling and grass courses should never be used in the same breath.” Michael is responsible/consults/consulted for Manton, Ballydoyle, the Maktoums and has provided many courses around the USA. He is also a great trainer and horseman.
I say, the improvement a track makes during racing is imaginary, and easily shown to be such by a proper study. Tracks can deteriorate but never improve.
I re-draw your attention to the TAB turnover figures and ask you to reassess the impact on racing prizemoney and consequently racing participants.
I call upon Racing Victoria to replace its current TPP.
May I supplement by submission on tracks with these points:
1. I draw attention to Dr Mumford’s thesis on Going Management. He says much of interest to Australian racing. Two points stick in my mind in particular. Firstly, he is critical of inconsistent going (as caused by artificial watering) saying how injury prone it is. Secondly, he gives a properly researched table for injury to horses on various goings – our dead (their ‘good to soft’) is worse than ‘good to firm’ and ‘good’.
2. I note there has been newspaper discussion of the Caulfield going on Boxing Day. I note the Stewards’ report said the connections thought the firmness of the track caused two horses to be disadvantaged. The Stewards found that, in fact, one was galloped on, the other was sore (perhaps from the track). I further note that the results were in line with the form book and punters had no reason to complain.
Also:
1. On Saturday January 12 at Caulfield there were 8 horses which had had 40 starts or more, nil which had 100 starts or more.
2. On the same day at Doomben there were 26 who had had 40 starts or more, 3 which had 100 starts or more.
3. Melbourne has the watering policy, Brisbane normally has fast tracks, notwithstanding they misdescribed as good, yet horses ‘last’ longer on the firm tracks.
Passing Of The Baton?
Are we seeing the passing of the baton? To Exceed And Excel. Or is it too early to say?
All but one of his nine prizemoney earners (including four Group winners) to date have been in Victoria, but this is an aberration due to the EI effect in NSW, which means expect more fireworks to unfold in Sydney this autumn.
Remember Redoute's Choice? Used to be a good sire!
Fine yearling and racehorse that he was, Exceed And Excel does not carry a drop of Australian blood in his veins though, of course, he was bred here and 'proven' under Australian conditions. And he's Northern Dancer 3 x 3 through different sons. Just like Desert King, but two horses more aptitudinally different you couldn't find.
Exceed and Excel was bred by Ananda Krishnan at his Kia Ora Stud soon after he bought the place and set about rejuvenating it back to its former glory. Just last week Kia Ora-bred three-year-olds Acoustical and Playwright won Group races in South Africa and Australia respectively, and from just 11 yearlings of their own breeding offered at last year's sales, two have already won as two-year-olds this season. A force to watch out for. One of Kia Ora's great assets is that it's a big farm deliberately understocked, which gives their developing young horses every chance.
Exceed And Excel's dam Patrona died in 2006 but she has two other young sire sons, Patronise (by Redoute's, therefore three-quarters to E&E) who is at Kia Ora on what you might call an informal basis - though that's sure to change - and Listed winner Enemy Of Average, by FuPeg.
Talking about passing of the baton, Exceed And Excel leads the charge for Darley who are locked in a worldwide battle with Coolmore for bloodstock supremacy. Coolmore will be hoping they have a counterpunch next year in the form of Fastnet Rock. But Darley's resources are such that the pendulum could be about to swing away from the Irish, at least in this part of the world. Sooner or later the avalanche of money must talk.
Today, one of Darley's despised sires Fantastic Light (also the sire of aforementioned Playwright) had a Gr 1 winner in NZ in the form of 3YO Mission Critical who beat a basically weak collection of older horses over 2000m at WFA at Te Rapa.
Mission Critical was bred by Darley and sold on their behalf in New Zealand by Haunui Farm for NZ$75,000 at Karaka 2006.
