Roll With Joe
+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 112

Thread: Jereme's Jet

  1. #81
    Super Moderator Stallion mango will become famous soon enough mango's Avatar
    Real Name
    Dallas Harvey
    Location
    Young n.s.w
    Occupation
    Shift Operator
    Posts
    1,564
    Horses
    G R We There Yet, Crowea
    Hi Jammsb
    I don't think it is a major error by not going to the farm to inspect yearlings, by going through the catalogue and doing my research on the computer i can narrow it down to what i'm looking for and that could leave me half a dozen to look at sale day. If i was to pick out half a dozen and drive all over the country side to inspect them i might have to take a week of work. If you inspect them at the sale's you see them walk, stand and it is good to see how they behave outside there enviroment. And for unresearched decisions if i get to the sale and the 6 i've picked out by studying the catalogue and studying updates on the computer don't tick the box i don't buy and go home. I always have someone else with me for a second opinion so why drive over the country side when you can make a decision in 20 mins sale day.

  2. #82
    Member Yearling jammsb will become famous soon enough
    Real Name
    Unknown
    Posts
    37
    That's fine with me if its fine with you. Through life's journey, I've found that the people I've known who work the hardest have generally been the most successful. Probably just a coincidence.

  3. #83
    triplev123
    Guest
    G'day Mango,

    I realise there's not always the time available to us but nevertheless I think Jammsb is right on the money there.
    The most repeatedly successful buyers I've seen have often initially looked over their quarry (sometimes as early as foals, but more often) as weanlings & they'll go back again a couple of times to observe any changes and then again once or twice more as the yearlings are being prepped for sale...all the time seeing them in their 'home' or at the very least in a non-sale environment. Then, come Sale Day they effectively just check on them and make sure they haven't injured themselves and that no dramatic changes have occurred. I realise that sort of approach might not be possible for many people however it is what it is and it most definitely works. There are two things that as an Industry I believe we do not pay near enough attention to here in the Southern Hemisphere. One is of course the above...taking the time out for an extensive yearling inspection/selection process. The other is shoeing, but that's for another day and another thread. The practical reasons why you'd do so aside for a moment...my wife thinks I'm nuts but I couldn't think of anything more interesting and more pleasurable than driving around looking at yearlings heading salewards. No doubt you'd see plenty of Turkeys but the Swans would more than make up for it.
    Last edited by triplev123; 01-13-2011 at 02:34 PM. Reason: bad grammar

  4. #84
    Super Moderator Stallion mango will become famous soon enough mango's Avatar
    Real Name
    Dallas Harvey
    Location
    Young n.s.w
    Occupation
    Shift Operator
    Posts
    1,564
    Horses
    G R We There Yet, Crowea
    Hi Triplev123
    I love going out to the studs and looking at the horses, i go out and see my mare's and foals as much as possible and you are probably right you should go look at them but i don't see it as a major error it might make it a little harder thats all. Mark Purdon recently raced a M3 colt he purchased at the premium yearling sale last year and it won first up in 1.58.1 and i doubt he would of looked at that yearling untill the day before the sale. And it's lucky i'm not married otherwise i could be in the nut's department aswell, i read over the sale books night after night and i'm booked in for an ankle op tommorrow and the sale books will be comming with me.

  5. #85
    triplev123
    Guest
    G'day Mango,
    Beautiful things those mares and foals. I could sit out in the paddock all day watching the newbies running about As luck would have it I've just returned from an arvo's handling of the most recent foal. A bit of initial push and shove with the mare but in the end she was fine with it and so was the foal. Really happy with the foal, it's a ripper.
    That M3 colt M.Purdon picked up in Melbourne....MP is good, he's very,very good but nobody is that good. I'm pretty certain he didn't see it until sale day but I believe he had someone on this side of the Tasman doing the initial leg work for him. Alas, I must leave you now. Mrs Triple is away overseas on business, the kids are exhausted and headed off to bed after a long and hectic day (I ran their legs off) & I have rung my trusty local Pizza guy who will knock upon my door and regale me with his product in short order. I have Foxtel & the APG Sales Catalogue for company. Life is good. :-) Good evening my dear.

