MONTJEU.COM

An Independent View of the Bloodstock World

Tag: stallions

  • When is a stallion past their prime?

    Older Sires are treated with suspicion

    Ageism : noun “prejudice or discrimination on the basis of age”

    In the bloodstock world, there is often a suspicion of any stallion out of their teens. Supporting this theory, a friend recently mentioned that even Sadler’s Wells had no Group 1 winner from his last three crops. Is this just coincidence (and a very small sample size) or are older sires less effective? A quick internet search, didn’t reveal any serious research on the subject (please let me know if I missed something). Without proper data, we are in the realms of speculation but I am happy to speculate….

    My own thoughts are as follows:

    • Perceptions matter and if people doubt older stallions, then it could become a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Owners of high quality mares may be wary of visiting older stallions and this well lead to weaker crops, reduced success and ‘prove’ the theory.
    • Owners of high quality mares may be wary of visiting older stallions if their fertility is lower. Their is a natural decline in fertility as stallions age, so it could be a legitimate risk aversion to ensure the best chance of getting their mares in foal. However again the behaviour of the mare owners will end up ‘proving’ the theory.
    • Owners of high quality mares may be wary of visiting older stallions not because they doubt them but because they worry that many buyers have that bias against older sires. Breeders can’t ignore the marketplace. Again a weaker book will lead to less success on the track.
    • If the market does reduce the value of the offspring of older sires then those offspring will tend to go to fewer top end trainers. This could reduce the actual level of success.

    • Older stallions are probably covering a number of older mares who are trying to replicate a previously successful mating with that stallion. We do know that the progeny of older mares (specifically mares who have had more foals) are less successful than younger mares (albeit not as much of a difference as some people think). If a stallion covered the same 100 mares for ten consecutive years, I would expect a decrease in the number of stakes performers in the later crops due to the ageing of the mares, not the ageing of the stallion.
    • Later crops by stallions are competing against grandchildren of the same stallion. This years St Leger was a good example as Galileo’s best finisher was the third place horse, Nayef Road. The first two places were filled by his grandsons in Logician (by Frankel) and Sir Ron Priestley (by Australia). Similarly, when Galileo sired the first three home in the 2006 St Leger (Sixties Icon, The Last Drop and Red Rocks) the next two home were sons of Sadler’s Wells in Ask and Tusculum).
    • As for Sadler’s Wells last few crops, it is true that his success dimmed near the end. However, it is also worth remembering that Sadler’s Wells himself was part of a crop of 31 foals by Northern Dancer in 1981- so Northern Dancer was 20 when they were born. From those 31 foals there was Sadler’s Wells, El Gran Senor, Secreto and Northern Trick so not bad for an old sire! Mr Prospector also did well in his latter years- his only Kentucky Derby winner, Fusaichi Pegasus, was born when Mr Prospector was 27.

    Conclusion: Without proper data, it’s hard to be dogmatic on the subject. A simple crop by crop analysis with the percentage of black type winners in each crop isn’t sufficient. The quality and age of the mares in each crop would also have to be included in calculations. In humans, research on the children of older fathers shows some negative correlations so it is plausible that this would apply in horses also. If there is a negative correlation in horses, I think it would be slight and might perhaps be overestimated by the market. If that is the case, there could be some value to be had at the sales. One man’s prejudice, can be another man’s opportunity…….

  • Attack on the clones

    There was some coverage in the Irish media last week of the cloning of former top showjumper Cruising http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/other-sports/mary-mccann-confirms-she-has-two-cruising-clones-312555.html .

    The owners are not acting outside the rules of the sport made by the Federation Equestre Internationale (FEI) or of the Irish sports horse stud book but I don’t think either of those bodies can fully know the impact that cloning will have on that sport. When it comes to horse racing we will hopefully never allow cloning or it will utterly destroy the sport.

    What’s wrong with cloning?

