Which (if any) 3-yr-olds will run next year?

[Dunbar]

I've been a big Street Sense fan since his BC win last year. But I can't root for him this year if he's going to take the win into the breeding shed.

Are any of the 3-yr-olds in the Classic committed to racing as 4-yr-olds?

--Dunbar

[SniperSB23]

I've been a big Street Sense fan since his BC win last year. But I can't root for him this year if he's going to take the win into the breeding shed.

Are any of the 3-yr-olds in the Classic committed to racing as 4-yr-olds?

--Dunbar

I think Tiago will be back. Curlin could be as well. Any Given Saturday is an outside chance but doubtful and certainly won't be back if he wins the Classic. No way Street Sense or Hard Spun will be back, I think it is in their contract that they get turned over to Darley for stud duty after the Classic. What is interesting is that Lawyer Ron could be back. He doesn't become the property of Stonewall until he finishes out of the top two in back to back races or the Hines estate decides to retire him for stud.

[Merlinsky]

I think it's ridiculous not to root for Street Sense because he's going off to breed. Either he's good enough or he's not. If he is and this is your reasoning, it's pure spite which is crazy.

Regarding next year, I think they're thinking Dubai World Cup with Lawyer Ron and frankly I enjoy seeing him do what he's been doing. This isn't some sad attempt to eek out another race, he's G1 caliber and seems to thoroughly enjoy himself. They get the purse money (which let's face it, is why he's still going), we get to keep seeing him, and should he start to wind down before they choose to retire--which I doubt--the finish position contractually limits him from being driven into the ground.

Doesn't Any Given Saturday already have a stud deal? They bought shares in his dad too. Maybe we could see AGS and LR go at it in Dubai if they opt to keep him going. I wonder what's going on with Curlin--does he not have a deal due to his owner-situation craziness? It's either that or they're playing hard to get. It would be nice to see him too but I'll wait for the announcement.

Nobody's brought up Rags to Riches who I figure would've been retired already if they were going to. I think they've had more than enough opportunities. I realize they'd probably send Rags to Riches to Storm Cat or something but maybe they could consider Smart Strike (I just hope $75,000 isn't under breeding in their minds, I think the pedigree holds up). Pulls in Mr. Prospector and Curlin has that over Deputy Minister who's Rags' BM. You'd get a similar family mix in addition to the Mr. P/AP Indy that works out so well so often. That's another reason I think they'll try to bring her back, Storm Cat's no spring chicken so if they wanted to go that route they'd be trying to do that now. His book's already going down.

[SniperSB23]

Nobody's brought up Rags to Riches who I figure would've been retired already if they were going to. I think they've had more than enough opportunities. I realize they'd probably send Rags to Riches to Storm Cat or something but maybe they could consider Smart Strike. Pulls in Mr. P and Curlin has that over Deputy Minister who's Rags' BM so you'd get a similar family mix combined with the Mr. P/AP Indy that works out so well so often. That's another reason I think they'll try to bring her back, Storm Cat's no spring chicken so if they wanted to go that route they'd be trying to do that now. His book's already going down.

They have plenty of time with Rags. It isn't like a stallion where you need time to fill their book. They can bring her back in the spring and see how she looks and even in April or May if she has another setback there is still time to breed her.

[Merlinsky]

They have plenty of time with Rags. It isn't like a stallion where you need time to fill their book. They can bring her back in the spring and see how she looks and even in April or May if she has another setback there is still time to breed her.

Very true. And I'm sure even with a book limitation they'd squeeze her in.

[Danzig]

I think it's ridiculous not to root for Street Sense because he's going off to breed. Either he's good enough or he's not. If he is and this is your reasoning, it's pure spite which is crazy.

Regarding next year, I think they're thinking Dubai World Cup with Lawyer Ron and frankly I enjoy seeing him do what he's been doing. This isn't some sad attempt to eek out another race, he's G1 caliber and seems to thoroughly enjoy himself. They get the purse money (which let's face it, is why he's still going), we get to keep seeing him, and should he start to wind down before they choose to retire--which I doubt--the finish position contractually limits him from being driven into the ground.

Doesn't Any Given Saturday already have a stud deal? They bought shares in his dad too. Maybe we could see AGS and LR go at it in Dubai if they opt to keep him going. I wonder what's going on with Curlin--does he not have a deal due to his owner-situation craziness? It's either that or they're playing hard to get. It would be nice to see him too but I'll wait for the announcement.

Nobody's brought up Rags to Riches who I figure would've been retired already if they were going to. I think they've had more than enough opportunities. I realize they'd probably send Rags to Riches to Storm Cat or something but maybe they could consider Smart Strike (I just hope $75,000 isn't under breeding in their minds, I think the pedigree holds up). Pulls in Mr. Prospector and Curlin has that over Deputy Minister who's Rags' BM. You'd get a similar family mix in addition to the Mr. P/AP Indy that works out so well so often. That's another reason I think they'll try to bring her back, Storm Cat's no spring chicken so if they wanted to go that route they'd be trying to do that now. His book's already going down.

yeah, i'm pretty sure they're thinking dubai for lawyer ron. i wouldn't be surprised to see any given saturday stay in training for the same target, while street sense and hard spun go to the shed.

[Cannon Shell]

Hacker Craft will run next year

[Linny]

AGS was reported to be listed on the WinStar roster for next season. I just looked and he's not there. That could be a good sign.

[Dunbar]

I think it's ridiculous not to root for Street Sense because he's going off to breed. Either he's good enough or he's not. If he is and this is your reasoning, it's pure spite which is crazy.

Sorry, but I don't feel either crazy or ridiculous. Possibly spiteful, though. Why should I root for a result that will add prestige to a horse who's been retired too early?

I'd rather get to watch winners of the Breeder's Cup races run another year, especially when they are just 3-yr-olds. And I'd rather see a 4-yr-old like Lawyer Ron win it than a 3-yr-old whose connections can't wait to cash in. I'm not sure why that seems so ridiculous to you.

--Dunbar

[Cannon Shell]

Strub Series bound I assume?
Probably skip the Malibu but maybe the 2 turn races........or $7500 NW3L

[letswastemoney]

The Green Monkey :)

[Merlinsky]

Sorry, but I don't feel either crazy or ridiculous. Possibly spiteful, though. Why should I root for a result that will add prestige to a horse who's been retired too early?

I'd rather get to watch winners of the Breeder's Cup races run another year, especially when they are just 3-yr-olds. And I'd rather see a 4-yr-old like Lawyer Ron win it than a 3-yr-old whose connections can't wait to cash in. I'm not sure why that seems so ridiculous to you.

--Dunbar

I don't hold the horse responsible for whatever I might dislike about his management...I didn't hold it against Smarty Jones or Toccet and I got over issues with Point Given too. I don't cheat myself out of enjoying a top horse because of the future (hey now don't mess with Toccet, he could've been better). Horse of the Year doesn't mean how well or if he's gonna run next year, it's how well he's running now. I want him to have a great race. Can you still enjoy Secretariat's Belmont given he didn't run on at age 4? I mean let's apply this retroactively.

The Green Monkey :)

Done enough my friend, he's done enough ;) There's no one for him to beat...because everyone's beating him but hey, semantics.

[Benevolus]

Not classic horses this year, but I think four very goods ones for next year are going to be Going Ballistic, Delightful Kiss, Zanjero, and Grasshopper.

[SniperSB23]

Not classic horses this year, but I think four very goods ones for next year are going to be Going Ballistic, Delightful Kiss, Zanjero, and Grasshopper.