  6. #86
    Flashing Red
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by newschool View Post
    (Apparently, JJ's earnings at age 3 would have been higher had he not been sick most of that year.)
    People will say anything for an excuse, especially for a stallion. And if it was the case, why would you breed to a stallion with a weak immune system?

    While outstanding at 2, that isn't questionable, the fact of the matter is his race record shows he wasn't the same horse at 3 and 4. IMHO, it is very risky to breed to a horse that was his best at 2. Say he throws 2yos - if they have a paddock accident, whatever, something happens, you have missed the boat and will not be one of the top colts the next season. Its bad enough with sires knowing for ONLY siring 2 and 3yos. But to only sire 2yos? (which may be the case here) Not for me... I will take a wait and see approach

  7. #87
    Flashing Red
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by newschool View Post
    Much the same as the last decade, the Western Hanover line should continue to excel producing racehorses and the Artsplace line producing broodmares. It will be interesting to see if RNR Hanover females also become strong broodmares and if there will be horsepower from the Artsplace line to follow Art Major in producing stong racehorses.
    And thus the golden cross: Western Hanover (or sons) to Artsplace broodmares. The Meadow Skipper line with the Abercrombie. Most famous cross in standardbreds.

  8. #88
    Flashing Red
    Guest
    There is no magic formula for breeding or picking out champions, but I do believe you can help your chances with pedigree, conformation, family, sire etc. I believe you would be more successful than picking one out of a hat. I honestly don't believe it is completely random, I think there are things one can do to improve their chances... does anyone else agree?

  9. #89
    triplev123
    Guest
    G'day Flashing,

    I used to think that way but no longer.
    Sires that produced the complete opposite to that which their race careers indicated changed my views entirely.

    Here's part of an article (part for the sake of size & relevance I clipped off some bits on TB breeders & the TB Breeders Cup politics of the time)

    Written in The Bloodhorse Magazine from back in Feb. 2005, it is compelling reading.

    John Gaines: In His Own Words

    By Dan Liebman
    Posted: Monday, February 14, 2005 9:04AM

    After taking over a highly successful Standardbred operation begun by his grandfather in 1925, and moving it to even greater heights, John Ryan Gaines established a Thoroughbred division of Gainesway Farm in 1962. He wasted little time in becoming one of the industry's most important and forward-thinking figures. Gainesway Farm became a true "stallion station," with Gaines never owning more than 15 broodmares, but instead concentrating on the stallion end of the business. He acquired, syndicated, stood, and managed such well-known stallions as Lyphard, Riverman, Blushing Groom, Vaguely Noble, Bold Bidder, and Broad Brush.

    Gaines became a leading consignor at major Thoroughbred auctions and adviser and partner to some of the sport's leading owners and breeders. Though owner of a relatively small broodmare band, he has owned the dams of champions and twice had mares he owned-Cosmah and Glowing Tribute-named Kentucky Broodmare of the Year.
    In 1989, Gaines sold his Gainesway Farm to Graham Beck, but just a few years later, missing the business he loved so much, re-entered the game, though on a totally different level. Gaines now operates John R. Gaines Thoroughbreds and owns more than 100 mares. His son and daughter are partners in the operation, which is managed by Olin Gentry. While most young horses are sold as yearlings, John R. Gaines Thoroughbreds has been selling its foals as weanlings.
    It was Gaines who had the idea which became the Breeders' Cup, and he was a founder of the National Thoroughbred Association, from which spawned the National Thoroughbred Racing Association (NTRA). He also was instrumental in the founding of the Kentucky Horse Park and Maxwell H. Gluck Center for Equine Research at the University of Kentucky. Gaines has been bestowed nearly every honor and award in the Thoroughbred industry, including a Special Eclipse Award, Thoroughbred Club Honor Guest, and the lone recipient of the Breeders' Cup Special Award.
    Gaines, 70, was provided questions in advance of a Sept. 17, 1999 interview with Dan Liebman, executive editor of The Blood-Horse. He supplied written responses to those questions, then was asked additional questions during the interview.