    1. Cloning is not about looking to breed an improved racehorse, it is about recreating an existing top class horse. It is about sameness and predictability and the elimination of risk. It is about replacing the old maxim of ‘breeding the best to the best and hope for the best’ with a new maxim of ‘clone the best’. However it is the uncertainty of breeding that underpins the industry, if cloning was to become commonplace it would kill the industry it seeks to improve. Why get involved in the genetic lottery of current breeding? Who would use current stallions, the best of whom struggle to get 10% stakes winners when you can produce a horse guaranteed to be of similar genetic ability to a past champion? With uncertainty there also exists hope and it is  this hope that totally underpins the entire breeding industry and ensures that most foals will eventually find a buyer. Who would gamble on a modestly bred foal when they could buy a clone of Frankel? The breeding industry as we know it would collapse.

    2. Horse racing is dependent on gambling for its survival. We don’t know the relative merits of horses until they are tried against each other under different conditions. With clones much of that uncertainty is removed as we already have a much better idea of horses maximum abilities, optimum trips and going preferences. There would initially be great interest in running a decade of cloned Derby winners against each other but ultimately we would have a much less diverse sport with the same clones running against each other after the question of the ultimate horse has been decided and the clones of same being the only logical choice for breeders. Once horse racing becomes too predictable its attractiveness to the public will fade.

    Scientific breakthroughs are chipping away at the fundamentals of the sport. Genetic testing such as those offered by equinome.com are still in their infancy but in time will certainly improve to a predictive accuracy that outstrips any of us self-appointed pedigree or bloodstock ‘experts’. I am certain that artificial insemination (AI) will be allowed for thoroughbreds within the next two decades given its advantages in disease control. By itself AI is not a threat to the fundamentals of the sport once some measures such as the destruction of straws within an agreed period following the death of the stallion are implemented. Cloning is a completely different prospect and to my mind it was a mistake to allow it in showjumping and it would be a catastrophe for horse racing.

     

     

  • Henry Cecil- a belated tribute

    With the passing of Henry Cecil in June it is worth considering his place in the pantheon of the great trainers. It is also worth looking back on the subsequent impact of his runners in the breeding sheds.  Surprisingly, for such a successful trainer over such a long career, Henry trained very few important stallions.

    Ranking as a trainer

    As a ten time champion trainer, its obvious that Henry Cecil must take very high rank amongst the list of great trainers.  However for me, there are a few factors that temper my enthusiasm for ranking him anywhere near Vincent O’Brien, who is the benchmark for trainers.

    1. Firstly Henry had it easy. He came from a privileged background being a stepson of champion trainer and Royal trainer Cecil Boyd Rochfort and his early marriage to Julie Murless (daughter of another champion trainer and Royal trainer) meant he was quickly seated at racing’s top table.  His starting position would have taken others a decade or more to achieve.

    2. Apart from Wolver Hollow’s Eclipse in his first season his early years were underwhelming. A lot of tributes talk about Henry’s instinctive way with horses, however to me if there is nothing significant happening for a number of years it looks less like genius and more of a gradual tweaking of the same old methods used by others. Henry may have had a reputation for working his horses hard at Newmarket but he wasn’t much of an innovator in his methods. Gradual improvements in staff, methods and stock are a road map to training success but they are rooted in the ordinary rather than in genius.

    3. Henry largely ignored the rest of the world. Henry may have felt that British racing was the best in the world but in his heyday he spurned many opportunities for his runners overseas. His tally of two US wins (Yashmak  in 1997 and Midday in 2009) is very underwhelming given the relatively easy pickings available in the US for turf horses. His tally of 6 Irish classics is also less than one would expect.  In my view, his Anglo-centric approach didn’t do justice to his horses or his owners by ignoring the opportunities that were available throughout the world.

    4. He didn’t succeed with sprinters. I don’t know the reason for this but it is noticeable that he never trained a really top class sprinter and almost all of the big sprints are absent from his cv.

    Great Stallions trained by Henry

    none

    Very Good Stallions trained

    1. Kris (1976 Sharpen Up- Doubly Sure by Reliance).

    Kris was a superb miler who should have won the Guineas and won 14 of his 16 races. His first crop yielded the outstanding Cecil trained triple crown winner Oh So Sharp (1982 Kris ex Oh So Fair by Graustark). His second crop yielded Irish 2000 Guineas winner Flash of Steel (1983 Kris ex Spark of Fire by Run the Gauntlet). His final career stats show 75 black type winners from 846 foals, a very creditable 9% and include other Group 1 winners such as Shavian, Rafha and Balisada. However Kris is regarded as a fillies sire and no important sire sons have emerged to continue his male line.