Darley sold off his dam Trick Taker (USA), by Capote, at last year's Magic Millions Broodmare Sale for just $70,000, in foal to ... you guessed it, Exceed And Excel! Well spotted Paul Willetts, who bought her for Oakland Stud's Neville Stewart (for what will prove a lot less than this year's service fee to E&E), and she produced a filly last September. Trick Taker (USA) is a magnificently-bred mare being out of a Mr Prospector mare out of a Gr 2 winning Northern Dancer daughter of champion Dahlia, by Vaguely Noble.
That's upside with a capital U!!
All but one of his nine prizemoney earners (including four Group winners) to date have been in Victoria, but this is an aberration due to the EI effect in NSW, which means expect more fireworks to unfold in Sydney this autumn.
Remember Redoute's Choice? Used to be a good sire!
Fine yearling and racehorse that he was, Exceed And Excel does not carry a drop of Australian blood in his veins though, of course, he was bred here and 'proven' under Australian conditions. And he's Northern Dancer 3 x 3 through different sons. Just like Desert King, but two horses more aptitudinally different you couldn't find.
Exceed and Excel was bred by Ananda Krishnan at his Kia Ora Stud soon after he bought the place and set about rejuvenating it back to its former glory. Just last week Kia Ora-bred three-year-olds Acoustical and Playwright won Group races in South Africa and Australia respectively, and from just 11 yearlings of their own breeding offered at last year's sales, two have already won as two-year-olds this season. A force to watch out for. One of Kia Ora's great assets is that it's a big farm deliberately understocked, which gives their developing young horses every chance.
Exceed And Excel's dam Patrona died in 2006 but she has two other young sire sons, Patronise (by Redoute's, therefore three-quarters to E&E) who is at Kia Ora on what you might call an informal basis - though that's sure to change - and Listed winner Enemy Of Average, by FuPeg.
Talking about passing of the baton, Exceed And Excel leads the charge for Darley who are locked in a worldwide battle with Coolmore for bloodstock supremacy. Coolmore will be hoping they have a counterpunch next year in the form of Fastnet Rock. But Darley's resources are such that the pendulum could be about to swing away from the Irish, at least in this part of the world. Sooner or later the avalanche of money must talk.
Today, one of Darley's despised sires Fantastic Light (also the sire of aforementioned Playwright) had a Gr 1 winner in NZ in the form of 3YO Mission Critical who beat a basically weak collection of older horses over 2000m at WFA at Te Rapa.
Mission Critical was bred by Darley and sold on their behalf in New Zealand by Haunui Farm for NZ$75,000 at Karaka 2006.
Darley sold off his dam Trick Taker (USA), by Capote, at last year's Magic Millions Broodmare Sale for just $70,000, in foal to ... you guessed it, Exceed And Excel! Well spotted Paul Willetts, who bought her for Oakland Stud's Neville Stewart (for what will prove a lot less than this year's service fee to E&E), and she produced a filly last September. Trick Taker (USA) is a magnificently-bred mare being out of a Mr Prospector mare out of a Gr 2 winning Northern Dancer daughter of champion Dahlia, by Vaguely Noble.
That's upside with a capital U!!
Shopping In New Zealand
I'll probably have a more detailed look at the NZ yearling sales in a later post but although you must deduct a percentage from the sales figures for the usual "bullshit factor" the sales were healthy to say the least.
It's been going on since the dawn of time but the yearling sales figures proudly broadcast afterwards in the PR releases are exaggerations of where the true market is at. You have to make allowance for the retained percentages, buy-backs, sold-but-not-solds, some blatantly manufactured prices and all the customary smoke-and-mirrors which go on.
My shopping over there, with a modest budget as the sale unfolded, was confined to finding two potential middle distance colts. Eventually heading to a Melbourne stable is Lot 190, High Chaparral-Kaapentyne, by Kaapstad (NZ$260,000; his half-sister won a stakes earlier this week) whilst destined for Sydney is Lot 625, Golan-Double Owe, by Oregon (NZ$60,000). Don't expect to see either of these before they turn three.
