Home

0629143
Ratings Generated in 2014
Featured Stallion

TrueNicks Reports for Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe

Complimentary TrueNicks Enhanced Reports are available below for the Oct. 6 Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe (Fr-I) at Longchamp. Click on a horse's name or rating to view the full report.

TrueNicks ratings (A, B, C, etc.) describe the stakes winner strike rate of a particular sire/broodmare sire cross compared to the records of those sire lines when bred to all other lines. Ratings don't describe the quality of a particular horse, but rather they describe the efficiency of that horse's cross, i.e. the "nick."

TrueNicks reports offer breeders, buyers, and stallion owners up-to-date racing data from The Jockey Club database to help describe a prospective mating. The TrueNicks Enhanced Report answers questions like:

  • how often has the cross been tried?
  • how often does the cross result in a stakes winner?
  • who are the best horses bred on the cross?
  • how have horses on the cross sold at auction?
  • how has the cross performed on dirt, turf, and synthetic surfaces?
  • what is the average winning/racing distance for starters bred on the cross?
  • is the cross more successful with its colts or its fillies?
  • what is the level of inbreeding in the mating?
  • how closely related are sire and dam?

The inbreeding coefficent of a mating is one of the newest statistics in TrueNicks reports and is included in the table below for interest's sake (read more on inbreeding coefficient). Average distance raced (ADR) and average winning distance (AWD) are the averages for all horses bred on the cross and are shown in furlongs. Typically when AWD is greater than ADR, it is a sign of a stamina-oriented cross, an important consideration for the 12-furlong Arc.

No.HorseSire
TrueNicks
InbreedingADRAWDOdds
1
Very Nice Name Whipper
A++
 1.84% 8.57 8.72
66-1
2
Novellist Monsun
A++
 1.93% 11.12 10.82
4-1
3
Al Kazeem Dubawi
A
 2.78% 8.35 8.48
16-1
4
Joshua Tree Montjeu
A++
 2.74% 9.83 9.61
66-1
5
Meandre Slickly
D
 0.83% 12.77 12.66
50-1
6
Orfevre Stay Gold
A++
 2.74% 10.12 10.33
2-1
7
Going Somewhere Sulamani
A++
 2.46% 12.31 11.73
100-1
8
Haya Landa Lando
C
 0.36% 10.60 10.27
100-1
9
Pirika Monsun
A+
 0.83% 10.89 11.28
100-1
10
Flintshire Dansili
A
 4.48% 10.63 10.78
14-1
11
Leading Light Montjeu
B+
 2.09% 11.40 11.47
12-1
12
Ocovango Monsun
A++
 0.46% 9.38 10.12
33-1
13
Penglai Pavilion Monsun
A++
 0.58% 10.87 10.91
50-1
14
Kizuna Deep Impact
A
 1.70% 8.85 8.82
7-1
15
Ruler of The World Galileo
A++
 5.12% 13.55 13.50
12-1
16
Sahawar Dark Angel
A
 1.45% 6.82 6.88
100-1
17
Intello Galileo
A+
 3.98% 9.48 9.20
12-1
18
Treve Motivator
A++
 2.56% 10.78 10.79
5-1

Filed under: , , ,

4 Comments:

It has been a banner year for Monsun and I will be cheering for him to be the sire of the Ascot Gold Cup and Arc winner in the same year.

John T 04 Oct 2013 11:53 PM

Alas the main hope for Monsun, Novelist was scratched out of this race but Treve was a worthy winner and she give a big boost to the Epsom Derby winner Motivator.

John T 06 Oct 2013 10:31 PM

On face value, this product is more likely to iD unsuitable matings than find true answers....this is further compounded by the laws of random ten matings using  the same dam and sire will produce ten different  results ,when you add  the different trainers ,upbringing,environment ,race competitors ...the odds just get longer.....my personal view is I rely on the physical attributes of sire  and dam ,race results and conditions....use pedigree stuff to ID what not to do only.....trainers skills are also a major influence.....with the entire gene pool going back to a handful of ancestors .its more guesswork than trus science,with random the biggest influence....Tony

Tony. Antoniades 09 Oct 2013 2:16 PM

Tony,

Thanks for taking time to comment.

Most heritability studies which explain the differences in horses have the "trainer effect", which is in fact a combination of trainer/jockey/vet at somewhere between 20-25% of the variance in a horse population. The other 75-80% are explained by the pedigree and other environmental factors (how the horse is raised, etc). Random effects as you have described are low in terms of describing overall heritability of performance as a trait.

In regards to it being more "guesswork than science" because it is a closed gene pool, the opposite is actually true. Because it is a closed gene pool, and one that is selected on for performance (although that may vary from country to country depending on what races are important), some traits are highly heritable and thus less about guesswork and more about science. As an example, optimal race distance has a high heritability that depending on the metric used has been measured from 68% to 92%, that is between 68 to 92% of the variability of optimal race distance can be explained by the immediate ancestors of an unproven horse. This is why mating a sprinter to a sprinter will get you a sprinter.

Obviously class is a lot more complex than distance, but a similar concept applies. TrueNicks is also never intended to be used in isolation in selection. It is one tool that is proven to be important, but must be weighted with other considerations including conformation and other aspects that influence outcomes.

Thanks again for taking time to post.

Byron Rogers 09 Oct 2013 2:32 PM

Leave a Comment

All comments are moderated and must be approved before they are posted. The blog author reserves the right to edit or omit any comment.

  (Appears with your comment) (required)
  (Will not be published) (required)
  (required)