I'm still hopeful Ketchikan will join that list too. I guess Ravel is another that should be mentioned as well as the injured O'Neill horses (Notional and Great Hunter).

[cakes44]

Is Chelokee retired yet?

[Coach Pants]

Sightseeing will be back for 2008. LOL

[Benevolus]

Is Chelokee retired yet?

I don't think so. I think he had a minor injury and will be back at 4.

[Benevolus]

I'm still hopeful Ketchikan will join that list too. I guess Ravel is another that should be mentioned as well as the injured O'Neill horses (Notional and Great Hunter).

Ravel could be anything. It wouldn't shock me if he turned out to be the top horse in the country next year. Hopefully he runs in the Clark at Churchill.

[Getaway]

Sorry, but I don't feel either crazy or ridiculous. Possibly spiteful, though. Why should I root for a result that will add prestige to a horse who's been retired too early?

I'd rather get to watch winners of the Breeder's Cup races run another year, especially when they are just 3-yr-olds. And I'd rather see a 4-yr-old like Lawyer Ron win it than a 3-yr-old whose connections can't wait to cash in. I'm not sure why that seems so ridiculous to you.

--Dunbar

What most of you still can't get into your heads is that it costs TONS of money to insure these beasts! Street Sense is worth MILLIONS and for smaller operations (not Coolmore or Darley or Shadwell....) it is just not economically feasible to keep them in training. While Im sure the connections of Street Sense are not starving for money, they have much more to lose by keeping him in training another year. They are not in any way cashing in...they have had a good run, and are getting out while they are ahead. Bernardini on the other hand last year was a whole different story. I just can't look at Street Sense the same way.

[Danzig]

it's not that the horse is suddenly valuable and ins is the problem, it's the potential loss of millions in stud fees. look at curlin, due to legal issues, he's got no deals. if there were no shadows being cast by lawyers, he'd also have a stud career worked out. so, his insurance is affordable and street senses isn't? no, it's that his potential value as a stud isn't on paper yet. there is a perceived value, but not a real value. of course his insurance may be high, but it's hard to believe that these millionaires (or in jacksons case, billionaires) are going to cry poor over insurance. another thing that gets me is that porter hurried to sign a deal for hard spun, and then bemoans the fact he can't run the horse at four. he wants a deal quick, before the horse possibly runs up the track, but then can't understand why darley might see a career at four as a problem?! of course HE can't, he no longer has a risk, only a reward.

[Danzig]

What most of you still can't get into your heads is that it costs TONS of money to insure these beasts! Street Sense is worth MILLIONS and for smaller operations (not Coolmore or Darley or Shadwell....) it is just not economically feasible to keep them in training. While Im sure the connections of Street Sense are not starving for money, they have much more to lose by keeping him in training another year. They are not in any way cashing in...they have had a good run, and are getting out while they are ahead. Bernardini on the other hand last year was a whole different story. I just can't look at Street Sense the same way.

yes they are.

street sense has no hope of making the millions in stud fees as a racehorse running for purses. tafel is no dummy, but he most certainly is cashing in.

[Dunbar]

yes they are.

street sense has no hope of making the millions in stud fees as a racehorse running for purses. tafel is no dummy, but he most certainly is cashing in.

Exactly. It's about the money. And there's no law that people have to (or even get to) maximize their money at the expense of the sport.

--Dunbar

[GPK]

Hacker Craft will run next year


Since EC is gonna retire after this year...im thinking my next license plate is gonna be..

HKR CRFT:cool:

[tiznowthegreat]

Any update regarding Curlin or AGS for next year?

[GenuineRisk]

yes they are.

street sense has no hope of making the millions in stud fees as a racehorse running for purses. tafel is no dummy, but he most certainly is cashing in.

I was thinking about the breeding industry, as I was reading yet another article about George Washington today- one of the articles mentioned he was sold for a bit over $2 million as a yearling. It reminded me of how incredibly over-inflated the prices for racehorses are, because they're being sold not as racing prospects, but as breeding prospects, which happen to run a few times in an attempt to increase their value. GW, one of the few really expensive racehorses who actually had a chance to earn back what he cost, was retired upon having earned a little more than half what he cost, because he wasn't really purchased for that at all- it was for profits in breeding.

And because of the breeding industry, the successful intact horses are assigned these incredibly high values for insurance purposes, and yes, it does start to make no sense to run them because they can't earn enough to cover the insurance payments for an arbitrary figure set according to a possible future breeding success (which is about as rare as success in stakes races- Real Quiet sired a BC winner yesterday and stands for what, $5000? In Pennsylvania). And it has nothing to do with racing as a sport- it's this weird parallel industry that makes lots of money and doesn't really have anything to do with the reason racing exists (gambling)- a 6-1 shot pays exactly the same in a $2500 claimer as in the Kentucky Derby. But it does harm the popular face of the industry because it's hard to attract fans to a sport where the big stars have maybe an 18-month career.

And because of the big $$ involved, the racing industry won't do the most obvious thing to keep the stars running- regulate the breeding industry. Requiring the stud horse to be at least 5 years old is no less arbitrary than requiring the matings to be natural covers. But requiring natural covers drives up stud fees, while making horses reach 5 before breeding would result in a lot of precocious but unsound 2-year-olds being forgotten after they get injured and retired to replicate their unsoundness.

Anyway, so yeah, it's about the $$. And so I can sympathize with Dunbar finding it hard to root for a horse that is being rushed off to the breeding shed. As a person who understands $$ rules everything in this world, I comprehend it, but as a fan of racing I hate it, and in the end, fandom is emotional, not logical (see some of my 2006 posts on Lawyer Ron for proof of that!).

[GPK]

I was thinking about the breeding industry, as I was reading yet another article about George Washington today- one of the articles mentioned he was sold for a bit over $2 million as a yearling. It reminded me of how incredibly over-inflated the prices for racehorses are, because they're being sold not as racing prospects, but as breeding prospects, which happen to run a few times in an attempt to increase their value. GW, one of the few really expensive racehorses who actually had a chance to earn back what he cost, was retired upon having earned a little more than half what he cost, because he wasn't really purchased for that at all- it was for profits in breeding.

And because of the breeding industry, the successful intact horses are assigned these incredibly high values for insurance purposes, and yes, it does start to make no sense to run them because they can't earn enough to cover the insurance payments for an arbitrary figure set according to a possible future breeding success (which is about as rare as success in stakes races- Real Quiet sired a BC winner yesterday and stands for what, $5000? In Pennsylvania). And it has nothing to do with racing as a sport- it's this weird parallel industry that makes lots of money and doesn't really have anything to do with the reason racing exists (gambling)- a 6-1 shot pays exactly the same in a $2500 claimer as in the Kentucky Derby. But it does harm the popular face of the industry because it's hard to attract fans to a sport where the big stars have maybe an 18-month career.

And because of the big $$ involved, the racing industry won't do the most obvious thing to keep the stars running- regulate the breeding industry. Requiring the stud horse to be at least 5 years old is no less arbitrary than requiring the matings to be natural covers. But requiring natural covers drives up stud fees, while making horses reach 5 before breeding would result in a lot of precocious but unsound 2-year-olds being forgotten after they get injured and retired to replicate their unsoundness.