It's now two years since I left behind the heady Waterhouse days when we not only bought a pile of good ones but for a variety of reasons also didn't buy a number we had clearly identified as superior. You never forget those! Since then, as a freelancer, I've bought only a small number of yearlings because I only have a small number of clients, which is the way I prefer it. My service to some clients is purely advisory rather than standing in the bidding for them. One such client spent $1.7 million on two 'approved' yearlings in 2007 (now 2YOs).
The oldest purchases are three-year-olds whose careers in the main have been stalled by the EI outbreak. Two who have recently got back to the track are Gently Bentley (Flying Spur-Tambara, by Thunder Gulch - Magic Millions 2006) and Scouting Wide (Zabeel-Gardd, by Sheikh Albadou - Karaka 2006) who should have won on debut at Randwick yesterday.
I also selected for a Melbourne client the Snowland filly Absolut Glam ($150,000 Magic Millions 2006), a smart filly which won first-up in black-type company in Melbourne in late January. To relate here the story of why the client is not racing that filly today would probably put me in jeopardy of the libel laws, but suffice to say she is not, nor has she bought a horse since.
I've had a fairly ordinary run so far with a group of fillies I bought, but those I have been underbidder on have done great!! I need a bit of luck, like in 1986 when I purchased future topline racemare Courtalista for just NZ$5,500, or I need Patinack Farm Mk II.
Anybody else do any shopping at Karaka?
It's been going on since the dawn of time but the yearling sales figures proudly broadcast afterwards in the PR releases are exaggerations of where the true market is at. You have to make allowance for the retained percentages, buy-backs, sold-but-not-solds, some blatantly manufactured prices and all the customary smoke-and-mirrors which go on.
My shopping over there, with a modest budget as the sale unfolded, was confined to finding two potential middle distance colts. Eventually heading to a Melbourne stable is Lot 190, High Chaparral-Kaapentyne, by Kaapstad (NZ$260,000; his half-sister won a stakes earlier this week) whilst destined for Sydney is Lot 625, Golan-Double Owe, by Oregon (NZ$60,000). Don't expect to see either of these before they turn three.
It's now two years since I left behind the heady Waterhouse days when we not only bought a pile of good ones but for a variety of reasons also didn't buy a number we had clearly identified as superior. You never forget those! Since then, as a freelancer, I've bought only a small number of yearlings because I only have a small number of clients, which is the way I prefer it. My service to some clients is purely advisory rather than standing in the bidding for them. One such client spent $1.7 million on two 'approved' yearlings in 2007 (now 2YOs).
The oldest purchases are three-year-olds whose careers in the main have been stalled by the EI outbreak. Two who have recently got back to the track are Gently Bentley (Flying Spur-Tambara, by Thunder Gulch - Magic Millions 2006) and Scouting Wide (Zabeel-Gardd, by Sheikh Albadou - Karaka 2006) who should have won on debut at Randwick yesterday.
I also selected for a Melbourne client the Snowland filly Absolut Glam ($150,000 Magic Millions 2006), a smart filly which won first-up in black-type company in Melbourne in late January. To relate here the story of why the client is not racing that filly today would probably put me in jeopardy of the libel laws, but suffice to say she is not, nor has she bought a horse since.
I've had a fairly ordinary run so far with a group of fillies I bought, but those I have been underbidder on have done great!! I need a bit of luck, like in 1986 when I purchased future topline racemare Courtalista for just NZ$5,500, or I need Patinack Farm Mk II.
Anybody else do any shopping at Karaka?
Staying The Course
The words Rob Waterhouse mean different things to different people. One thing that can't be argued, in my experience, is Rob's profound knowledge and understanding of racing. Having been in close proximity to him throughout my Tulloch Lodge days, I can attest to his wide scholarliness and intellectualism - he's a bright man.
Rob has kindly made a couple of contributions to the blog. The first of these was in reply to my piece on the insidious elimination of distance racing.
The way we're heading, if we're not careful, the genotype and phenotype of the Australian thoroughbred will be such that within a hundred years there will only be 'quarter horse thoroughbred racing' in this country. Some people - influential commercial breeders amongst them - think that's OK because we have proved we breed speed best - it's become our international brand image - and therefore we should exploit it to the exclusion of all else. But I doubt such homogenized racing will sustain mass appeal.
