Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

Firebrand — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:21:55 GMT

Actually, it was John Hay "Jock" Whitney, along with Ogden Phipps and Robert Kleberg Jr. of King Ranch who purchased the entire group of horses from Bradley's Idle Hour Farm estate.

I would definitely say Mr. Phipps came out the winner in that deal - greatly due to the daughters of La Troienne.

Hirsch and Ethel Jacobs bought Searching, a granddaughter of La Troienne, from Mr. Phipps.

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

Obmar — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:20:50 GMT

The Phipps ,Jacobs and the King Ranch divided the land and the horses of E.R Bradley after he died

"Mr. Bradley, one of America's most successful breeders of his day, considers the mare eighty percent in importance. His general theory is to bring back to the sire the best blood of his dam within the first four removes."

Nursery Stud Dispersal "It was the results secured from the blending of the blood of Fair Play and Rock Sand that gave the Nursery Stud international fame ** Selective breeding within the nursery gave the best results. Mares that had not been raced excessively and that were related to good performers were perferred for the stud."

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

Jermon — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 01:38:55 GMT

I recall Aspidistra and Somethingroyal very well. Because they

were not exactly household names, I never thought I would see

the names A. Deck and Chinatowner in print again. A. Deck's

sire was First Cabin, a horse I was "intoduced" to in his stall as

an unraced 2yo in 1954. My, where has the time gone, why has

it passed so quickly? The answer to that is simpler than the

solution to this debate.

An understanding; all I've ever been is a fan and racegoer, who

would occcasionly meet a horsey person who would invite me

to the early morning workouts.

Genes are like electrons, in that no one has ever seen them.

In the case of electrons, one can measure and regulate their

flow with the appropriate test equipment. In the case of genes,

one can only exercise a little probability theory and wonder.

Because I had his book(s) at one time, I remember Tesio's

theory as quoted by others. In that same book, in an effort

to relay to the reader the relative importance of the mare

in various cultures, he stated that the Egyptians regarded

the mare to be no better than a burlap bag. One got out of

her only what was put into her. Such poppycock!

Unfortunately, I lent my entire library to someone who was

contemplating going into racing in 1964. I never saw the

books again. No one can remember everything, no one's

memory is perfect. I can't recall if Tesio offered his theory

of a racemare leaving her"nervous energy" on the track

as a general rule or in reference to certain types of mares.

I do recall him mentioning mannish mares, that this applied

in particular, to those that were good enough to compete

against the males.

I remember Cicada very well, having seen most of her races.

Her failure to produce anything worthwhile was a major dis-

appointment. Her breeding lends itself to interesting

speculation. Her dam Satsuma raced but twice, her grand-dam

was the storied, blind Hildene, who was supposedly purchased

by Christopher Chenery of Meadow Stable for $600. Hildene,

given her success as a producer, most probably put Meadow

Stables in the big leagues of racing. I can't recall a Meadow

performer worthy of note prior to her Hill Prince, a top handicap

performer and horse of the year. Was Cicada's failure to

produce to the standard of her bottom line due to having left

all her "nervous energy" on the track, or due to her sire

Bryan G? In all the years at the track and in all the pedigrees

I researched, I can't recall another Bryan G. attaining much

success. The shame of it is that he was extremely well bred.

In an effort to resolve this issue in my own mind in the past,

I've used the broodmare bands of two families, the Phipps' and

the Jacobs' as a reference. The Phipps family had a very power-

ful band of well bred mares that produced runners year after year.

On the track, they had raced often and hard, some of them

racing 40 to 45 times. My all time favorite combined racemare

and producer was Misty Morn, one of the country's best handi-

cap racemares. Year after year, she seemed to have one

horse or another contending for year end honors.

By the Jacobs family, I basically mean Hirsh Jacobs, Patrice

Wolfson's father. His band of broodmares ran the gamut from

Searching to some rather cheap mares he had claimed. On

the track, Searching was the best handicap mare in the country.

Her first foal was Affectionately, who was so successful in

stake races she was assigned as many as 137 lbs. Another

daughter was Priceless Gem, who at 3 was good enough

to beat the males, including Buckpasser. Jacobs, more so

than the Phipps', raced his horses often and hard.

Nothirdchance, the dam of Hail To Reason, went to the post

93 times. And it wasn't because she was a cheap mare. Her

grand sire on the top line was Blue Larkspur, and her grand

sire on the bottom line was Sir Gallahad III. In my opinion,

she was royally bred and a valuable breeding prospect.

Even Jacobs' cheap mares, as heavily raced as they had

been, would drop a horse that would be more than just

useful. His theory was that the family was stronger than the

individual. He led this country's Breeders list at least once.

I guess he knew what he was doing.

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

Shari — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:49:36 GMT

Study after study has proven this theory false. There are thousands a new unwinning broodmares produced every year. There are only 2 or 3 champions. If you actualy adjust the numbers, the winning mares typically have a higher rate of success. As for winning colors being a dud as a brood mare, she had two foals danzig colors (300,000) and golden colors ($500,000), who were both very good race horses. Golden colors has already produced two earners of over $500,000.

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

Tammy — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 02:37:17 GMT

And then you have Toussaud, A really good race mare but very nervous. She became a great broodmare, these gems are so rare!

But I think a lot of the great breeders built on good families not just a great race mare.