Anyway, so yeah, it's about the $$. And so I can sympathize with Dunbar finding it hard to root for a horse that is being rushed off to the breeding shed. As a person who understands $$ rules everything in this world, I comprehend it, but as a fan of racing I hate it, and in the end, fandom is emotional, not logical (see some of my 2006 posts on Lawyer Ron for proof of that!).


your so sexy when you talk like that...:p

[Cannon Shell]

I was thinking about the breeding industry, as I was reading yet another article about George Washington today- one of the articles mentioned he was sold for a bit over $2 million as a yearling. It reminded me of how incredibly over-inflated the prices for racehorses are, because they're being sold not as racing prospects, but as breeding prospects, which happen to run a few times in an attempt to increase their value. GW, one of the few really expensive racehorses who actually had a chance to earn back what he cost, was retired upon having earned a little more than half what he cost, because he wasn't really purchased for that at all- it was for profits in breeding.

And because of the breeding industry, the successful intact horses are assigned these incredibly high values for insurance purposes, and yes, it does start to make no sense to run them because they can't earn enough to cover the insurance payments for an arbitrary figure set according to a possible future breeding success (which is about as rare as success in stakes races- Real Quiet sired a BC winner yesterday and stands for what, $5000? In Pennsylvania). And it has nothing to do with racing as a sport- it's this weird parallel industry that makes lots of money and doesn't really have anything to do with the reason racing exists (gambling)- a 6-1 shot pays exactly the same in a $2500 claimer as in the Kentucky Derby. But it does harm the popular face of the industry because it's hard to attract fans to a sport where the big stars have maybe an 18-month career.

And because of the big $$ involved, the racing industry won't do the most obvious thing to keep the stars running- regulate the breeding industry. Requiring the stud horse to be at least 5 years old is no less arbitrary than requiring the matings to be natural covers. But requiring natural covers drives up stud fees, while making horses reach 5 before breeding would result in a lot of precocious but unsound 2-year-olds being forgotten after they get injured and retired to replicate their unsoundness.

Anyway, so yeah, it's about the $$. And so I can sympathize with Dunbar finding it hard to root for a horse that is being rushed off to the breeding shed. As a person who understands $$ rules everything in this world, I comprehend it, but as a fan of racing I hate it, and in the end, fandom is emotional, not logical (see some of my 2006 posts on Lawyer Ron for proof of that!).
Good post but personally I believe limiting a stallions foal crop to a certain number would be a better option than making a stallion wait until they are 5. You may wind up with horses with legit injuries trying a limited, big money campaign with endings like GW. It would also lower the total value of a stallion because they would not be able to collect as much in stud fees which may lead to lesser horses who may stand for 15k or less stay in training to try to enhance credentials since they have the potential to make close to the breeding money on the track. Of course these things have no chance of ever happening.

[Dunbar]

And because of the big $$ involved, the racing industry won't do the most obvious thing to keep the stars running- regulate the breeding industry. Requiring the stud horse to be at least 5 years old is no less arbitrary than requiring the matings to be natural covers. But requiring natural covers drives up stud fees, while making horses reach 5 before breeding would result in a lot of precocious but unsound 2-year-olds being forgotten after they get injured and retired to replicate their unsoundness.


Wow! I've never heard anyone express that idea besides me. Thank you!

As you note, it's entirely possible for the breeding industry to be regulated in the interest of the overall horseracing business. Breeders would take a minor hit. They would lose one year out of a horse's, what, 12-17 year breeding life? As compensation for that, we'd see horses that become stars, like Street Sense, hang around another year. We might have seen Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex run another year.

In every other sport, the stars try to hang around as long as they can. That helps create fans. People relate to familiar names. In horseracing, as soon as a horse's name cracks the general public's radar, that horse is gone from the scene.

As it is now run, I see the breeding business as a giant pyramid scheme. Breeding costs are very high, despite the fact that few offspring will amount to much. As soon as any offspring shows promise, it, too, is whisked off to the shed to create another pyramid of its own. Because of the economics, breeders are breeding future breeders, not racehorses.

Maybe when there are 100 people/day coming to Santa Anita and Belmont, the industry will realize it has to take the step of prohibiting breeding with any stallion until it is at least 5 years old.

One of my two local papers did not have ANY coverage of the Breeder's Cup in today's paper. That's how large the BC is in the mind of some sports editors.

--Dunbar

[Cannon Shell]

Wow! I've never heard anyone express that idea besides me. Thank you!

As you note, it's entirely possible for the breeding industry to be regulated in the interest of the overall horseracing business. Breeders would take a minor hit. They would lose one year out of a horse's, what, 12-17 year breeding life? As compensation for that, we'd see horses that become stars, like Street Sense, hang around another year. We might have seen Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex run another year.

In every other sport, the stars try to hang around as long as they can. That helps create fans. People relate to familiar names. In horseracing, as soon as a horse's name cracks the general public's radar, that horse is gone from the scene.

As it is now run, I see the breeding business as a giant pyramid scheme. Breeding costs are very high, despite the fact that few offspring will amount to much. As soon as any offspring shows promise, it, too, is whisked off to the shed to create another pyramid of its own. Because of the economics, breeders are breeding future breeders, not racehorses.

Maybe when there are 100 people/day coming to Santa Anita and Belmont, the industry will realize it has to take the step of prohibiting breeding with any stallion until it is at least 5 years old.

One of my two local papers did not have ANY coverage of the Breeder's Cup in today's paper. That's how large the BC is in the mind of some sports editors.

--Dunbar

While agree that it would be nice if horses raced longer the idea that the game will somehow be revived if a few of the big horses run at 3 is just not true.
1st problem - The greater the chance of a popular horse having an untimely ending which does far more to hurt the game than one staying in training and running does to help it. Making anything mandatory will always make people make questionable decisions especially when so much money is involved. The truth is that I am sure that you can get a much lower insurance rate if a horse is not in training and some may retire and sit the year out anyway. Or run in the Dubai race then retire.
2nd Problem - Racing fans are going to watch the big events regardless. New fans may not know who the hell is running anyway. Beside a few big days a year, it is not like the horses will run much anyway. Racings problem is that it needs new fans that bet, not just new fans.
3rd Problem - See recent campaigns of Funny Cide

[Danzig]

the breeding industry has got to self correct. read the other day in bh that altho keeneland sales were a 'success', only 1/4 of the breeders made back their money. obviously that can't continue. over the last few months, there have been some saying they are going to a lower priced stallion, as the prices aren't going thru the roof like in years past. and of course coolmore vs darley has some effect on that--for a few breeders. most of course never have the opportunity to have one of theirs get the attention of the biggest guns.
darley grabbed a few headlines due to their purchases of some of the top three year olds, but i think overall that the market is turning downward.

[pgardn]

The problem is that I like watching horses run, not waiting for their offspring.
Each horse is an individual, not a descendant of some horse who won a Grade I race.

Therefore I hope Street Sense, as well as Smarty Jones, Bernardini, etc... are absolute duds in the shed. I hope all their offspring make great riding ponies and are happy doing so.

I like watching athletes perform. I really liked watching Street Sense ride the rail with Borel aboard. He made races interesting. He was fun to watch. I would look forward to races he was in.

But racing is not about people who like watching athletes compete.
Which is the purest form of sports pleasure, apologies to the serious
handicappers, breeders, pinhookers, hookers, etc...

[ALostTexan]

I will always root for the gelding in the Derby. If there has to be a TC Winner, I hope they are a gelding...

