Tony Morris Answers your Questions

[Daylight]

Many thanks again to Tony for this, I sent him the questions yesterday afternoon and they were back before I woke up this morning! What a star!

<br>Question posted by Zoz:

Hi Tony and thanks again

I’ve got a few questions. Firstly, how do you view the amount of inbreeding to Northern Dancer? I read an interesting article recently about him being a bleeder and his over-breeding causing more bleeders today. What’s your take on the situation?

Are you sure you didn’t just read about him appearing in a lot of bleeding pedigrees? If he was a bleeder, it would be news to me, and I’ve read an awful lot about him.  Herod, who was the first great Thoroughbred stallion, was certainly well-known as a bleeder; it didn’t stop breeders wanting to use him and in due course inbreed to him. He would now be in every pedigree hundreds or thousands of times over.  As to inbreeding to – as I believe – a non-bleeding Northern Dancer, it’s happening, working in a lot of cases, and breeders are going to continue to do it.

Secondly, do you think that the attempts of the Big Players – Maktoums and Ballydoyle etc – to corner the best bloodstock is killing off the smaller owners and breeders? Do you see their influence as negative or positive?

Sadly, we can’t turn the clock back.  I would rather see a much wider distribution of ownership – of racehorses, stallions and breeding-stock – as we had before the early ’80s.  The concentration of so much of the quality among two ever-more acquisitive and ultra-wealthy groups can only be a disincentive to would-be competitiors.

Lastly – how did you get to be writing for the Racing Post? I’d like to write myself and have always fancied having a shot at bloodstock journalism. Have you got any advice you can offer aspiring journalists?

I got to write for the Racing Post because they offered me more money than the Sporting Life!  As for getting into the profession, times have changed a lot since I came into it straight from school in 1963, and I honestly don’t know what the best route is these days, but I would suspect that most editors would want a prospective recruit to have done some kind of course in journalism.  Some years back a chap came to see me with his schoolboy son, asking my advice on how he should go about finding his way into the profession, and as I recall I told him to read avidly and write at every opportunity, not just about his chosen subject, but letters to Aunt Mabel – anything that amounted to practice at using words – and to take a course in journalism, even if only a correspondence course.  I don’t know whether the lad took my advice, but for a while now he has been chief sports writer of the Daily Telegraph, earning a hell of a lot more than me!  If you’re not looking for a career as such, but fancy writing as a sideline, the only thing to do is write something and submit it to an editor; if you clearly know your subject, have something interesting to say, and express yourself well, you’ve got chances.

Thanks!!

Question posted by Venusian:

Tony, thanks for coming along.

Hope I’m allowed four quetsions…anyway here goes…

1) What do you think about the dominance of Phalaris-line stallions in the breed today – do you think there is an unsoundness issue here?

It seems to be generally recognised that we have more unsoundness now than a while back, but Phalaris hasn’t got anything to do with it.  He figures in so many pedigrees now – of good, bad and indifferent horses – that it is pointless crediting him or blaming him for anything.  The wholesale watering of courses which we began some 40 years ago was a huge mistake, covering up weaknesses that would otherwise have been exposed.  Trainers never used to complain about the state of the ground, and horses ran on hard or heavy, whatever the weather dished up.  Now we’re breeding from a lot of inherently unsound stock.  The Germans, who are now doing extremely well on the international scene, have long had effective regulations, allowing licences only for stallions with no obvious transmittable physical defects, and they recently instituted a new rule, barring stallions who raced on medication.  I would be in favour of a licensing scheme here.

2) Do you think that Brigadier Gerard would have been a more successful stallion if he had been better managed (i.e. more commercially)?

I was a great friend of the Hislops, and though I wouldn’t have dared to tell the formidable Jean that I thought they had made a mess of the Brigadier’s management, I believe that John might have conceded the point – up to a point.  What he did admit to me was that he had always doubted whether the horse’s pedigree was strong enough for him to make a prepotent stallion, and I would certainly go along with that.  He might have been given better chances, but I don’t suppose he would have been much more successful with them.<br> <br>3) What is your opinion of Dosage ‘theory’?

It’s a load of rubbish. See reply to Gus Kennedy below.<br> <br>4) Who are the most under- and over-rated stallions at stud today?

Hernando is the most under-rated, but there is such an abundance of over-used and over-priced horses that I would hesitate to identify just one in that category.

