http://www.attheraces.com/blogs/kevin-blake Mehmas going to stud. Missed this news and it's an interesting blog post relating to the subject of why a 2 year old horse at the top of its game should be retired to stud after just one competitive season. " ... As is the case in so many situations in life, the answer comes down to money. The reality is that the commercial end of the bloodstock industry demands precocious speed and is willing to pay well for it. "
We had the same thing when the 2008 Golden Slipper winner Sebring was retired after it's two year old season. After winning nearly AU$2,500,000, he was sold to Widden Stud for a reported AU$30,000,000. His 2016 fee is set at AU$77,000. One of his sons has to date earned AU$7,268,865. So there's certainly money to be made by packing them off to stud early.
It is happening more and more, though it's worth noting that it only happens in Ireland at the moment - I can't recall the last 2yo to be retired to stud in Britain or France. Until there is a move away from buyer demands for speedy two year olds, it will continue and can only hurt the breed over time.
Holy Roman Emperor springs to mind and his epic contests against Teofilo. Wasn't he packed off to stud around the same time George Washington was found to be sub fertile? He definitely only had his 2 year old season in 2006.
If you keep breeding for speed you will ultimately lose the stamina and you end up in a situation where true middle distance horses no longer exist. I'm not his biggest fan but John Gosden was right when he said in an interview a few weeks ago that Coolmore dominate the middle distance race division because they breed for it - they stand stallions that are proven over a trip and are reaping the benefits. The original interview in the RP is now behind their PayWall, but this was written in response: Breeders not to blame for emphasis on speed BY JAMES THOMAS12:02PM 9 SEP 2016 TUESDAY'S Racing Post featured the thoughts of John Gosden on how the rise of breeding for speed was causing long-term damage to the thoroughbred breed. Gosden made several salient points, namely the need for staying races to remain a prominent feature of the programme book and that Coolmore deserve all the myriad successes that come their way since they first pursued the stock of Northern Dancer - a move that many years later led to them owning undoubtedly the greatest stallion of our times, Galileo. I'm sure Gosden didn't intend to point the finger at any particular individuals, but his point could easily be construed as placing those who breed for speed as the root cause of the problem. The issue Gosden identifies is indisputable, but I would argue the problem has arisen not from the hands of the commercial breeders, but from the state of racing as a whole. While racing remains accessible for those with the financial ammunition to keep taking aim at the high-end yearling sales year after year, those further down the food chain are finding it harder to compete. A lack of buyers with plenty to spend but not eye-watering sums has been evidenced in the weakening of the middle market across a variety of sales, be that yearling, breeze-up or horses-in-training, in recent months. Gosden also highlighted the decline in owner-breeders. If those who are already immersed in the sport are being forced to shut up shop, how can newcomers to racing be expected to see bloodstock as a wise investment when the risk and outlay are so high and the potential rewards so meagre? Undoubtedly a large part of being involved in ownership is the gratification from seeing your horses run, regardless of grade of race, distance or age group. However, if the majority of people are having to rein in the number of horses they own or have shares in, the chances are it simply isn't a viable financial option for them to invest in a middle-distance horse they know from the outset may not even run, never mind realise its full potential, for the next 18 months. While ownership is undoubtedly a big financial risk, the chance to recoup at least some of your outlay must come into consideration. Yesterday's card at Doncaster acts as the perfect microcosm for the wider problem prospective owners are presented with. The Group 2 Park Hill Stakes for three-year-olds and upwards over 1m6f undoubtedly brings its share of prestige, but offers just £51,039 to the winner, by which point owners will have already forked out for multiple seasons' keep and training fees. The Weatherbys Hamilton 2-Y-O Stakes over 6f, on the other hand, is open to horses whose sire had progeny sell at the major European or US auction houses and offers £147,540 to winning connections. Owners of younger runners in the latter race will not have spent the same level of keep and training fees. There are a range of generous incentives to buy two-year-old types, from maiden race bonuses to valuable sales races, and the companies that offer these deserve praise for doing so. Perhaps this is a model which could be expanded in a bid to reinvigorate market interest in buying horses that take that bit longer to realise their full potential. Those who are breeding for speed and precocity are not the reason buying backward, late-maturing types is no longer an appealing proposition - they are simply meeting demand with supply.