    2. Diesis (1980 Sharpen Up- Doubly Sure by Reliance)

    A brother to Kris, Diesis was a brilliant two year old who achieved a rare Middle Park, Dewhurst double.  Like his brother he made an immediate impression with an outstanding filly in his first crop-namely Diminuendo (1985 Diesis ex Cacti by Tom Rolfe).  Other Oaks winners followed in Ramruma (1996 Diesis ex Princess of Man by Green God) and Love Divine (1997 Diesis ex La Sky by Law Society). However unlike his brother there was not the same sex bias amongst his offspring who ranged from sprinters such as Keen Hunter (1987 Diesis ex Love’s Reward by Nonoalco) to milers such as Docksider (1995 Diesis ex Pump by Forli) and superb 10 furlong performers in Halling (1991 Diesis ex Dance Machine by Green Dancer) and Elmaamul (1987 Diesis ex Modena by Roberto). His final stud statistics showed 82 black type winners from 1069 foals (8%) and his sire line is just barely hanging on through Muhtathir (a son of Elmaamul and sire of Doctor Dino) and Halling who  has a few sons at stud.

    Really Disappointing Stallions Trained by Henry

    1. Reference Point (1984 Mill Reef ex Home on the Range by Habitat)

    An above average Derby winner who won a Futurity at two and seemed to have the pedigree to succeed at stud.  He was very disappointing and his early death was not lamented by many breeders.

    2. Hello Gorgeous (1977 Mr Prospector ex Bonny Jet by Jet Jewel)

    As a winner of a Dante and Futurity (aka Racing Post Trophy) and a son of the new American sensation Mr Prospector, Hello Gorgeous proved popular at Coolmore and big money was paid for many of his early offspring. He was a disaster and led to a distrust of sons of Mr Prospector in Europe that took a long time to fade.  His final stats show 10 black type winners from 510 foals (2%).

    2. Old Vic (1986 Sadler’s Wells ex Cockade by Derring Do).

    From the first crop of Sadler’s Wells, Old Vic was a brilliant winner of the Irish and French Derby’s. Retired to Dalham Hall he was very disappointing as a flat sire before proving to be an exceptional jumps stallion.

    Mixed bag

    Of Henry’s other Derby winners, Oath (1996 Fairy King ex Sheer Audacity by Troy) and Commander in Chief(1990 Dancing Brave ex Slightly Dangerous by Roberto) found themselves in Japan and failed to make much impact.  Slip Anchor (1982 Shirley Heights ex Sayonara by Birkhahn) did reasonably well, but as a stamina source was never fashionable enough to attract sufficient high quality mares.

    National Hunt sires

    Henry was associated with many great stayers such as Le Moss (1975 Le Levanstall ex Feemoss by Ballymoss),  Ardross (1976 Run the Gauntlet ex Le Melody by Levmoss) and Buckskin (1973 Yelapa ex Bete A Bon Dieu by Herbager) . He trained a lot of other horses who also made names as national hunt stallions such as Gunner B (1973 Royal Gunner ex Sweet Councillor by Privy Councillor), Moscow Society (Nijinsky ex Afifa by Dewan). In addition to the previously mentioned leading jumps sire Old Vic, he also trained the King George winner King’s Theatre (1991 Sadler’s Wells ex Regal Beauty by Princely Native) who became champion NH sire.

    Conclusions

    Henry’s standing as a great trainer is not in doubt and only Michael Stoute has stronger claims to be regarded as the outstanding British trainer of the modern era. A trainers job is to train horses for the racecourse and he has no influence on whether they succeed as stallions. It is of no relevance to Henry’s standing as a trainer that he was not associated with any horses who proved to be great stallions. It is just one of those statistical curiosities. His  success as a trainer of stayers inevitably meant that he was associated with horses who ended up earning their oats as national hunt stallions. Henry’s greatest project, Frankel is now embarking on his stud career and he has every prospect of success, so there could yet be a great stallion associated with the Cecil name.