    The Blood-Horse: Is the breed as sound today as it was 30 years ago?
    John Gaines: Conventional wisdom will tell you that the breed is not as sound today as it was 30 years ago, 50 years ago, and 75 years ago. Conventional wisdom is almost never right. A study from 1969-1999 reveals a surprisingly marginal increase of only 3% in the number of horses starting in races over a 30-year period. The more horses competing on the racetrack would appear to translate into more unsoundness in the breed as a whole;; however, this does not appear to be the case.
    It is the condition of racing that determines the soundness of the breed. There is no such thing as an index of soundness and there is no agreed upon definition of what soundness means. The tracks are not much different and the methods of training are not much different compared to 30 years ago, although I think veterinary science is much more sophisticated than it was 30 years ago. Since the Thoroughbred does not reach his full physical maturity until 4 1/2 years of age, soundness is always going to be a major problem. The unreasonable physical demands that are placed upon young, immature, undeveloped horses are going to cause all kinds of breakdowns, injuries, physical trauma, and mental problems.
    Conventional wisdom will tell you horses stay sounder if they run on the turf instead of the dirt. Although it is almost automatically assumed horses stay sounder in Europe than they do in America, I wonder if this is really true. When the Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing company developed artificial surfaces for both trotters and runners, the change in surface only created new unsoundness problems in different loci of the horses' anatomy. The question of soundness is primarily an immaturity and condition of racing issue rather than a genetical and inheritance issue. The overemphasis on the perform-ance of the 2- and 3-year-olds in a Darwinian sense purifies the breed, because only the fittest animals can survive the conditions of racing.

    Are commercial breeders forced into standing stallions oriented to speed and precocity over stamina and soundness, whether they want to or not?
    No one is forced to stand any stallions they do not want to stand. Speed, precocity, stamina, and soundness are convenient buzzwords, but they are not mutually exclusive concepts. A horse can have soundness and precocity as well as speed and stamina. The conditions of racing determine the shape of the breed.



    Should this (breeding for precocity) be a source of serious concern to the industry?
    Absolutely not. If for some bizarre reason the breed stopped producing these supreme examples of the Thoroughbred-the very best of hundreds of thousands of foals-that would be a serious concern.

    Can and should anything be done about it?
    Yes. Just keep breeding the best to the best and hope for the best.

    So, that theory worked in the past and should work in the future?
    Well, people try to make it so complicated, and it is complicated in the dynamics of how animals inherit. That is incredibly complicated. But, the principles are incredibly simple. And, it's all a question of getting as many probabilities on your side as you can. And, environmental probabilities are just as important as genetical probabilities. I once asked Bull Hancock the question, "If your fairy godmother came out of the sky and said, 'Bull, I'll grant you one of three wishes. Would you rather have Bull Lea, the 20 best mares at Calumet, or Ben Jones?' Which would you take?" He said, "That would be easy; I'll take Bull Lea." And, he said, "What would you take?" I said I would take Ben Jones. Because there are just a few transcendent trainers. And, they are so important, breeders only want to think in terms of genetics, but the transcendent trainer like Ben Jones, Hirsch Jacobs, Woody Stephens, and now (Bob) Baffert, Wayne Lukas, are worth as much as a great stallion or a great broodmare.

    Does the commercial market and its characteristics (corrective surgeries and shoeing techniques, use of treadmills, steroids) have too much influence on the breed?
    Corrective surgeries, shoeing techniques, and treadmills are a positive influence; steroids given for the wrong reasons are a negative influence. Taking the breed as a whole, these procedures are almost meaningless. Steroids administered to highly important racehorses and future sire prospects have been known to compromise fertility, particularly in the first year at stud.

    You brought stallions from Europe to stand here. Why are so few breeders today importing new bloodlines?
    Home is where the heart is. The breeders and owners of the great European stallion prospects prefer to keep their horses at home. Their breeding rights are worth as much in Europe as they are in North America. When I imported Vaguely Noble, Blushing Groom, Riverman, Sharpen Up, Irish River, and Lyphard, this was not the case. The market was here. At that time, when a prominent European racehorse or stallion was imported to Kentucky, he immediately doubled in value. This arbitrage no longer exists. With the exception of Japan, any breeder has access to almost any stallion standing anywhere in the world, if he wants to ship his mare and pay the stud fee.