Question posted by Katy:

Hi Tony thanks for answering our questions,

When Galileo retires do you think he could be as good a stallion as Sadler’s Wells?

He could be, but the odds must be very long against.

If money was no option, which sire and dam would you choose to make the ideal racehorse?

Sorry, but that one’s impossible without cheating.  How about Dan Cupid and Sicalade?  Or Bold Ruler and Somethingroyal?

Thanks Again <br>Katy

<br>Question posted by Jay Torbitt:

Hi Tony

At what age did you first become interested in racing, and why was it bloodstock and breeding which captured your attention in particular?

I always read my parents’ paper (the Daily Express) from the back, and as Clive Graham and Peter O’Sullevan generally featured on the next-to-back page, I soon became acquainted with them.  The first big sports stories I remember were Stanley Matthews at last getting his F A Cup winner’s medal and Gordon Richards at last winning the Derby, about a month apart in 1953.  I really became fascinated with racing when I bought the 1956 News Chronicle Racing Annual to read on a train journey; I’d have been about 11½ at the time.  As for the bloodstock thing, I suppose it really stemmed from a fascination with the history of the sport; how better to follow its progress than through pedigrees, where the continuity was evident and a historical perspective became clear.  I’ve always been a historian at heart, and would be one now if someone would pay me to be one!  From a professional angle, you might say that bloodstock and breeding represented my best bet at getting on in the profession; any number of young journalists wanted to be tipsters and race reporters, whereas the only specialist writers on breeding when I was starting out were Peter Willett and John Hislop, both much older than myself.  I got into bloodstock sales for no better reason than that nobody else at the Press Association (where I started) wanted to cover them; that turned out to be a tremendous break, and I made an awful lot of friends and good contacts through that, learning all the time.  

Cheers

Question posted by Terry:

Tony,

Where would you like British breeding to be in 20 years’ time, and where do you expect it to be?

I would like it to be at the top, which is where we thought it was when I came into the game, though we soon got a rude awakening from the Americans.  I’m afraid we’re not going to be at the top in 20 years’ time, because I see no end to the Coolmore dominance.  However, there’s always the chance, I suppose, that by then John Magnier will have a major stallion station here, to go with his American and Australian (and Chinese and Lithuanian?) off-shoots.

Question posted by Bilko:

Hello Tony

Do you consider it wise for owners of broodmares to send them to horses that had severe injuries when at racing age – ie – Fasliyev & King’s Best – Is there a possibility that these sires could pass on the same problems to their progeny?

Conformation is the key.  If the severe injury comes as the result of an inherent physical weakness, breeders should certainly be circumspect, whereas a genuine accident is a different matter.  The trouble is, the cause of injury is not always obvious, and stallion owners don’t make a habit of advertising their horses’ physical shortcomings.  I get rather depressed at hearing of breeders who book nominations to stallions without even bothering to inspect them, or having them inspected by a competent judge.

Question posted by Robgomm:

Tony, <br>I think Entrepreneur will be a good sire in the future but his progeny seen on a racecourse so far have been a little disappointing. There’s an Aidan O’Brien horse that ran the other day that should win but other than that there’s not much about. What are your thoughts on Entrepreneur’s offspring so far and how good do you think he’ll be?

To be honest, Entrepreneur doesn’t excite me much.  He was a very ordinary Guineas winner and he’s been grossly over-hyped, in my opinion.<br> <br>Just one more quick one…How do you rate Nashamaa as a sire and do you know if he’s still standing at stud? Thank you and who knows, maybe I’ll be a stallion one day….Rob

Nashamaa can’t be rated as anything but a bad sire on his record with runners in this country.  He has been in France since 1993 and stands at a rather obscure stud there.  Rest assured, you’ll be a better stallion than him, and I hope you’ll get rather more employment in that role.

Question posted by Zoz (again!):

Me again….

Tony, if reports of Dubai Millennium’s covering approximately 80 mares before his death are true, how many of those foals do you realistically believe will be seen on the racecourses of the world, taking into account chances of foals not surviving, bloodstock value, injury statistics etc?