Good for Gosden, but it's all understandable. In effect we have 2 types of racing. First a lot of short distance stuff with about 70% of 2yo races being at 6f or less (which is how it has always been for 2yos and is not wrong but is now plundered by the speedy horses) which is becoming more like dog-racing AND the classier racing that attracts the big breeding conglomerates of Coolmore, Darley, Juddmonte and The Aga Khan. In reality it has always been there but it has swung further towards the former over the last 15 years. A concern I have is that a horse that has not run as a 3yo has not totally proved himself. Are we weakening the breed that way?
There's definitely something to be said for that Bustino. Back when Holy Roman Emperor was retired the official line was that he was recruited to replace George Washington but the bloodstock rumour mill said that he'd been injured on the gallops and that it was a cover story to hide the fact he was retiring unsound. I still think the German's have it right - stallions are not allowed to stand in Germany unless they have raced for at least 2 seasons (not necessarily consecutive), they must not have used any drugs (so any horse that travels to Breeders' Cup and uses Lasix is automatically banned) and they must pass a conformation examination by a qualified person to ensure they do not carry any heritable errors such as a parrot mouth, etc.
Thanks for the reply Princess. John Gosden makes some salient points when it comes to the protection of distance racing, but I have to ask, does today's staying brigade deserve to be held above the march of time? There has been quite an amount of complaint about the way races like the St Leger are heading, but that does not necessarily have to mean that the future is full of gloom. Sure races above 12 furlongs will gradually become more and more shallow in time, and some will lament the passing of the out and out stayer, but this is a natural progression of the breed. When the mighty Eclipse ruled the turf, he sometimes won events that necessitated him having to take races over a couple of four mile events in the same day. If the folks of that time could see how racing is conducted now, they'd be horrified at how the stayer has been destroyed. I think Mr. Gosden has a limited perspective here. The Derby, Arc and other middle distance races will live on well past our time, but they will be more influenced by speed than at anytime in the past. As much as people won't like to hear it, the future of middle distance racing lies with the likes of sires like Frankel. It won't happen just yet, but in the not too far off, fast 10 furlong horses will throw that extra bit of speed into 12 furlong types. And as for sprinting, it isn't the end of the world. Far from it, it is in fact one of the great life lines of a struggling industry. It pays a quicker dividend. Coolmore caught on quite a while back and are now cleaning up. Sitting on ones hands now means falling further behind. Mr. Gosden points to the problems of the boutique breeder in the market place. It's sad that any part of an industry goes to the wall, but if they can't find a niche for themselves, they can't expect to stand against the tide. Canute tried it I believe. It sounds cold, but it's life. We once had people opening doors at department stores and driving elevators, but the world has evolved and so too has racing. And whether we like it or not, it's sure to head off in direction some of us just won't like, but racing folk of the decades to come will enjoy the sport with which they'll be familiar. And when we're in our dotage and reminiscing about the glory of racing in our day, the youngsters will politely smile at our folly and shovel another spoonful of some horrid gruel into our gobs as we sit helpless on the verandah, waiting for the last of our allotted time to ebb away.