[pgardn]

your logic is more convoluted than most but my little mind unraveled it to the point to say you haven't thought your somewhat smug conclusion to it's rightful end...i am paying street sense's bills, and others here a lot more than i...u might be watching kobe or whoever for free but who's paying 200 bucks a seat for those college games you're such an expert at? u are living on everyone else's dime unless u have a s-load of bc apparel in your closet

Those 200 dollar seats at college games are miniscule compared to what TV networks pay the NCAA to broadcast those games. Thus the advertisers are obviously making bucks off the consumer settin in her big chair at home drinking large amounts of the High Life. Get real magma.

And you very well might be paying more of Street Sense's bill. Which is why your computer speaks Japanese to you.

[philcski]

While agree that it would be nice if horses raced longer the idea that the game will somehow be revived if a few of the big horses run at 3 is just not true.
1st problem - The greater the chance of a popular horse having an untimely ending which does far more to hurt the game than one staying in training and running does to help it. Making anything mandatory will always make people make questionable decisions especially when so much money is involved. The truth is that I am sure that you can get a much lower insurance rate if a horse is not in training and some may retire and sit the year out anyway. Or run in the Dubai race then retire.
2nd Problem - Racing fans are going to watch the big events regardless. New fans may not know who the hell is running anyway. Beside a few big days a year, it is not like the horses will run much anyway. Racings problem is that it needs new fans that bet, not just new fans.
3rd Problem - See recent campaigns of Funny Cide

I think the GW situation yesterday makes it even more difficult for in-demand 3YO potential studs to return to the track.

On that note... while I have no idea what defines a catastrophic injury, it happened right in front of us, and I don't know why they didn't make any effort to stabilize the foot and try to save him. It almost seems like Coolmore didn't WANT to save him... maybe I'm being pessimistic, who knows.

[Cannon Shell]

I think the GW situation yesterday makes it even more difficult for in-demand 3YO potential studs to return to the track.

On that note... while I have no idea what defines a catastrophic injury, it happened right in front of us, and I don't know why they didn't make any effort to stabilize the foot and try to save him. It almost seems like Coolmore didn't WANT to save him... maybe I'm being pessimistic, who knows.
If what was said was true there is no chance of recovery...multiple fractures to sesamoids and conjular to cannon with open wound.

[Danzig]

I think the GW situation yesterday makes it even more difficult for in-demand 3YO potential studs to return to the track.

On that note... while I have no idea what defines a catastrophic injury, it happened right in front of us, and I don't know why they didn't make any effort to stabilize the foot and try to save him. It almost seems like Coolmore didn't WANT to save him... maybe I'm being pessimistic, who knows.


open wound means infection, don't forget that barbaro suffered from a massive infection, and he did not have an open wound when he broke down.
also, because of the dislocation, the blood supply was cut off. that is the worst thing that can happen, as there is no chance once the supply is gone.

[freddymo]

I think it's ridiculous not to root for Street Sense because he's going off to breed. Either he's good enough or he's not. If he is and this is your reasoning, it's pure spite which is crazy.

Regarding next year, I think they're thinking Dubai World Cup with Lawyer Ron and frankly I enjoy seeing him do what he's been doing. This isn't some sad attempt to eek out another race, he's G1 caliber and seems to thoroughly enjoy himself. They get the purse money (which let's face it, is why he's still going), we get to keep seeing him, and should he start to wind down before they choose to retire--which I doubt--the finish position contractually limits him from being driven into the ground.

Doesn't Any Given Saturday already have a stud deal? They bought shares in his dad too. Maybe we could see AGS and LR go at it in Dubai if they opt to keep him going. I wonder what's going on with Curlin--does he not have a deal due to his owner-situation craziness? It's either that or they're playing hard to get. It would be nice to see him too but I'll wait for the announcement.

Nobody's brought up Rags to Riches who I figure would've been retired already if they were going to. I think they've had more than enough opportunities. I realize they'd probably send Rags to Riches to Storm Cat or something but maybe they could consider Smart Strike (I just hope $75,000 isn't under breeding in their minds, I think the pedigree holds up). Pulls in Mr. Prospector and Curlin has that over Deputy Minister who's Rags' BM. You'd get a similar family mix in addition to the Mr. P/AP Indy that works out so well so often. That's another reason I think they'll try to bring her back, Storm Cat's no spring chicken so if they wanted to go that route they'd be trying to do that now. His book's already going down.

Don't you think they will send Rags to GC for free?

[SniperSB23]

Curlin winning was probably worst case for 3yos returning next year. Street Sense and Hard Spun were already gone so it wouldn't have mattered if they won. By Curlin winning they are now considering retiring him which likely wouldn't have been the case had he lost.

[philcski]

open wound means infection, don't forget that barbaro suffered from a massive infection, and he did not have an open wound when he broke down.
also, because of the dislocation, the blood supply was cut off. that is the worst thing that can happen, as there is no chance once the supply is gone.

If what was said was true there is no chance of recovery...multiple fractures to sesamoids and conjular to cannon with open wound.

I stand corrected then, it was most definitely dislocated. I hope ESPN did their best to avoid showing it, it was very ugly. :(

[Dunbar]

While agree that it would be nice if horses raced longer the idea that the game will somehow be revived if a few of the big horses run at 3 is just not true.
1st problem - The greater the chance of a popular horse having an untimely ending which does far more to hurt the game than one staying in training and running does to help it. Making anything mandatory will always make people make questionable decisions especially when so much money is involved. The truth is that I am sure that you can get a much lower insurance rate if a horse is not in training and some may retire and sit the year out anyway. Or run in the Dubai race then retire.

Good point about the risk of the untimely ending, but I don't agree with your conclusion. Anguish is part of the game. The Barbaro saga did nothing to hurt horseracing. Horseracing got more good press that year than any year in the past 20.

You may be right about some owners sitting out rather than paying higher insurance, but I'm skeptical of that.

2nd Problem - Racing fans are going to watch the big events regardless. New fans may not know who the hell is running anyway. Beside a few big days a year, it is not like the horses will run much anyway. Racings problem is that it needs new fans that bet, not just new fans.

I'd certainly agree that keeping horses in training isn't going to single-handedly solve all the problems. But I do think a fan base is important, and it's not easy to have a fan base in a sport where the stars disappear as soon as they become familiar.

3rd Problem - See recent campaigns of Funny Cide

Didn't Funny Cide bring fans and attention to Finger Lakes when he ran his swan song race? Of course it would have helped if Funny Cide had raced at his earlier level a la Kelso or John Henry. But even with his diminished talent, he was a popular draw.

Anyway, as always I appreciate and respect your thoughts.

--Dunbar

[Dunbar]

Curlin winning was probably worst case for 3yos returning next year. Street Sense and Hard Spun were already gone so it wouldn't have mattered if they won. By Curlin winning they are now considering retiring him which likely wouldn't have been the case had he lost.

Good point. That's sort of a Catch-22. If he loses, we get him back, but then maybe he's not all that great and the attraction of having him back isn't that great. Having won the BC Classic, we'd REALLY like to see him back next year, but maybe now he gets retired.

We're left rooting against all the really good ones winning so that they won't retire them!

--Dunbar

[pgardn]

that was the old computer, which i, along with the brilliant macncheese half a world away, taught fluent english in less than 3 days..my fourth one is this litle laptop puppy which u will regret my having wireless capability on sometime by derby 2012, and

don't degrade yourself by goin down to the pillowhead level, i guarantee you i have put more into the industry this summer than you have in your life, not even countin paying extra for tvg...

i think your tv argument would make more sense re nascar fans; the ncaa, nfl, mlb etc all have much more $ than the nyra will ever have, even if they finally wised up and got a national horseracing authority like they should (but maybe i should be a little careful what i wish for there)...

i somehow doubt you watching the bc, or the derby for that matter, on tv without putting any money into it except ordering a pizza made pizza hut decide to pay more for the broadcast rights

Magma do you go to the track?
Do you actually go to the track and bet?