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

Ofelia — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 23:36:47 GMT

Lady's Secret, the champion mare by Secretariat, never produced a foal of quality much less that could run. Champion Cicada couldn't produce either. It could be related to their temperament. Gentle loving mares as opposed to high-strung racers , produce calmer foals that are easier to train. Tesio believed racing sapped their energy but also made them nervous and edgy.

I think Rags to Riches has a better chance of producing a winner than a mare that has never raced but she may not have the temperament or patience to carry a foal and raise it.

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

Huh — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 20:46:12 GMT

To me mares who are well bred will succeed at being a broodmare, but some mares like Winning Colors who have multiple stakes winners including G1 winners in her pedigree it is almost surprising she couldn't reproduce herself.

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

Dreamer's Mom — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 20:43:55 GMT

We have long believed the "left it on the track" way of thinking, but some of those mares are great to be around so you breed them to not only try to pass on talent, but also disposition. We have found full sisters to be better broodmares, but the babies of the good ones are certainly able to pay their way.

My own good mare came from a dam that never beat a single horse in her short race career. The dam had a nice, solid pedigree so we kept her around and she rewarded us! I'll let you know in 2 1/2 years if my good mare keeps up with her dam!

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

Bill Patterson — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:32:48 GMT

Having studied Tesio's breedings and thoughts on the matter I do feel that a lot of great racemares have indeed left it on the track. Tesio, perhaps the most successful breeder of all time, thought that energy spent on the track was gone forever and would race his best fillies only enough to judge their true ability. Today, purses are so high that the better fillies and mares stay in training longer than they did even just 20 years ago. Perhaps a mathmatical study would prove that these talented but less raced fillies and mares are now producing a greater percentage of the top runners.

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

cheryl — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:17:36 GMT

It is very interesting that more often than not, the great race fillies of the last 30 or 40 years have not been able to reproduce themselves in their offspring. Princess Rooney, Winning Colors and One Dreamer are others that come to mind. I'm really looking forward to seeing what Rags to Riches can do. Taking nothing away from the above fillies, it would be awesome to see her follow in her mother's footsteps as well as Personal Ensigns. To me, this is what is so cool about owning broodmares, as frustrating as they can be. They have only one shot each year to prove themselves. When they do - very exciting!!!!

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

Elaine — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:09:11 GMT

You have it completely backwards and every study on the subject says so, including the study that appeared in the Blood Horse on 10/23/03. In "Thoroughbred Breeding" by Mordaunt Milner, he discovered that non-winning mares made up 30% of the mare population and 15% of the dams of high-class runners. Good racemares made up 5% of the broodmare population and 26% of the dams of good racemares. Encouraging breeders to buy well-bred but non-winning mares is the fastest way for breeders to lose money.

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

Maggie — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:46:54 GMT

You might be right on that regard. I remember reading a book about the breeding industry and the philosophy of some of the greatest breeding farms and breeders in North America. For the life of me, I cannot recall the author or the name of the book, but that is not even the point. From what I can gather in my memory banks of reading past horse racing industry books, I seem to recollect a recurring statement. "The more the mare races, the lesser a chance of her producing a great horse," or something to that effect. That does make sense; after all, we have had and still have broodmares who did not establish much on the track, yet they completely dominate in the breeding shed. Of course, that opinion could be wrong. I would love to find out if other great filly and mare champions transferred their brilliance from the track to the breeding shed, such as you mentioned above with Personal Ensign and My Dear Girl. Great point, though! Is it really worth it spending millions of dollars for an outstanding broodmare prospect who is established on the track but does not perform well at the breeding shed? Or is it a risky venture to buy a broodmare at low value for her to produce excellent offspring? That is what makes the game all the more intriguing.

re: Saving It vs. Leaving It On the Track

No_Class — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:17:22 GMT

From the Canadian Racing Hall of Fame:

No Class -Hall of Fame Inductee, 1997

"No broodmare more belies her inappropriate name more than No Class. Her name is just the opposite of her claim to fame as there isn't another mare in Canadian thoroughbred racing history whose runners have earned more than $6 million.

No Class is the dam of four Sovereign Award winners - Sky Classic ($3.2 million), Regal Classic ($1.4 million), Grey Classic ($602,029) and Classy 'n Smart ($303,222), the dam of Dance Smartly, the leading money-winning female thoroughbred in Canadian history ($3.2 million) when she retired. The daughter of Danzig - Dance Smartly won the Breeders' Cup Distaff, an Eclipse Award, Canada's Triple Crown and induction into the National Museum of Racing and Hall of Fame in Saratoga, N.Y. Dance Smartly became as prolific a broodmare as her grandma; producing Plate winners Scatter The Gold and Dancethruthedawn.

No Class's other stakes winners include Classic Reign and Always A Classic, a Gr. 1 stakes winner in Kentucky with earnings of $388,648. He was No Class's final stakes winner. No Class is the dam of eight foals, seven to race and all winners. No Class, by Nodouble-Classy Quillo, died in 1993.

Bred by Jack Hood of Stratford, Ont., No Class was consigned by Roy Kennedy's Gateway Farms to the annual CTHS yearling sales in 1975 and was purchased by Sam-Son Farms for $25,000. As a runner she placed in the Yearling Sales Stakes and was third in the Princess Elizabeth. But her destiny was as a broodmare as she became the foundation mare of Ernie Samuel's world-renowned breeding nursery. She won a Sovereign Award as the champion Broodmare of the Year in 1985."

Think that article says it all!!!