Rob's is a thought-provoking piece worth elevating to a posting in its own right, so I reproduce it here. I invite comments, but please stick to the subject and leave the writer alone, if you know what I mean.
Here's what Rob wrote:
Thoughts on re-establishing Australian distance racing
The great sadness of Australian racing is the gentle and gradual demise of distance racing. In spite of Group distance racing receiving a much larger proportion of prizemoney than distance racing should expect, the quality of staying races has become unsatisfactory and the number of races is declining. This situation must be maddening to the allocators of prizemoney.
The Melbourne Cup itself is evidence of this weakening – both the Cup winners and fields in general have too many imported elements (included New Zealand-bred horses), showing the weakness of the locals. Efficient (NZ) was a pleasing exception to the general 2006 VRC Derby form malaise.
It is a talking point that the subsequent form of recent Derby winners and runners has been woeful. Many reasons are given but I say the reasons generally put forward are not the true driving forces against the staying races, and misexplain the dynamics of the situation.
There is a general concensus that staying races should be maintained for the sake of the breed as well as the spectacle and our international racing reputation. I believe there are two reasons for the decline, interestingly these are both unrecognized as such.
In my view the major reason is the near abandonment of the handicapper’s most important tool – the weight-for-age (WFA) scale for non-group races. Also, handicappers feel/are constrained to handicap “on performance” rather than correctly aiming at equalising runners’ chances.
The lesser factor is the pernicious bonus prizemoney system each State uses that diverts prospective horse buyers from the “best” horses to the local product. This pollution of the free market system is, in reality, a strong bias against stayers.
The major reason – the weight-for-age factor. In essence, there has been a large change in non-Group One handicapping regarding the use of the WFA scale in recent years. The time-proven WFA scale has been supplanted by an inferior, dare I say, puerile scale. In simple terms, the new scale is very muted and inexplicably, ignores distance as a factor. This important change has never been ventilated or publicly debated.
To illustrate the change, under the old WFA scale a three-year-old in early November over 3200m would receive, till about 25 years ago, about 13 kilos from a four-year-old of equal standing. Under the modern official WFA, it is now about 10 kilos. But, under the current non-Group One scale, only 1.5 kilos is allowed - a huge difference.
This shift has been allowed to occur for probably three reasons:
First, connections complain only about too much weight at the top of the weights – complaints are never made about runners on the limit being over weighted or too close to the top weights.
Second, it is said three-year-olds are well catered for with plenty of races for their own age. The handicappers would also say that soon-to-be-top-class three-year-olds would dominate. Of course, that is the problem when handicapping is done by formula, as they are presently constrained to do, rather than to equalise runners.
Additionally, the handicappers and form students would argue that the WFA “only works with Group One (i.e. top class) racing”. I believe the old scale is accurate with all open class races and works in a diluted form with restricted races (the weaker the races, the less effect) to the extent it has no relevance in maiden class.
It would also be said that many three-year-olds would find themselves on the limit but ‘out of the handicap’ (should be well less than the limit) in handicaps. But, conversely, the new Ratings Based Races provide great opportunities for staying three-year-olds. The biggest effect of this shift is that three-year-olds don’t compete in open-age distance races. Consequently, they are not bought or trained to be stayers. Moreover, those three-year-olds who compete in three-year-old distance races are usually “second division” i.e. failed over shorter courses.
Good racing is built appropriately on the fortunes of two and three-year-old horses. For instance, my wife, Gai, has only a handful of four-plus aged horses in her stable. Punters are mostly interested in young, exciting horses. And staying events need the young competitors to make them interesting. If the full WFA scale allowance were given, three-year-olds would, quite rightly, win more all-aged staying races than any other age group. I believe three-year-olds were the most successful Melbourne Cup group till the Second World War.