I think I might actually put more into Street Sense's coffers than you do wagering at some maggot infested OTB. Get ye to Arlington or Hawthorne and then talk to me.

[Cannon Shell]

Good point about the risk of the untimely ending, but I don't agree with your conclusion. Anguish is part of the game. The Barbaro saga did nothing to hurt horseracing. Horseracing got more good press that year than any year in the past 20.

You may be right about some owners sitting out rather than paying higher insurance, but I'm skeptical of that.



I'd certainly agree that keeping horses in training isn't going to single-handedly solve all the problems. But I do think a fan base is important, and it's not easy to have a fan base in a sport where the stars disappear as soon as they become familiar.



Didn't Funny Cide bring fans and attention to Finger Lakes when he ran his swan song race? Of course it would have helped if Funny Cide had raced at his earlier level a la Kelso or John Henry. But even with his diminished talent, he was a popular draw.

Anyway, as always I appreciate and respect your thoughts.

--Dunbar
You are not suggesting that breakdowns are good or beneficial are you?

Fan base of betting customers is important...regular fans are not. Sorry but if you just just watch the sport and dont bet or participate you are really not important. Unlike other sports which have tv contracts that pay big bucks, ticket sales income and merchandising, all of which a regular fan will partake in, we only have betting as a revenue source. So if you dont bet, why should the industry care about you? You as a nonbetter or owner are not adding to the sport in any manner.It is one of the biggest problems that the industry faces is that its leaders for so long tried to sweep the gambling aspect under the rug instead of promoting it. Even now they hire marketing people who seemingly fail to understand the demographic that they should be going after.


If Funny Cide was a colt, what would he have been worth after the Triple Crown? $25 or 30 million?
If Funny Cide were a colt and campaigned for 2 more years with the same results, what would he be worth as a 5 year old? $5 million?

You do the math.

[Riot]

Hacker Craft will run next year

Whew! I was searching Blood-Horse for same tonight, just saw this.

Byk's list ALWAYS gets the early, accurate news! ;)

[Dunbar]

You are not suggesting that breakdowns are good or beneficial are you?

I'm saying that the spector of a breakdown is not a reason to rush a healthy horse off to the breeding shed. And I'm saying that Barbaro's breakdown brought the sport more positive press than any other event of the last 20 years.

In general, I don't think the occasional loss of a top horse to a breakdown will hurt the sport enough to offset the benefit of keeping the stars in training.


Fan base of betting customers is important...regular fans are not. Sorry but if you just just watch the sport and dont bet or participate you are really not important. Unlike other sports which have tv contracts that pay big bucks, ticket sales income and merchandising, all of which a regular fan will partake in, we only have betting as a revenue source. So if you dont bet, why should the industry care about you? You as a nonbetter or owner are not adding to the sport in any manner.It is one of the biggest problems that the industry faces is that its leaders for so long tried to sweep the gambling aspect under the rug instead of promoting it. Even now they hire marketing people who seemingly fail to understand the demographic that they should be going after.

I agree with some of this. But I don't know how you distinguish the fans that end up being bettors from the fans that are simply fans. I was a fan from the time I was a kid, but didn't start seriously betting the horses until maybe 15 years ago. I'm one of the very few sports bettors I know who also bets horses.

In my mind, the industry should work on establishing a fan base. The betting fans will emerge from that fan base fairly naturally.

You are also ignoring the impact that a larger fan base would have on TV revenues. The current viewership of broadcast racing is a joke.

If Funny Cide was a colt, what would he have been worth after the Triple Crown? $25 or 30 million?
If Funny Cide were a colt and campaigned for 2 more years with the same results, what would he be worth as a 5 year old? $5 million?

You do the math.

Okay, here's the math. I assume in most cases a deal would be cut at some point during the 3-yr-old year. Deals were cut with Street Sense and Hard Spun earlier this year before they finished racing. There's no reason that a deal couldn't be cut that includes another year of racing. Yes, the deal would be for less than what would be offered for immediate breeding. But I don't think it would be hugely less. And under the idea that Genuine Risk and I put forward, there would be no alternative but to wait anyway.

--Dunbar

[Cannon Shell]

I'm saying that the spector of a breakdown is not a reason to rush a healthy horse off to the breeding shed. And I'm saying that Barbaro's breakdown brought the sport more positive press than any other event of the last 20 years.

In general, I don't think the occasional loss of a top horse to a breakdown will hurt the sport enough to offset the benefit of keeping the stars in training.



I agree with some of this. But I don't know how you distinguish the fans that end up being bettors from the fans that are simply fans. I was a fan from the time I was a kid, but didn't start seriously betting the horses until maybe 15 years ago. I'm one of the very few sports bettors I know who also bets horses.

In my mind, the industry should work on establishing a fan base. The betting fans will emerge from that fan base fairly naturally.

You are also ignoring the impact that a larger fan base would have on TV revenues. The current viewership of broadcast racing is a joke.



Okay, here's the math. I assume in most cases a deal would be cut at some point during the 3-yr-old year. Deals were cut with Street Sense and Hard Spun earlier this year before they finished racing. There's no reason that a deal couldn't be cut that includes another year of racing. Yes, the deal would be for less than what would be offered for immediate breeding. But I don't think it would be hugely less. And under the idea that Genuine Risk and I put forward, there would be no alternative but to wait anyway.

--Dunbar
Barbaro's story while unique in its effects will be the exception rather than the rule. If GW had been Street Sense the outcry in the US would be much more severe. We as an industry have no way to defend or spin breakdowns that will be acceptable to the general public. The more the public gets familar and attached to a horse the worse the kickback will be if there is a tragedy associated with him.

Almost every sports gambler that I know plays horses but maybe I am the exception to the rule because of where I live and where i grew up.


The farms will not allow their investments to contine to run and possibly decrease in value. Once a horse reaches a peak value there is no reason to risk them losing that value especially considering insurance premiums. If they sit out a year they sit out a year. Plus if other jurisdictions dont adopt the same rules what keeps them from shuttling them elsewhere until they are 5?

[SniperSB23]

Plus if other jurisdictions dont adopt the same rules what keeps them from shuttling them elsewhere until they are 5?


Seems to me if you didn't allow any horses to race in the country that were offspring of stallions under five and didn't allow any horses to stand here if they stood in another country before they turned five that it would decrease the stallion prospect enough in value to not make much sense for the majority of stallion prospects to stand elsewhere for that one year.

[Cannon Shell]

Seems to me if you didn't allow any horses to race in the country that were offspring of stallions under five and didn't allow any horses to stand here if they stood in another country before they turned five that it would decrease the stallion prospect enough in value to not make much sense for the majority of stallion prospects to stand elsewhere for that one year.
It would also lead to issues when dealing with Southern Hemisphere horses. It is an interesting idea but there are too many problems associated with it. Capping the number of foals per year does the same thing without all the complications. You need to find a way to decrease the value of the stallions a bit without to help the entire market. By capping the number of foals, you will increase the quality of books of mares to the top stallions by eliminateing the lesser mares. That in turn means many mares currently being overbred will need to find a lesser stallion which in turn will lead to lesser mares at the bottom of the chain finding racing a better option.