This just popped up on Racing Post: Letter: Gosden right about speed breeding Breeder Sue Cameron from Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, writes on the subject of John Gosden's recent comments on commercial breeding being to the detriment of staying horses I WAS delighted to see that such a prominent and deep thinking trainer as John Gosden has joined the argument about our present breeding policies. It has been obvious for many years that the industry has been wasting the years of careful, informed and balanced thoroughbred breeding carried out by our forebears. Princess Zahra spoke on this subject at the Asian Racing Conference. The whole concept of breeding racehorses has changed from just that to, in the main, a commodity market aimed at making money rather than producing a good racehorse. The rot began when the standard numbers of mares covered, i.e., 42 per stallion in most cases, was abandoned. When it was in force, the stallions were managed by syndicate committees who selected suitable mares for their horses from the applications received, all aimed at breeding good racehorses and improving their stallion's chance of success. Once that code was ditched, the floodgates opened and anyone who paid could cover their mare with just about anything they wanted as certain stallion owners realised that as long as the horse earned enough in his first couple of years it did not matter whether he was a success or not: he had paid for himself and could be thrown away with no loss. This applied particularly in Ireland and it was a long time before this country got anywhere near covering the numbers of mares covered by horses standing in Ireland. Sadly we are now catching up. The main focus of the industry now seems to be on making as much money as possible as quickly as possible by buying and selling horses, rather than striving to breed and sell good racehorses. How often do we see in sales reports that such and such a lot has been bought for resale in a very short time. Tony Morris once described the foal sales as a place where people who did not want the animals were selling them to other people who didn't want them either; how true that is in many cases. In turn, the huge numbers of mares covered by one horse put the price of potential stallions way out of most studs' reach and so the smaller players resorted to buying cheaper, mainly sprinter bred animals, for their establishments. Sometimes they were bought before they finished racing in the hope their potential would be realised after the price was set. So the Classic horses were all acquired by the big battalions or kept by their breeders. Backed up by plenty of high powered advertising, the former became the fashion icons of the industry; the sales companies have played along and pushed these stallions, good or bad, to the forefront of their auctions while effectively ‘downgrading' better bred animals more likely to turn into good racehorses by their placing in sales catalogues. We were lucky in that the advent of Sheikh Mohammed and his brothers to a large extent stopped the practice of rushing horses off to stud early in case they blotted their copy books and wrecked their earning potential. We were streets away from the original racing of horses at two, then aiming at the Classics at three, followed by the Cup races at four. How many horses could do that now, even if their owners put racing before money? We have to be grateful that the likes of Coolmore and the few big owner-breeders do produce Classic horses, but the very fact that this production is in the hands of so few is unhealthy. Stud fees have risen to obscene levels and exclude all but the very wealthy from access to Classic breeding. To further aggravate the problems of the industry, over the years many of the people who had a wide knowledge of breeding and years of experience of how it should be done have disappeared and the number of owner breeders has shrunk to a very small proportion of racehorse owners. They have been replaced by owners who either buy or share a horse to race - and thank heavens for them - but they are often led by people who do not have enough knowledge but have spotted a way to make a living. Many agents and trainers are excellent, but the old-timers who looked at the horse rather than the page in the catalogue are gone. In these days of litigation and a high level of ignorance, veterinary tests and the printed page seem to carry more weight than the selection of an athlete. At the same time, the new owners do not have the resources of the previous owner-breeders and need a quicker return on their money, as well as not appreciating that horses develop at various speeds. They are led to believe, mistakenly, that sprinters are precocious. The ignorant have patronised sprinting stallions on that basis and so they have been the ‘must-have' for many buyers who do not know any better. They end up with horses which often perform well early only to fade away later, and all because they do not know that patience frequently provides a better result and a better horse in the end. The demands of the market have also led, I believe, to a deterioration in the way we rear our horses. To be ready for the fashion show at the sales, young horses are brought indoors too early when they should be outside, learning about life and exercising their hearts and lungs. I am sure it is true that owner-bred horses, who are only brought in when they show they are ready, do better than those ‘hot house blooms' who are brushed and pushed and pampered to make them look pretty to the uninitiated at the sales. We are sacrificing soundness and hardiness by our modern methods and turning out animals whose minds and bodies are far less robust than they used to be. This does not matter to the people who produce sales horses: their profit is in the sales ring and as few studs keep their mares for very long nowadays, what happens next is largely immaterial. In earlier times it was very important for your mares' progeny to perform so that the following ones could be sold; now the mares are sold before the truth emerges. Until we change the emphasis, this situation will only get worse. The obvious way to do it is through rewarding breeders for producing successful racehorses. In France, breeders' prizes were given for any winner, anywhere. We have never had a total scheme like that. It would be possible, through a non-profit making auction house, for breeders to receive ten per cent of any prize-money won, (with the possible exception of the enormous pots for sales races). This would encourage breeders to aim more for the racecourse than the sales ring and allow them to sell their horses for more reasonable prices in the first place. It would also enable knowledgeable breeders to profit from breeding a good racehorse. If this scheme was put into operation, it might concentrate breeders' minds on planning matings better. At the moment, any sale catalogue will reveal that many mares are being wasted by matings with the wrong horses, just because they are perceived as commercial and impress the sales companies and the ignorant. Very few expensive horses, whose prices are determined by fashion, turn out to be much good. A mare should visit a stallion which suits her, not one that is fashionable at the time. The successful owner-breeders like the Aga Khan, Juddmonte and the Wertheimers have proved this over and over again. The way things are going at the moment, certain sections of the industry are going to increase their stranglehold on the business to the detriment of the variety provided by a larger pool of breeders.