     

     

  • 2020 Vision

    It’s a new year and a new decade,
    so I dusted off the crystal ball and thought about what the next decade holds for the thoroughbred world. In a European context the changes from 2000 to 2010 were incremental rather than revolutionary. It’s a largely familiar landscape in which Coolmore and Darley still dominate.  Sadler’s Wells and Danehill may be gone, but their sons are now dominant. In an American context the one truly radical change is the adoption of synthetics. However by 2020 I foresee dramatic changes worldwide.

    1. AI is coming.

    Artificial Insemination is inevitable and I for one would welcome this development. Economics (reduced travel costs), safety considerations (reduced injuries to stallions and mares) and critically AI’s role in disease prevention will ensure that it eventually happens. The ‘traditionalists’ chief concerns have been:

    1. the fear of huge crop sizes
    2. a reduction in stallion diversity
    3. the practical issue that foals conceived by AI are not eligible for inclusion in the stud book

    If we consider these arguments they don’t stand up to close examination. Huge crop sizes are already a reality. The marketplace will find a level at which demand (finite) will equal the new level of supply (almost infinite).  After an adjustment period, I do not envisage the top stallions greatly exceeding some of the current crop sizes. Commercial breeders have always factored in scarcity value to their deliberations and they will quickly adjust to the new environment. One interesting dilemma for stallion masters is whether they will be able to continue to charge different amounts for shuttle sires in different hemispheres.

    Stallion diversity it is argued will be reduced as everyone tries to use a smaller number of elite stallions. I disagree, as firstly crop sizes may not alter as much as expected (see above) but more importantly breeders can now access any stallion regardless of location.  For breeders in small regional markets this offers huge opportunities. As a mating analyst it would mean that geography was no longer a consideration and it would allow experimentation on a grand scale.

    Inclusion in the stud book will be driven by other factors. In the event of a major breeding country eg the US being forced to adopt AI as a disease prevention measure, the rules will be changed.  Australia contemplated AI when they had an outbreak of Equine Flu in 2007 amongst their shuttle stallions and other court cases have challenged the ban on the grounds of restraint of trade. Whatever the catalyst, once change comes, I believe the other major countries would eventually accept the new realities. If I was to make a practical suggestion I would recommend that foals would not be registered where the stallion has been deceased for 12 months or more. This would ensure that new stallions get a chance and that for example we would not still be seeing offspring of Sadler’s Wells in 25 years time.

     2. The scientists are coming.

    Genetic research is about to usher in a brave new world and one with implications for the bloodstock industry that are far more profound than the impact of AI. Take the following example(www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/innovation/2010/0108/1224261770182) and consider the implications of this work. If scientists can identify and then test for the genetic markers that determine performance, the consequences for the industry are dramatic and traumatic. Who will buy a horse who is lacking these critical indicators of success? Currently the industry is supported by the triumph of hope over probability. Genetic tests will eliminate this hope and will make the majority of foals/yearlings effectively worthless. Other possibilities arise. What if these tests can be performed on embryos? The logical thing for a breeder to do would be to cease the pregnancy and try again, which raises ethical issues. 

     On a more positive note the scientists will help debunk many current breeding theories. We should get a proper understanding of inheritance with due regard and understanding of female influence. Looking back in 2020 I suspect us modern pedigree ‘experts’ will be viewed in the same way that we regard 19th century doctors who relied on bloodletting and leeches for many ailments!

    3. The Japanese are coming

    Japanese horses have already finished 2nd (El Condor Pasa) and 3rd (Deep Impact) in the Arc. They have finished first and second in the Melbourne Cup (Delta Blues and Pop Rock) and have achieved major success in America (Casino Drive and Cesario), the UK (Agnes World) and France (Seeking the Pearl).  It is a long time since Japan was a dumping ground for failed or unfashionable European stallions and the effect of their investments in recent decades mean that their horses are competitive at the highest level. The huge prizemoney at home has probably restricted travel to date but that might be about to change. If the Japanese bloodstock industry follows the example of other Japanese industries then they will be anxious to prove themselves to the world.  It might be no more than a hunch but I predict that Japanese winners will become commonplace in major events here and in the US.