The minor (but still important) reason – the bonus systems. Protectionism has infected horse racing for a long time. The notorious Jersey Act effectively barred US and Australian race horses from racing in the UK from about 1913 till about 1949. English racing was poorer for it. The French discriminated against foreign (UK) horses racing in France for many years as did Germany – they now regard that policy as a foolish mistake. The American “state-bred” races are a blight. Today, it’s hard to race our horses in Japan and Hong Kong because of protectionism.
For about 20 years Australian racing has had different bonus schemes, off and on. Today, they are VOBIS, BOBS, SABIS, QTIS, Magic Millions etc. They are, in effect, devices set up to aid the local breeding industry at the expense of yearling purchasers’ choice - a conspiracy against the laity and not in the general interest of racing. It’s ironic that at a time when “liberals” have convinced most of the world of “free trade” advantages, racing has gone down the seedy, protectionist path, and it is a shame.
These schemes point purchasers to buy “home breds”. For example, Queensland trainer Bruce McLachlan attributes his demise as a top Australian trainer to restricting himself to Queensland-breds, to take advantage of the QBIS and QRIS.
However, the big loser, with no Australian-type bonus scheme to support itself, is New Zealand. The reduction of New Zealand imports to Australia is a matter of record. The numbers have dropped more than 25 per cent and the median value is well down. This has had a big impact on “staying-bred” horses. New Zealand is our fountainhead of the staying pool. This has been an unintended effect of the bonus scheme but a serious and pernicious one. It is ironic that these bonus races are only available to 2yos and 3yos, yet, in this way, they work against them.
Conclusion: I have no doubt that if:
• The WFA scale was made to be used by the handicapper (as well as handicapping to equalise runners’ chances) in all open class races, and in a diluted way in restricted races; and
• The bonus schemes were abandoned,
then the quality of distance races would respond dramatically and a great contribution would be made to Australian racing.
Rob has kindly made a couple of contributions to the blog. The first of these was in reply to my piece on the insidious elimination of distance racing.
The way we're heading, if we're not careful, the genotype and phenotype of the Australian thoroughbred will be such that within a hundred years there will only be 'quarter horse thoroughbred racing' in this country. Some people - influential commercial breeders amongst them - think that's OK because we have proved we breed speed best - it's become our international brand image - and therefore we should exploit it to the exclusion of all else. But I doubt such homogenized racing will sustain mass appeal.
Rob's is a thought-provoking piece worth elevating to a posting in its own right, so I reproduce it here. I invite comments, but please stick to the subject and leave the writer alone, if you know what I mean.
Here's what Rob wrote:
Thoughts on re-establishing Australian distance racing
The great sadness of Australian racing is the gentle and gradual demise of distance racing. In spite of Group distance racing receiving a much larger proportion of prizemoney than distance racing should expect, the quality of staying races has become unsatisfactory and the number of races is declining. This situation must be maddening to the allocators of prizemoney.
The Melbourne Cup itself is evidence of this weakening – both the Cup winners and fields in general have too many imported elements (included New Zealand-bred horses), showing the weakness of the locals. Efficient (NZ) was a pleasing exception to the general 2006 VRC Derby form malaise.
It is a talking point that the subsequent form of recent Derby winners and runners has been woeful. Many reasons are given but I say the reasons generally put forward are not the true driving forces against the staying races, and misexplain the dynamics of the situation.
There is a general concensus that staying races should be maintained for the sake of the breed as well as the spectacle and our international racing reputation. I believe there are two reasons for the decline, interestingly these are both unrecognized as such.
In my view the major reason is the near abandonment of the handicapper’s most important tool – the weight-for-age (WFA) scale for non-group races. Also, handicappers feel/are constrained to handicap “on performance” rather than correctly aiming at equalising runners’ chances.
The lesser factor is the pernicious bonus prizemoney system each State uses that diverts prospective horse buyers from the “best” horses to the local product. This pollution of the free market system is, in reality, a strong bias against stayers.