[SniperSB23]

It would also lead to issues when dealing with Southern Hemisphere horses. It is an interesting idea but there are too many problems associated with it. Capping the number of foals per year does the same thing without all the complications. You need to find a way to decrease the value of the stallions a bit without to help the entire market. By capping the number of foals, you will increase the quality of books of mares to the top stallions by eliminateing the lesser mares. That in turn means many mares currently being overbred will need to find a lesser stallion which in turn will lead to lesser mares at the bottom of the chain finding racing a better option.

How about foals by stallion age? If you want to stand a 3yo he can only cover 20 mares. If you want to stand a 4yo he can only cover 50 mares. Then you have a set amount for 5yos and up. You could easily factor in Southern Hemisphere horses that way by setting a number for the SH horses by age. If you truly have a horse that can't race and want to stand him at stud as a 3yo or 4yo you could on a limited basis but if you have a horse capable of racing there is less incentive to send him to the shed while limited to a book of 50.

[Cannon Shell]

How about foals by stallion age? If you want to stand a 3yo he can only cover 20 mares. If you want to stand a 4yo he can only cover 50 mares. Then you have a set amount for 5yos and up. You could easily factor in Southern Hemisphere horses that way by setting a number for the SH horses by age. If you truly have a horse that can't race and want to stand him at stud as a 3yo or 4yo you could on a limited basis but if you have a horse capable of racing there is less incentive to send him to the shed while limited to a book of 50.
That is still too complicated. Cap the number at 90 for any age and you will lower the value of the stallion but they will still be valuble. They may raise the prices a bit to compensate but the market will not bear a wholesale rise in stud fees, they are overvalued now. You cant destroy the breeding industry because thousands of horses are owned and raced by those same people. Racing horses will be the first thing they will cut out.The 2 industries need to be more aligned and by nudging the value of stallions down it will have a trickledown effect on the whole breeding industry which should help the racing side. But doing things radically wont help. The fact is that many of our biggest owners are involved because they are trying to hit a homerun with a stallion deal. You have to still have that carrot to dangle or they will go elsewhere which will not be a good thing for anyone. But if the top were lowered while still being lucrative the same effect of them leaving should not be felt.

[Danzig]

farms make a deal based on what they know a horse can draw at stud, x's the first couple years they can get that fee, x's # of mares bred. that # sets the initial price. most farms who set up these huge deals know they have to 'get out' after those first few seasons, while the name of that horse is still big, and before any of those first crops hit the track--hopefully to do well, but more often then not, horses stud fees decrease.
once they lock in a price, they can't take the chance of the horse going in a tailspin and lowering his value at stud. much as we like to think WE understand that horses are not robots, the truth is that losses will lower future value--take discreet cat for instance. he's really lowered his value. of course he's going to stand for his owner, so it's not as tho a big syndicate was put together, and there are part owners to keep happy. of course at times you also have horses such as lawyer ron, who improved his value at four, and will command a higher fee at retirement now than had he foregone racing this year.
also, once a syndicate is put together, and value set, insurance will have to meet that, pushing premiums thru the roof if you continue to race the horse--that's what forced smartys retirement.

[Cannon Shell]

why do you say that? i think stud fees are ridiculously cheap (cpt for maybe corinthian)...plus, don't most deals also include some sortof deal on the foal(s)...the owners on both sides would just have to get into bed with each other too...for the good of the game of course:cool:
Stud fees are only considered cheap in bizzaro world (see Jerry Seinfield)

[Danzig]

Stud fees are only considered cheap in bizzaro world (see Jerry Seinfield)

street sense at 75k
hard spun is 50k
discreet cat, 30k
rockport harbor (i just read) 20k--that's high imo.
hell, i think they're all high anymore. look at friends lake for instance!

[Cannon Shell]

street sense at 75k
hard spun is 50k
discreet cat, 30k
rockport harbor (i just read) 20k--that's high imo.
hell, i think they're all high anymore. look at friends lake for instance!
I did see some nice Friends Lake yearlings...

[Cannon Shell]

if you have a chance of selling a yearling for over 2 million u won't pay 20 k to get him??? :eek: then u shouldn't be a breeder, u should be a 2 dolla bettor
There aren't very many 2 million dollar yearlings by 20k stallions. Plus virtually all sales over 1 million are scripted anyway

[GenuineRisk]

your so sexy when you talk like that...:p

I just saw this post. Tee hee. I was so happy for you when EC took the Turf. :)

[GenuineRisk]

This is such an interesting discussion- I'm sorry I haven't been on the past few days. I totally see your point, Cannon, and I agree that this speculating is just that, speculation, because the breeding industry would fight tooth and nail any changes, but I have a few questions 'cause I'm confused-

I don't see how making the stallion books smaller would cause prices to drop- that seems to go against the law of supply and demand- I would think the fewer mares, the higher the fee would go for a top stallion (though I can see your point that owners would keep mares running longer because they couldn't get a top stallion). I do think you're right that fewer permitted covers is a great idea, and better for the industry; I just don't see how it would encourage owners to keep top colts running.

I agree, owners could opt to sit out a year; in that case they'd be gambling on the industry's memory of a good season vs. a 4-year-old campaign. And yes, I agree they risk a stallion's "value" dropping after a bad year, but I think that's part of the problem- the stallions are overvalued to begin with- the insurance companies price the top ones with the idea that they'll all turn out to be AP Indy at stud. Which is ridiculous, but insurance companies are in the business of making lots of money while paying out very little, so you can't expect them to do different. The "value" is connected to breeding value, and I think we're focusing on how to keep them racing. And frankly, a lower breeding value means lower insurance rates.

Yes, breakdowns = very bad. But it's part of the risk of racing- the only way to avoid them is to never let the horse step out on the track, ever. I think that's for the owners to decide- is it worth the risk, and if it's not, they put the horse in a field for a season or two and hope the breeding industry still wants him when he's five.

In Funny Cide's case, we saw the natural progression of many athlete's careers- he naturally tailed off towards the end, though was still competitive at the right level. And I think that's okay, from a fan standpoint. He wasn't running Grade 1s, but I think here on DT there was a thread started every time he ran, regardless of the level of race. Which is cool; and indicates how people were attached to him.

Unless the industry is willing to try to make the jockeys stars of the sport (as they are in Europe, right? Much more famous there than jockeys here), the horses are the stars. A horse with a fan base that gets three years to cheer him will bring people to the sport, which would improve ratings, making it more attractive to TV, and even bring in more $$ with shirts, hats, all that stuff that other sports fans spend an awful lot of money buying (though I imagine A-Rod Yankees shirts are a bargain right now).

Cannon, I do agree that racing exists for gambling, and more casual bettors are what the sport needs, but I think it trickles down- the casual fan will bet when at the track, and he or she will come to the track to see a superstar. But they have to be around long enough for people to discover them, and at this point, that's less important to racing than keeping breeding prices as overinflated as possible.

But I also agree with you- any changes are as likely as Clive Owen picking me up from work today on a shiny white unicorn (though that would be awwwweeesooome).

[GenuineRisk]

Huh. I didn't put any question marks after my questions. Sorry.

Hey, Cannon- you mentioned that most sales over $1million are "scripted." Can you elaborate? I've heard lots of people say that the high priced horses didn't really sell for what they are listed as selling for, but I don't understand how that works. Can you explain to me? Keep in mind I really don't know anything about how the sales work... :)

[Danzig]

Huh. I didn't put any question marks after my questions. Sorry.

