Hi PN. Just wondering if you could clarify something for me that I'm researching atm. Is it known exactly how many foundation mares there were? I've seen different numbers bandied about, and results from genetic analysis seem to differ to those from pedigree analysis and I'm getting a little confused. Thanks!
There was actually the kernel of a good discussion earlier on this thread but it degenerated into a farce because 'someone' was trying to prove a point. It was about the relative merits of stallions, although I did enjoy you pointing out the 'value' of Sixties Icon. However if you consider the 4 stallions Galileo, New Approach, Sea the Stars and Frankel I feel it's acceptable to ask a few questions:- 1. Would you rather have 4 nominations to New Approach or 1 to Frankel? 2. Sea the Stars and Frankel are yet to have runners but who of the two is likely to be the better stallion? You could argue that StS comes from a better stallion producing family than Frankel (and New Approach). 3. Are any of the three likely to eclipse Galileo 4. Are any of the 4 likely to eclipse Northern Dancer. I'm probably according New Approach a tad too much respect after one 2yo crop but it was impressive. At the same time the expectations on Frankel are huge. He was a much better racehorse than Galileo yet Galileo is a super sire, who not only sires great racehorses but looks as if he may do the same with sires. The likelihood of Frankel siring a horse better than himself is small. Galileo has done it.
Those are interesting questions! I'd say at the moment that, if your intention is to race then the answer to question 1 would be 4 by New Approach. However, if your intention is to breed to sell then you would want the Frankel! Sea the Stars is yet to have any runners, yet his sales average has been over £400,000 - almost 6 times his stud fee (if converted to sterling). Arguably, he yearlings will never be worth more than in the first two years, before he has runners. Sea the Stars certainly has the better stallion pedigree, at the moment, 2 of his 3 brothers at stud have been very successful. Frankel does not yet have that opportunity, being out of a young mare, but he does represent two of the best European bloodlines - a champion sire in Galileo for his father and a champion sire and champion broodmare sire in Danehill as his maternal grand-sire. It is unlikely that Frankel, or Sea the Stars, will ever sire a horse as good as themselves. Bloodstock experts pften talk about "the regression to the mean", meaning that Champions tend to be bred from good, but not outstanding horses, and Champions tend to breed only good horses. In answer to your final question, it will be another 30 years or so before we know whether any of them can eclipse Northern Dancer's achievements!
Cheveley Park Fees for 2013: DUTCH ART: £18,000 (2012: £12,000) KYLLACHY: £12,500 (2012; £10,000) MAYSON: £8,000 NEW MEDICEAN: £10,000 (2012: £8,000) PIVOTAL: £45,000 (2012: £45,000) VIRTUAL: £3,500 (2012: £4,000)
Random, you question is a complicated one to answer! According to the Family Tables of Racehorses the number of families break down as follows: 74 English Thoroughbred 26 English Half-Bred 39 American 36 Australian 2 Argentine 2 Polish In terms of the number of Foundation Mares, I'll have to investigate further!
Cheveley Park seem a bit under the weather. Pivotal was at 70,000 a few years back I think. He doesn't seem to have done so much lately. I think I understand what they mean by regression to the mean because in the main racehorses will on average be significantly no better or no worse today than the average horse was yesterday. So most of a stallions produce will fall in the bands of the mean plus or minus a few sigma. Let's say taking the ORs given to horses that the mean is about 85 then most horses are in the 60-110 band. The horses that we talk about on this forum are those, in the main, that are higher than 110. When it comes to stallions I suppose a good stallion may have a better mean for his produce than a bad stallion but the thing that probably sets him apart is how many animals they produce that are plus 115, plus 120 etc. I guess that equates to stakes race winners. So I suppose for a champion racehorse a la Frankel it is as difficult to get those + 115, + 120 horses as it is for other sires because that's the way of the world even if he is a 140 horse. But Sadler's Wells got a better horse than himself in Galileo and Galileo got a better horse than himself in Frankel. I agree Frankel's odds of getting a horse better than himself are absolutely miniscule, but he may get horses better than his sire. That in itself would be something. It will be a fine achievement if he's as good a sire as Galileo, but difficult because there's only one Frankel to be sired.
Agreed Bustino, and as I said earlier in the thread Galileo has got off to a good start as a sire of sires with only a small number of sobs at stud. Sadler's Wells took a long time to produce a good stallion son in In The Wings, to the point that some were starting to write him off as "just" a filly sire. Then in the mid/late 90s, 10 years after he went to stud, things started to come together for him.
Peter Chapple-Hyam to train Hydrogen Hydrogen, the most expensive yearling sold in the world during 2012 and a half-brother to Authorized, will be sent to trainer Peter Chapple-Hyam. Over the weekend Qatar Racing held a parade at Tweenhills Stud in Gloucestershire to announce which of their yearling purchases would go to which of their trainers.
More news - BULLET TRAIN has been sold to stand at stud in Kentucky. A very interesting move and signs that the US are keen to bring stamina back into the US bloodlines. No fee or exact location has been announced yet. Bustino, with regards to Pivotal, you are right that his fee has fallen in recent years (a high of £85,000 in 2007 and 2008). He is almost 20, so no longer in his first flush of youth, but he is still covering good book sizes - 116 and 125 in 2011 and 2012. FARHH and IZZI TOP have been his best performers in 2012, so he has had a good year.
Thanks pN. One tends to miss some performers just under the top division. He was a real hit as a sire 10 years ago and Sariska put him right to the fore.
Random, Been reading a book on the Royal Studs, and this goes back to the 1500s. Not much use to you but in the first GSB provided by Wetherby in about 1780 for Thoroughbreds there were a lot of the Royal mares. I don't know when the English Thoroughbred came about but just when racing was becoming popular they were importing a lot of Moroccan mares and present day Syrian mares, especially from Aleppo. One famous mare the Royal Studs imported and owned was the Barb Mare who became the ancestor of many great horses. One interesting story I liked was that the imported stallion the Byerley Turk was actually ridden by his owner at the Battle of the Boyne!!! They have a cushy time these days.
Thank you Princess and Bustino. I was writing an article on the subject, and eventually sort of fudged the subject and just said it's still unclear but research suggests blah blah. The recent genetic research involving mDNA (inherited from the dam) is very interesting, and suggests there may have been a lot of cross over between the mares e.g. nineteen families actually trace back to only fifteen mares according to one study, and considering that full sisters have identical mDNA, the picture's pretty muddled! There's also research that suggests that a lot of the important early mares were actually British and Irish bred, although a fair number of European mares were involved. Bustino, I read that as well! There's a brilliant book that tells a slightly fictionalised and enhanced story of the Byerley Turk, from his days as foal to his time as a warhorse. It's a pretty decent read if you ever come across it.
If you're talking about the Ballydoyle horses in particular, I believe they all wear a snaffle and a chiffney - the chiffney is used to lead them pre and post race. I'm not 100% sure but I think only snaffles are permitted on the racecourse, though I may well be wrong.
Just had a look on the Rules of Racing, all it says regarding bits is: 11.1 Veterinary Officers will take note of the bitting of every horse brought into the paddock. 11.2 Only bits which meet with the approval of the Veterinary Officer will be permitted. 11.3 No horse is permitted to run in a bitless bridle.
I have it and am reading it at the moment. It's mostly a compilation of Racing Post articles, but it's nice to have them compiled together.
