Stupid breeding question
 

I feel stupid for not knowing this already.......but......I was thinking about the Dreaming of Anna/Lewis Michael connection.

Let's say Dreaming of Anna turns out to be a superhorse (just give me this one for the sake of this question....because it addresses a more general idea later) and wins the majority of her career races, and racks up several grade I wins as a 3yo and as an older mare.

She goes to the shed and produces another precocious, top-level two/three year old.

Does Lewis Michael, by default, become a sought after stallion? Obviously, he's generally always overmatched in graded races, but is not a completely useless horse by any stretch. If his full sister becomes a good producer, does he generally get perceived as a good pedigree starting point?

Or is there an inherenetly major difference, from the pedigree standpoint, in what a top-level mare like Dreaming of Anna passes to her offspring as opposed to what her less-successful full brother would pass on as a stallion?

siblings...esp full sibling will always benefit from the success of their brothers and sisters...
but this is more true about fillies than colts IMO...the breeding parachute will open wider for a well bred unraced filly with good siblings than it will for a colt in the same situation...
I don't think DOA will increase LM potential stud value much...which doesn't mean that I think they might pass on different things just that it is how the market operates...it will forgive a filly for not running but not a stud.

So, essentially, no matter how good she may get or how good her offspring turn out to be on the track, Lewis Michael would still be standing on just his own accomplishments?

I don't get the biology of how the traits/success is passed down very well -- do you know why it wouldn't work vice versa for Lewis Michael?

I edited my post above...they have the same DNA so the potential to pass on the same traits is there...i just think that it is a market issue. And then OF COURSE you have to go through the whole nature vs. nurture debate.

he can benefit from her success but he won't get a stud deal out of it unless he does some running himself...or he stands in Utah or something.

haha.

I would think he'd be useful as an Illinois stallion at this point -- there isn't much standing in Illinois really. Cartwright was about as good as it got, and he's gone now.

Who knows....we'll see. I just wondered how the market/breeders react to general sibling success like that -- thanks B.

Look at Unforgettable Max....I think he is a full to Afleet Alex (can't verify with pedigreequery right now) but he didn't do much on the track.

Eavesdropper is another one

There is a good chance that he might stand in Illinois, unless he goes and wins a couple Graded races

Lewis Michael will benefit if he produces a couple of Grade I winners right off the bat. I don't believe that is likely, but you never know. The breeding industry is full of limiteless information.

I actually thought after he ran that big one behind Sunriver (?) that he might keep going forward. He hasn't embarassed himself in any way -- ran big at Keeneland too, but he can't manage to get home in front in any of the big ones.

Then again I'm obviously a huge sucker for both of them....so I'm probably very biased on the whole thing.

he is...but it's a slightly different situation in that he was marketed as the answer for all those people who couldn't get a season with AA...and since he only lasted for one season in KY I guess it wasn't as successful as they had hoped...

I wasn't actually saying that I don't think Lewis Micheal will end up as a stud somewhere...he very well may...I was only saying that the success of his sister probably won't make him more sought after by the larger outfits.

I got ya -- I was asking in the bigger general sense of if he will be sought after, which i think is what you were saying "not really" to.

10-4 :D

By then I should have made myself a successful touring musician and I'll go get me one. :D

I'm probably more likely to sire a graded winner than Lewis Michael.

it's all about matching you with the right mare...perhaps whoever is planning your matings needs to be fired :D

It is also a big difference in that even if Dreaming of Anna herself had never won a race, the relatively minor exploits of Lewis Michael would have enabled her to get a breeding season to nice 2nd or 3rd tier stallions in Kentucky, the fact she has become a multiple stakes winner, especially a Grade 1 stakes winner has opened her up to the most elite of the Stallions, ie Stoem Cat etc.. however, her explots on the track will not merit Lewis Michael anywhere near the caliber of elite mares to breed. He's strictly on his own as far as mare owners are concerned.

No one knows it well. There are some basic rules to follow but genetics is an extraordinarily difficult thing to predict. Now you will get few admiting this but its the truth.

There is not one gene in the horse genome that anyone has related to racing success. And the mapping of the thoroughbred genome is very close to complete.

Yes! In fact I just had this very conversation with my advisor on such matters, Mystic Zelda. She has also let me down on a couple recent Exacta back-wheels.

I wouldn't say Unforgettable Max was a dud on the track. He ran a few decent races.

Yeah, just 5 wins, 4 seconds in 23 starts, $384,079, 1st Shecky Greene S; 2nd General George S (G2), Discovery H (G3), Salvator Mile (G3), Jim McKay BC H; 3rd Tom Fool H (G2).

I've seen horses go to stud with a lot less in racing credentials, especially in regional markets. Check out Devon Lane - 3 wins in 6 starts, but only earned $6300. Can you say CHEAP? But he got a chance at stud because he was a son of Storm Cat; and his distinguished 1/2-sisters Starrer and Stellar Jayne came along later to make his ads look good.