    Is the gene pool getting too narrow with Northern Dancer and Raise a Native (Mr. Prospector) line stallions?
    Taking the Thoroughbred breed as a whole, the coefficient of inbreeding is at a very low percentage compared to that of other breeds of animals. The coefficient of inbreeding in Standardbreds is only marginally higher and is still considered to be a low percentage of the breed as a whole. There is no such thing as having too narrow a gene pool. Stallions only provide 50% of the genes to any individual animal and the broodmare, of course, provides the other 50%. Geneticists call this Galton's Law and it is one of the fundamental, indeed immutable principles of how animals inherit. Any permutation of Galton's Law is without merit and is errant romantic nonsense.

    Why is the syndication of stallions less popular now than 20 years ago?
    This is an economic decision. The stronger the economy, the less adverse stallion owners are to the risk of failure.
    For the short term, the stallion owners can maximize the revenues, for long-term, if the stallion is a failure or mediocre, then the revenue stream will be compromised. It is somewhat like tiptoeing on the high wire without a safety net.

    What will be the long-term effect on the breed of large stallion books?
    Biologically a normal stallion can easily handle books of 100 mares or more. The way to manage a stallion is to manage the mares booked to him. Breeding techniques for mares have reached a high level of sophistication. Since there are more than 600,000 Thoroughbred horses in North America alone, large stallion books will have no effect on the breed as a whole. In the Standardbred industry, artificial insemination is allowed which greatly favors the proven progenitors who are frequently bred to 250 mares or more. This discriminates against the young, unproven stallions because they are not getting the best producing broodmares and their books are small by comparison. Looking at the top 1% of the breed, a large book of mares probably enhances the gene pool, but only marginally.

    You mention artificial insemination in Standardbreds. Of course, you were formerly involved with Standardbreds. Do you think artificial insemination would work in Thoroughbreds?
    First, it would be an economic disaster. Secondly, from a standpoint of hygiene, it would be a definite plus. But, it would destroy the entire economic paradigm of the industry. That is one reason I got out of the Standardbreds, because the art of breeding horses and the fun of breeding horses were being lost.

    If you were getting into the stallion business today, what attributes would you look for in a stallion prospect? How would that strategy be different from 20-30 years ago?
    The attributes a responsible stallion manager is looking for are the same today as yesterday. All of the criteria are probably weighted differently by different stallion managers, however the categories are the same: racing class, pedigree, soundness, conformation, temperament, precocity, stamina, speed, way of going, and durability pretty much cover the waterfront. In absence of the progeny test, all of these criteria become irrelevant.

    How has the shuttle stallion trend influenced the business?
    Biologically, it is a good thing for stallions to be bred year-round. It is closer to nature as opposed to an arbitrary, artificially imposed breeding season. The idea that a horse only has so many covers in his genetic bank is scientifically absurd. This concept is one of the many tongue-in-cheek myths originating from the diabolically fertile mind of Federico Tesio, one of the greatest horsemen of all time (he was greatly amused by the gullibility of his fellow breeders and the more outlandish Tesio could make things, the happier he was). The breeder of Nearco and Ribot was interested in creating a persona that would make him more mysterious and profound.
    Under competent management, the health risk has proven to be minimal. I think it will be fascinating to see how all of this shuttle business will work out from a performance point of view. It is pretty predictable-the best stallions here will be the best stallions down there. The biggest problem with the shuttle stallions is the quality of mares being bred to these horses is vastly inferior to their Northern Hemisphere books. Over time, the shuttle stallions should improve the breed in Australia, New Zealand, and South America.
    It is essentially an economic decision. Obviously the older and more proven the stallion, the less incentive there is for the Southern Hemisphere shuttle. After the horse becomes a certain age, the health factor of moving the horse back and forth becomes a significant problem.