The major reason – the weight-for-age factor. In essence, there has been a large change in non-Group One handicapping regarding the use of the WFA scale in recent years. The time-proven WFA scale has been supplanted by an inferior, dare I say, puerile scale. In simple terms, the new scale is very muted and inexplicably, ignores distance as a factor. This important change has never been ventilated or publicly debated.
To illustrate the change, under the old WFA scale a three-year-old in early November over 3200m would receive, till about 25 years ago, about 13 kilos from a four-year-old of equal standing. Under the modern official WFA, it is now about 10 kilos. But, under the current non-Group One scale, only 1.5 kilos is allowed - a huge difference.
This shift has been allowed to occur for probably three reasons:
First, connections complain only about too much weight at the top of the weights – complaints are never made about runners on the limit being over weighted or too close to the top weights.
Second, it is said three-year-olds are well catered for with plenty of races for their own age. The handicappers would also say that soon-to-be-top-class three-year-olds would dominate. Of course, that is the problem when handicapping is done by formula, as they are presently constrained to do, rather than to equalise runners.
Additionally, the handicappers and form students would argue that the WFA “only works with Group One (i.e. top class) racing”. I believe the old scale is accurate with all open class races and works in a diluted form with restricted races (the weaker the races, the less effect) to the extent it has no relevance in maiden class.
It would also be said that many three-year-olds would find themselves on the limit but ‘out of the handicap’ (should be well less than the limit) in handicaps. But, conversely, the new Ratings Based Races provide great opportunities for staying three-year-olds. The biggest effect of this shift is that three-year-olds don’t compete in open-age distance races. Consequently, they are not bought or trained to be stayers. Moreover, those three-year-olds who compete in three-year-old distance races are usually “second division” i.e. failed over shorter courses.
Good racing is built appropriately on the fortunes of two and three-year-old horses. For instance, my wife, Gai, has only a handful of four-plus aged horses in her stable. Punters are mostly interested in young, exciting horses. And staying events need the young competitors to make them interesting. If the full WFA scale allowance were given, three-year-olds would, quite rightly, win more all-aged staying races than any other age group. I believe three-year-olds were the most successful Melbourne Cup group till the Second World War.
The minor (but still important) reason – the bonus systems. Protectionism has infected horse racing for a long time. The notorious Jersey Act effectively barred US and Australian race horses from racing in the UK from about 1913 till about 1949. English racing was poorer for it. The French discriminated against foreign (UK) horses racing in France for many years as did Germany – they now regard that policy as a foolish mistake. The American “state-bred” races are a blight. Today, it’s hard to race our horses in Japan and Hong Kong because of protectionism.
For about 20 years Australian racing has had different bonus schemes, off and on. Today, they are VOBIS, BOBS, SABIS, QTIS, Magic Millions etc. They are, in effect, devices set up to aid the local breeding industry at the expense of yearling purchasers’ choice - a conspiracy against the laity and not in the general interest of racing. It’s ironic that at a time when “liberals” have convinced most of the world of “free trade” advantages, racing has gone down the seedy, protectionist path, and it is a shame.
These schemes point purchasers to buy “home breds”. For example, Queensland trainer Bruce McLachlan attributes his demise as a top Australian trainer to restricting himself to Queensland-breds, to take advantage of the QBIS and QRIS.
However, the big loser, with no Australian-type bonus scheme to support itself, is New Zealand. The reduction of New Zealand imports to Australia is a matter of record. The numbers have dropped more than 25 per cent and the median value is well down. This has had a big impact on “staying-bred” horses. New Zealand is our fountainhead of the staying pool. This has been an unintended effect of the bonus scheme but a serious and pernicious one. It is ironic that these bonus races are only available to 2yos and 3yos, yet, in this way, they work against them.
Conclusion: I have no doubt that if:
• The WFA scale was made to be used by the handicapper (as well as handicapping to equalise runners’ chances) in all open class races, and in a diluted way in restricted races; and
• The bonus schemes were abandoned,
then the quality of distance races would respond dramatically and a great contribution would be made to Australian racing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