Hey, Cannon- you mentioned that most sales over $1million are "scripted." Can you elaborate? I've heard lots of people say that the high priced horses didn't really sell for what they are listed as selling for, but I don't understand how that works. Can you explain to me? Keep in mind I really don't know anything about how the sales work... :)


probably bought ahead of time, and the auction just for show.
look at how many horses are bough back, reserve not achieved, and then they sell privately. often for less then they've been bought back for. i'm pretty sure it's because a deal was already in the works. hey, we'll sell to you for such and such, IF no one bids higher at auction. if they do, would the now jilted 'buyer' get part of that extra?
no doubt plenty of funny business behind the scenes. look at the green monkey story.

[GenuineRisk]

probably bought ahead of time, and the auction just for show.
look at how many horses are bough back, reserve not achieved, and then they sell privately. often for less then they've been bought back for. i'm pretty sure it's because a deal was already in the works. hey, we'll sell to you for such and such, IF no one bids higher at auction. if they do, would the now jilted 'buyer' get part of that extra?
no doubt plenty of funny business behind the scenes. look at the green monkey story.

But see, that's just it! Everyone talks around what happened with TGM and his $16 million tag, but never in any sort of way I can actually understand. What? What happened? Pleeeasssee someone tell meeeee....

In the first example you gave- people can actually do that? Offer up a horse that's been sold? Then what, the purchasing agent just makes sure to keep bidding so that the people who bought the horse prior to the auction appear to win the the auction as well? Why don't they just pull the horse from the auction when the sale goes through?

I'm so very confused...

[Danzig]

But see, that's just it! Everyone talks around what happened with TGM and his $16 million tag, but never in any sort of way I can actually understand. What? What happened? Pleeeasssee someone tell meeeee....

In the first example you gave- people can actually do that? Offer up a horse that's been sold? Then what, the purchasing agent just makes sure to keep bidding so that the people who bought the horse prior to the auction appear to win the the auction as well? Why don't they just pull the horse from the auction when the sale goes through?

I'm so very confused...

buzz chace recently bought a horse that was sold before it went thru the auction. so the seller listed, wasn't really the seller. in those situations, the horse is supposed to be pulled from the sale.
as for the green monkey, someone put up here (can't remember who, sorry) that the horse had already been purchased by coolmore, and then the auction and driving up the bid was bs, as the horse was already owned by the winning bidder.

[Danzig]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/articleindex/article.asp?id=36006

that's the link to the buzz chace story i talked about...note who the immediate underbidder was on the filly....

[GenuineRisk]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/articleindex/article.asp?id=36006

that's the link to the buzz chace story i talked about...note who the immediate underbidder was on the filly....

That's an interesting read; thanks for posting it!

[Cannon Shell]

I don't see how making the stallion books smaller would cause prices to drop- that seems to go against the law of supply and demand- I would think the fewer mares, the higher the fee would go for a top stallion (though I can see your point that owners would keep mares running longer because they couldn't get a top stallion). I do think you're right that fewer permitted covers is a great idea, and better for the industry; I just don't see how it would encourage owners to keep top colts running.


It would not cause prices to drop but would limit the dollar amount a stallion would be able to produce which is where the value of a stallion exists. Currently there are horses that are breeding close to 200 mares. Cut that in half and you signifigntly lower the value of the stallion. Sure the top stallions prices may rise a bit but you still give incentive for the lesser horses like Lawyer Ron as a 3 year old to return and become stars. I still believe that the best horses may still retire and sit out a year with high values and not risk lowering them. The benchmark is three years worth of fees to cover the cost of the horse. Many stallions are capturing the cost by breeding to an excessive number of mares.

[Cannon Shell]

And yes, I agree they risk a stallion's "value" dropping after a bad year, but I think that's part of the problem- the stallions are overvalued to begin with- the insurance companies price the top ones with the idea that they'll all turn out to be AP Indy at stud. Which is ridiculous, but insurance companies are in the business of making lots of money while paying out very little, so you can't expect them to do different. The "value" is connected to breeding value, and I think we're focusing on how to keep them racing. And frankly, a lower breeding value means lower insurance rates.



Insurance companies dont put the value on the horse. The market does that. They may chose not to insure a horse past a certain level but that is just business.

[Cannon Shell]

In Funny Cide's case, we saw the natural progression of many athlete's careers- he naturally tailed off towards the end, though was still competitive at the right level. And I think that's okay, from a fan standpoint. He wasn't running Grade 1s, but I think here on DT there was a thread started every time he ran, regardless of the level of race. Which is cool; and indicates how people were attached to him.

GR, Funny Cide had a lot of fans for sure but he was also the poster child of why people retire horses while they are on top. Dual classic winner to 3rd tier NY bred stakes loser. Lots of demand for one, not so much for the other. If you owned a dual classic winner that you could get $25 million for would you risk almost all of it to run him another year fearing a Funny Cide scenario?

[Riot]

Three Chimneys announced it will contractually limit the book on all it's stallions to 110 mares in 2008.

For the northern hemisphere ;)

[Danzig]

this fits perfectly in this thread...just read this in the 10/20 bloodhorse (which i got yesterday, thanks so much bloodhorse for the bc preview which i got days AFTER the event)--in the 'what's going on here' article by dan liebman:


'If you think those with interests in stallions don't place horses with various consignors and run up the prices to infalte stallion averages, you haven't been paying attention.'

also, meras, regarding chace being upset. did you read the link, and catch the name of the immediate underbidder? it was the new, but undisclosed, owner. guy had nothing to lose, and everything to gain, by helping run up the price on his OWN HORSE. but chace didn't know it was his horse, he thought it still belonged to someone else. did that guy find out chace was interested, and gamble that he could drive up the fee? at any rate, it worked...til chace found out who the owner was, and was able to lower the price.

right now it's only voluntary to disclose ownership. why? who does it benefit?

certainly not the buyer.

caveat emptor.

[Danzig]

Three Chimneys announced it will contractually limit the book on all it's stallions to 110 mares in 2008.

For the northern hemisphere ;)

yippee.


i like hamdans view of things much more.

[Cannon Shell]

also, meras, regarding chace being upset. did you read the link, and catch the name of the immediate underbidder? it was the new, but undisclosed, owner. guy had nothing to lose, and everything to gain, by helping run up the price on his OWN HORSE. but chace didn't know it was his horse, he thought it still belonged to someone else. did that guy find out chace was interested, and gamble that he could drive up the fee? at any rate, it worked...til chace found out who the owner was, and was able to lower the price.

right now it's only voluntary to disclose ownership. why? who does it benefit?

certainly not the buyer.

caveat emptor.
There is more fiction involved with this story than Harry Potter.

[ELA]

GR, Funny Cide had a lot of fans for sure but he was also the poster child of why people retire horses while they are on top. Dual classic winner to 3rd tier NY bred stakes loser. Lots of demand for one, not so much for the other. If you owned a dual classic winner that you could get $25 million for would you risk almost all of it to run him another year fearing a Funny Cide scenario?

Chuck, it's like asking someone what they would do if they won the lottery, and asking them what they are going to do after they won the lottery.

Want to know? Check back with them in a year, two, three. The statistics would make your hair fall out (or mine considering I have not much more than you, LOL).

Eric

[letswastemoney]

If I owned Street Sense, I'd be happy with the money he makes me from just racing on the track.:)

[Cannon Shell]

If I owned Street Sense, I'd be happy with the money he makes me from just racing on the track.:)
Which is not that much lately...