I haven’t heard anything about the horse’s fertility, but assume it was O.K.  It’s generally reckoned that rather more than 90 per cent of mares covered in Newmarket go home pregnant, so if he was up to scratch, I dare say around 60 foals may reach the racecourse.  Most of them seem likely to run in Maktoum (or Godolphin) colours, as to date I’ve heard of only one British breeder with an in-foal mare who has refused Mohammed’s offer to buy her.

Thanks again!

<br>Question posted by GusKennedy:

Tony, I’ve enjoyed your articles for years in both the Life and the Post. I don’t think you’re ever going to see Exeter win the Premiership now but equally I don’t see myself leading Sheffield United out at Wembley either.

My question: could you please debunk the Dosage theory in 100 words? Far too many people on this forum give it far too much credence in my humble opinion.

I’m sure you’re right about Exeter City never winning the Premiership, but at least I was there (in 1990) when we won the Fourth Division title.  Where were you when we beat Sheffield United 2-1 in a friendly last month?  

Dosage is wholly irrational and hopelessly unscientific.  It is ludicrous to attempt to assess the merit (or staying-power, or whatever) of any horse by reference only to an arbitrary selection of its male antecedents.  The theory presupposes that a sire transmits the same qualities to all of his products, which very obviously is not the case.  The name of the game is genetics, and writing as a father of five who are much more noted for their differences than their likenesses, I’m well aware that genes do not operate according to any man-made plan.  The fact that the proponents of Dosage have to keep re-inventing it is their admission that it’s a nonsense.

Question posted by Luis Martin:

Hi Tony and thanks for your time, <br>What do you think about Storm Cat as sire of sires?

Well, he’s certainly doing O.K. at the moment, and one would have to expect that the chances his sons are getting will stand him in good stead in the immediate future.

Once you said that Machiavellian was one of the most over-rated stallion in England,have you changed your mind after the season he is having (Muwakleh , Medicean, Street Cry, Best of the Bests, No Excuse Needed, Storming Home , Monnavanna, and getting interest from American breeders) ?

My objections to Machiavellian were on the grounds of (a) he did not appear to be a particularly influential stallion, given that his offspring rarely took after him, and (b) that he was very expensive, judged on his record to that point.  Yes, he is looking better now, but at £60,000 he is more expensive than ever.  No doubt his besotted owner, who has been trying to buy back all the shares he sold in the horse, will want to raise his fee again next year.  He still does not rate among my favourites.

Is there any stallion in England better than him ? If so,who?

I can’t help it; I’ve always believed that proper horses stay a mile and a half, so I like Rainbow Quest and Unfuwain, who get them reliably.

Would you spend $150,000 for a Fusaichi Pegasus nomination fee, having proven stallions like Kris S. or Deputy Minister standing at the same fee?

Fusaichi Pegasus is priced according to his (alleged) value off the track, the others by reason of their record as sires.  I always prefer the proven horse to the untried one.

What do you think about breeding race horses in Dubai ? Is Timber Country good enough to send more than 50 mares to Dubai to be bred by him ?

Mohammed’s prime purpose is to promote Dubai.  It is an objective that nobody else shares, so Timber Country, whether he is any good or not, is going to be covering Maktoum mares and nothing else, unless breeders elsewhere are provided with strong inducements – which, of course, is always a possibility.

In 1999 you ranked the 50 greatest American champions and only 5 horses who were born in the 90s were included, with Cigar in the 12th position.What position would Point Given get in that ranking?

Point Given needs to run against the best older horses, and beat them conclusively, then beat younger horses just as conclusively next year, before I’ll be convinced that he’s as good as Cigar.  We shall see.

What are the breeders doing so wrong, that they are unable to breed better horses than they did 25 or 30 years ago after all this time of selection?

The basic reason is that the American breed peaked a while ago after a long period of steady improvement; it’s reached its limit of progress, and the occasional superstar cannot produce superstars.  Other negative factors – not unique to America – include: the switch of emphasis from private to commercial breeding, the use of unsound parent stock, and the sale abroad of innumerable high-class broodmares and broodmare prospects.

In the RP Bloodstock Review  you said that "the next great sire after Sadler´s Wells is probably not yet foaled and definitely not by Sadler´s Wells" ( no chance for King of Kings, Montjeu or Galileo then).  Don´t you like SW as sire of sires ?

I’m none too impressed with the Sadler’s Wells record in that respect as yet.  In any case, “male linesâ€ÂÂ

[Author]

Posts