Susan Cameron is a journalist with a long history of equine articles and essays and has been published in many a journal over the years. She's also had a modicum of success as a breeder. According to one source, she was the joint breeder of After The Last, a winner of three races in 1992, Lady Phil 1993, Cardinal Hill, a G1 winning hurdler in 1994, and some others. Ms. Cameron is said to responsible but not credited with five other winners, Troll Lady & Aminah, (both mares sold in foal) Alwal, Quedex and Nervey Crown. Quote. This does not matter to the people who produce sales horses: their profit is in the sales ring and as few studs keep their mares for very long nowadays, what happens next is largely immaterial. In earlier times it was very important for your mares' progeny to perform so that the following ones could be sold; now the mares are sold before the truth emerges. Stock has always been bought and sold, Ms. Cameron had been part of this practice herself. Troll Lady and Aminah are examples. Quote. The demands of the market have also led, I believe, to a deterioration in the way we rear our horses. To be ready for the fashion show at the sales, young horses are brought indoors too early when they should be outside, learning about life and exercising their hearts and lungs. I am sure it is true that owner-bred horses, who are only brought in when they show they are ready, do better than those ‘hot house blooms' who are brushed and pushed and pampered to make them look pretty to the uninitiated at the sales. End Quote. Yearlings that are "hot housed" and who are brushed, pushed and pampered, are not weaker in heart or lung. They have the same capacity as those left outside. And to infer that buyers are buying into prettiness over breeding is a nonsense. Sure the animal has to look the part, conformation is extremely important, but so too is breeding. It's condescending to think otherwise. Quote. The ignorant have patronised sprinting stallions on that basis and so they have been the ‘must-have' for many buyers who do not know any better. They end up with horses which often perform well early only to fade away later, and all because they do not know that patience frequently provides a better result and a better horse in the end. My eyes nearly popped out of my rather average looking head when Ms. Cameron's article lambasted those who buy into sprinting stock, as ignorant. I could say considerably about the article, but the veins in the side of my neck are all to precious to me. The above is not a shot at you Princess. I'm just not too keen on some of our Susan's opinions. I think we have to ask ourselves whether racing for the most part, is healthy or not? Is it actually on it's death bed, or has it just got a bit of a limp? I firmly believe it's the latter. Glass half full or empty? It is a massive, global entity that trades in the hundreds of billions of dollars and employs God knows who many people. Racing will not only survive but continue to grow, and it will all be on the back of man's manipulation of the our equine friends. If Ms. Cameron wants to suggest that the modern day need for speed is to the possible physical detriment of the horse, then she opens up a whole other debate. To go down the ethical road on the welfare of horses, then calls into question the very sport itself. It opens up a whole new can of worms.
I'm not offended in the slightest! I posted the letter from Sue Cameron (who I have had dealings with over the years - say no more!) as I thought it was appropriate given the discussion that was going on here. I agree that the march of progress cannot be halted, but I do think we have to be a bit careful not to put too much emphasis on speed. BHA have already recognised that this is a problem and have started tweaking the race programme so that there is better balance and opportunties for staying-bred horses - for example the introduction of a number of Maidens confined to progeny of sires who won over 10f and further, additional maidens over longer trips for three year olds, new Pattern races over longer trips, etc, It will be interesting to see what impact these races might have over time.
And now The Gurkha, also http://www.attheraces.com/news/latest-news/the-gurkha-retired-to-coolmore-in-2017