[Cannon Shell]

Chuck, it's like asking someone what they would do if they won the lottery, and asking them what they are going to do after they won the lottery.

Want to know? Check back with them in a year, two, three. The statistics would make your hair fall out (or mine considering I have not much more than you, LOL).

Eric
I know what I'm gonna do....

[Danzig]

every sport has rules to follow, from the owners thru the coaches and down to the players. why horse racing is different i don't know. why owners think that because they run horses, rather than owning a team, that they can do whatever they please, is beyond me. to not speak out imo is wrong. how else do you have change unless the problems are pointed out? so, some big shot owns horses--if he wants to hire a cheater as a trainer, we should all just shrug our shoulders? oh well...his right...is that how we're supposed to view it?

since some owners are not willing to hire a clean trainer, the sport must do what it takes to make sure that only those who are above board are in the sport. they need rules with real punishments, with limits set, and with lifetime bans when necessary. the sport must make sure the playing field remains level. the powers that be in racing are the ones who have to do this. after all, if a trainer cheats, he isn't just ensuring a win for himself--bettors are being ripped off, the very people who keep this sport going.
you see stories days and weeks after a race where a horse is taken down--intercontinental for example, with her lasix given too close to race time. purse is redistributed--but what about the bettors who lost money on a horse who suddenly got moved into a board finish??

[GenuineRisk]

Cannon, thanks for the explanation on how limiting a horse's number of covers would reduce the stallion's value- now I understand what you're saying (sometimes it takes me a second explanation to get it. :) ). Though again, I don't see it having any effect on staving off the retirements of top runners- as you said, it would motivate owners of 2nd-tier horses to keep their horses running longer, but I think 1st-tier runners would still be rushed off to breed, so again, no superstars.

And I do understand your point on Funny Cide, but again, the figures you're estimating are what his value would have been as a stallion prospect, had he been intact- not his value as a runner. So while I agree FC would have been retired as a 3-year-old had he been a stallion, because he would have been at his peak value, again, what I was hypothesizing was ways to keep the superstars racing, and I don't see any way around that than making them wait to start standing at stud. Some owners, to be sure, will pull them from the track to wait it out, but that's not any different to the fan than pulling them to start breeding right away, so for the fan it wouldn't be a detriment, and might, in some cases, keep a horse running.

And yeah, it'll never happen. (No sign of Clive and my unicorn yesterday, either.)

[horseofcourse]

GR, Funny Cide had a lot of fans for sure but he was also the poster child of why people retire horses while they are on top. Dual classic winner to 3rd tier NY bred stakes loser. Lots of demand for one, not so much for the other. If you owned a dual classic winner that you could get $25 million for would you risk almost all of it to run him another year fearing a Funny Cide scenario?

You are correct. I am of the opinion Funny Cide never races past 3 if he wasn't a gelding. He was still legit at age 4 usually on the board in grade 1s with an occasional win thrown in...but after that...not so much. So in all actuality, I think he would have maintained most of his value if retired after his 4 year old year...it was age 5-6-7 where his decline was obviously apparent. But yeah, you look at results...speed figures through the Belmont Stakes of their career there is virtually nothing separating, Funny Cide, Smarty Jones, Afleet Alex, Curlin, Street Sense, Hard Spun etc. So yeah, why run any of them...when as you said we have our poster boy of what happens...and through spring of their 3 yr old years...FC was as good as any of those mentioned above and if not as good...certainly in their ball park. They are all individuals so there are a few here or there that may continue to get better and become megastars, but I think the majority would track like FC and become nothing extraordinary and with the money out there...why chance it at all when the guarantee is right in front of you not running??

[Danzig]

There is more fiction involved with this story than Harry Potter.

really?

well, they say believe half of what you see, none of what you hear. maybe that fits in this case.

[Riot]

I have a horse to sell. Someone wants to buy it. I sell. The next day the horse sells for multiple times what I sold it for. Who made money?

Not me.
Not the person who paid for the horse the next day.

[Cannon Shell]

You are correct. I am of the opinion Funny Cide never races past 3 if he wasn't a gelding. He was still legit at age 4 usually on the board in grade 1s with an occasional win thrown in...but after that...not so much. So in all actuality, I think he would have maintained most of his value if retired after his 4 year old year...it was age 5-6-7 where his decline was obviously apparent. But yeah, you look at results...speed figures through the Belmont Stakes of their career there is virtually nothing separating, Funny Cide, Smarty Jones, Afleet Alex, Curlin, Street Sense, Hard Spun etc. So yeah, why run any of them...when as you said we have our poster boy of what happens...and through spring of their 3 yr old years...FC was as good as any of those mentioned above and if not as good...certainly in their ball park. They are all individuals so there are a few here or there that may continue to get better and become megastars, but I think the majority would track like FC and become nothing extraordinary and with the money out there...why chance it at all when the guarantee is right in front of you not running??
Though it is easy for us to throw numbers around the amounts of money being paid for stallion prospects is staggering. 25 to 50 million dollars is real money even to rich people. Dont forget that alot of these rich owners believe that the sport is who makes the most money like in their other businesses. I am not saying it is wrong or right but it is how they think.

[Danzig]

well, there's another scenario that could happen...
let's say you have a buyer. he contacts an agent to do his buying for him. let's say the agent id's a horse. let's say he knows his buyer will pay X for a horse. let's say that maybe he finds someone to buy said horse privately (perhaps he provides the money to buy it?), and then he will bid up the next day, in the neighborhood of X. then could he and the private buyer (who no one knew about at the time) possibly benefit??

wonder if that has ever happened? goodness knows that all kinds of funny business could go on. just like the cases where someone bid and then a commission was split between the agent and the seller. who is taking care of the buyer? how many naive owners get taken? how many leave a game they would love to be in because they get taken by an unscrupulous agent?

[Danzig]

Though it is easy for us to throw numbers around the amounts of money being paid for stallion prospects is staggering. 25 to 50 million dollars is real money even to rich people. Dont forget that alot of these rich owners believe that the sport is who makes the most money like in their other businesses. I am not saying it is wrong or right but it is how they think.

i think the competition has veered from who can breed the best horse to who can get the best bottom line. a shame too.

[Dunbar]

I agree, owners could opt to sit out a year; in that case they'd be gambling on the industry's memory of a good season vs. a 4-year-old campaign. And yes, I agree they risk a stallion's "value" dropping after a bad year, but I think that's part of the problem- the stallions are overvalued to begin with- the insurance companies price the top ones with the idea that they'll all turn out to be AP Indy at stud.

I pulled this quote out of your post because I thought it was an extremely good point. Cannon Shell's response that the market sets the value, not the insurance company, is 100% correct, but it doesn't change your conclusion. Namely, that the preceived risk proves that stallions are overvalued to begin with.

There's no other rational conclusion that could be drawn. If the average value of a stallion prospect would drop markedly after a 4-yr-old campaign, then people are paying too much for 3-yr-old stallions. (yes, there should naturally be a small drop attributed to the loss of one breeding season, but we're not talking about that kind of price difference.)

The initial market price for breeding is based on a combination of the stallion's lineage and what it accomplished on the track. If the average market price would suffer from another year of racing, then clearly people have been over-paying for what a horse accomplishes on the track up to the point of its 3-yr-old year.

Maybe it already seemed obvious to some that breeding prices are inflated. But the argument could always be made that the market establishes a fair price. However, that argument would be negated by the fact, if it's true, that on average, a horse's value would go down decidedly by simply racing another year.

--Dunbar