    As a student of genetics, how did you apply that to your breeding philosophy in the Thoroughbred business?
    As a young man growing up, I had the unequaled opportunity of being associated for many years with Lao J. Brosemer, who worked for my father. Without question, Brosemer knew more about every breed of domesticated animal than anyone else in the world. At one time he was head geneticist for the U.S. Department of Agriculture and was unsurpassed in the entire field of animal husbandry. My father, and his father before him, had a profound understanding of horses and both were great teachers. From a more theoretical standpoint, I worked closely with professor of genetics Dr. Dewey Steele of the University of Kentucky and the highly intelligent and longtime editor of The Blood-Horse magazine, Joseph A. Estes.
    Estes was the devastating critic and debunker of breeding myths. He was the most scientific journalist that ever wrote about the breeding of Thoroughbreds. I was taught when all was said and done the progeny test was the only thing that mattered. That is why my program is to acquire older proven mares after the fact rather than unproven young mares, despite their credentials before the fact. In lieu of the progeny test, the most important thing is racing class in both the sire and the dam.
    I also learned from these influential mentors and from my own lived experience that scientific truth is not always economic truth. There is only a handful of people in racing that have an elementary understanding of genetics, how animals inherit, and scientific probabilities. The mythology surrounding the breeding of Thoroughbreds is pervasive. A few of these myths are the astonishing stupidity of the dosage system, the absurd overemphasis on the female family, and the irrational belief in the validity of nicks.

    When you say overemphasis on the female family, do you mean the first dam or the whole female family?
    The way we present our pedigrees is genetically irresponsible. The third dam in the female family is genetically no more important than any other horse in the third generation of that family. But that has become economic truth, though it is not genetic truth. I never look beyond the sire and the dam, because that is where the genetic material is coming from. The big issue is, that while there are all of these statistics, these pedigree nerds, the people that are promulgating all of this scientific nonsense, there is never any control group. It is all selective, self-serving, worked-over information. I did a study one time with Dewey Steele about nicks, and we found the worst horses, those finishing last at Thistledown and Charles Town, had the same nicks as the horses that were winning the classics. One of the dumbest things that's done is that they take an infinitesimal sample of maybe three or four or five horses and pompously say that is a nick. From my scientific point of view, a sample that is that minuscule is worthless.
    Millions and millions of dollars are spent every year (on horses), yet a high school freshman that is taking an elementary genetics course has a better understanding than someone who is spending a hundred million dollars a year and is listening to all these charlatans who are promoting genetical lies.

    Do you think geneticists will ever be able to identify the genetic markers that constitute a faster horse, or conversely the genes or markers that identify negative traits?
    The universe of scientific research and accomplishment ebbs and flows, and does not fit into the time and space of conventions that we are so fond of using to categorize our thoughts. I think it is fair to say the first 75 years of the last century, science was overwhelmingly preoccupied with the mathematics of time and space and the origins and operations of the universe. In the last 25 years of the century science has provided the preliminary research and indeed the launching pad for the exciting keystone technologies of computing and biotechnology. As more of the arcane secrets of genetics and molecular biology are revealed to the modern public, we will be able to have insights into the common mutations of our own genetic makeup. We will be able to spell out the precise sequences of the billions of letters in the equine genetic code. In fact, the new genetics will go far beyond the usual gene sequence analysis. As we crawl further up the value chain to include the chemical side and pharmacological and toxicology data, we can then search for continuous sequences that might lead to a full-length gene. The possible discoveries, compelling though they may be, do not necessarily mean we will in effect see a change. There is little question we will make quantum jumps in theory, but it does not mean we will be able to apply this theory in practical concrete terms. As we all know, the horse is not the most congenial of host animals.

    What are the most important factors to breeding success?
    Everything in breeding and racing is a matter of understanding the probabilities and getting the probabilities working for you instead of against you. In genetics it is the progeny test and in the environment it is the transcendent trainer.

    END

  10. #90
    Senior Member 4YO Don Corleone has a spectacular aura about Don Corleone's Avatar
    Real Name
    Ray Fidow
    Location
    Dunedin NZ
    Occupation
    Sec Cons
    Posts
    425
    Hey triplev123,
    Interesting article and I enjoyed reading it. Thank you.
    Yesterday I saw my first JJ and I must say I was very impressed. Lovely size and put together well and definatelty looks like a runner. I would tell you the lot number but I wont as you all might outbid me !!!!

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts