Forum Replies Created
- Posts
I think that’s an interesting idea, but of course there are many variables.
In favour: a mare who has had a ‘year off’ could well be healthier and stronger than one who has just had the strains of pregnancy, birth and suckling a foal. They can be covered earlier in the season and the covering is less likely to have stress or complications. This, plus not having to give any resources during early pregnancy to a suckling foal, may mean the mare can devote more energy and nutrition to the developing embryo, resulting in a stronger foal.
Against: if the mare was previously barren, or had needed to be rested, she may have underlying health problems. This may affect future pregnancies – the factor that caused her to be barren may affect the viability of the new foal. In addition, sometimes mares need plenty of practice to be good mothers. If she is not an experienced broodmare (due to missed years) she may get stressy and lose condition, which may affect the foal.
Out of interest, I’ve had a quick assessment of Galileo’s first crop – hardly a representative sample – but it’s getting late…
I divided the mares into 3 categories – maiden mares; mares with a living foal the previous year; mares with a non-productive return the previous year. Living foals was by far the biggest category. I then divided the progeny into 4 categories – unraced; non-winners; ordinary winners; black-type winners or placed.
Results:
Maidens.
Unraced = 29%
Non-winners = 25%
Winners = 21%
Black-type = 25% (an extraordinary 12.5% Group winners)Previous year living foal.
Unraced = 18.5%
Non-winners = 25.5%
Winners = 34.5%
Black-type = 21.5% (5% Group winners)Previous year non-productive.
Unraced = 14%
Non-winners = 14%
Winners = 64%
Black-type = 7% (O Group winners).Make of that what you will – my brain hurts.
alot of the top horses pre-2006 were foaled in March and now its more February
Way too much of vague statement really – only actual stats such as comparing the birthdates of the top twenty in the World Thoroughbred Rankings from each of the last twenty years might make it a valid statement.
Early foals will usually have a slight advantage over late foals until they reach full maturity, but I can’t really see much difference between February and March foals. The vast majority of flat-bred foals are born in those two months, so they are bound to throw up a big percentage of decent horses every year.
The only possible suggestion I would have is maybe that improvements in veterinary science means mares have more chance of getting in foal with the first covering, leading to more foals being born earlier in the year, but I don’t think it’s terribly likely that it would increase the numbers of February-born champions.
Those are her only foals of racing age – she has been barren in the other years. She currently has a yearling by Act One and a foal by Shirocco.
Hi Moe,
As far as I am aware, Madame D is still owned by Cliveden Stud Ltd (the Freedman family) – although they don’t have the original stud anymore, that is still the name their interests are registered with.She had an Authorized filly this year, but she is now quite an old lady (she was barren last year) and I’m not sure how many more foals she can have. Her 2yo is Saggiatore, who is in training with Ed Dunlop and had a thoroughly unexciting debut on Friday at Newmarket.
Not a big Count Dubois fan, but it is good to see he is having success in his field. He was sire of the champion 2yo filly in South Africa a couple of years ago and has had plenty of group winners out there, but nowhere else.
MD’s other successful ones have been Indian Haven (who will probably have much more of an impact as a sire over here than CD) and her daughter Place de l’Opera who has had three good runners here in Imperial Stride, High Pitched and Zero Tolerence.
http://www2.france-galop.com/FGWeb/domaines/chevaux/cheval_perf.aspx
Wouldn’t be sure this is all of them, but it is all the French-foaled anyway – click on ‘Crop’ to view.
I’ve done the weekend trip for the Breeders’ Cup thing – but it was at Belmont; not sure I would have done the same to Santa Anita.
The problem with branding, or rebranding, is that it attempts to put a product into a box, packaging it as a certain type of experience appealing to a particular target group.
Racing as an product can appeal to a huge range of target groups, offering each a different experience. It can offer a champagne ‘n’ hats day out for a girly group; a nice lunch and corporate box experience for businesses; a day of sport and betting for serious fans; a family picnic with horses and bouncy castles on a Bank Holiday Monday….
All of these groups are equally important for the future of the racing industry. Branding to target one or other of these groups is likely to alienate at least some of the others – I imagine many Brians are the small corporate box type who sponsor races at their local courses, or the die-hard sports fans who provide betting revenue.
This diversity is also one of racing’s greatest strengths – it offers a variety of experiences that sports like football and rugby cannot. Trying to homogenise racing into a single experience is a mistake.
IMO, racing should have a centralised information service with a calendar and booking details, but much of the marketing needs to be done on a localised scale. Marketing racing as all Royal Ascot glamour and celebrity is all very well, but first-time Devon racegoers to Newton Abbot will be disappointed if that is what they are expecting! Different courses should target their own marketing to their specific target audiences – a family experience at Cartmel, a corporate opportunity at Newbury, a showbiz and fashion edge to Chester, etc.
The racing authorities’ role should be to ensure the general image of racing is good – clean, sporting, exciting, competitive, prestigious and with high animal welfare priority. Going racing can be a great event and day out for everyone. Branding to a target group is exclusive – racing can be inclusive and should be marketed as such.
Have to agree with much of Paul’s points, except probably b), but especially e, f and g.
For a casual racegoer, the thing most courses are missing is a pleasant place to sit down and have a reasonable cup of tea and something to eat without missing the action. Posh restaurants and burger vans are in good supply – it’s the middle ground that tends to be grotty/over-crowded/hideously expensive/without enough screens.
Cost needs to be addressed directly. There should be centrally directed tiers of pricing. Set maximum prices for the main enclosure for all courses, related to the quality of racing on offer. Courses with lower quality facilities should also not be allowed to charge the maximum. Mid-week, low quality meetings should not be able to charge more than £5 for main enclosure entrance; better quality meetings should not charge more than £15. Festivals would have to be exempt from this, but even their prices should be capped to some degree.
Use racecards more as a tool to encourage customer loyalty. All racecards should include a free £2 Tote voucher, plus a free or discount course return entry voucher. Discount vouchers for food and non-alcoholic drink should also be included to encourage racegoers to use the facilities. Prize draws and competitions are all very well, but I don’t know many people who bother entering – it’s a faff to fill it in and you know you’ll get bombarded with junk mail. Straightforward vouchers create more of a feeling of value and satisfaction.
Racecourses should encourage local groups and societies to get involved. I found it very strange that Nottingham Racecourse didn’t want anything to do with Nottingham University, for instance. Colleges and universities often have sports societies – the racecourses should be proactive and offer discount admission and special offers (but probably not free booze!) to their local ones. Same goes for local sports clubs – the target audiences will often overlap.
Keep racing on terrestial telly.
Thinking about racecourse food has made me hungry, so I’m off to get some lunch now…
I remember talking to a chap at the riding school I used to go to – he had a bushy beard and said how much he hated wearing a chin strap. This was in the days when skull cap legislation was just coming in (required to wear one on a public road) and he was debating getting rid of the beard vs packing in riding!
She slipped her foal this year to Exceed And Excel. Al Adham was quite a late foal, born in May 2007, and understandably she was rested for 2008.
Will look for more info later.
Can’t see it mentioned elsewhere on this thread, so for those interested, the official Overdose fanclub page is http://www.overdoseonline.hu
Lovely website. Go Dozi!
1.30 Coe
2.05 Diamond Harry
2.40 Carruthers
3.20 Master Minded
4.00 Pierrot Lunaire
4.40 Amore Mio
5.15 Quinola des Obeaux1.30 Golan Way
2.05 I’msingingtheblues
2.40 Millenium Royal
3.20 Whiteoak
4.00 Dix Villez
4.40 United (NAP)I don’t think it’s a stat you can generalise about. Some mares do run up sequences – random ones that sprang to mind were Attraction, Devon Ditty, Peeping Fawn and Salsabil. But the same applies to colts, two-year-olds, sprinters, etc, whichever catagory you want, you will be able to find examples – Rock of Gibraltar, Timeless Times, Johannesburg, Sinndar…
It depends so much on the strength of the division, on the individual horse and the timing of the races. Russian Rhythm is an example – she twice won 3 races in a row, only to get beaten in the autumn.
The last flat jockey in the UK (I think) I remember very well was Steve Wood in 1994. It happened close to the time of Declan Murphy’s bad accident, and I remember having many heated Uni discussions about the relative safety of the sport of horseracing.
Tom Halliday (spelling?) was only a couple of years ago, and Richard Davis died in about 1996. Philip Barnard (sp?) was early 90s.
Think on those statistics it works out about one every 5 years, but I think safety has improved, so these tragic accidents will hopefully become less frequent.
*edit: Jeremy, not copying you, I just need to type quicker!
Probably a fuss over nothing – one negative comment often creates more outrage, and therefore more issue, than there actually is.
Having a 5yo, I tend to watch far too much CBeebies than is good for me! Our discussion over Cerrie has consisted of my son saying (after Cerrie and Alex had been fronting the segments for about a week) "Oh look, she’s only got one hand. Why?". I said I didn’t know, she might have had an accident, she might just have been born with only one hand. He replied "Why doesn’t she get a new one?"
He asked if lots of people only have one hand, and I told him about one of the girls at my school who I used to go riding with who only had one hand. He was curious to know how she could ride using only one arm (she was much better than me!), but he was certainly not scared or repelled. He’s not mentioned Cerrie’s arm since.Having said that, Cerrie and Alex aren’t good presenters yet – very stiff and self-conscious, horribly scripted and artificial sounding. Bring back Chris and Pui!
He asked if lots of people only have one hand, and I told him about one of the girls at my school who I used to go riding with who only had one hand. He was curious to know how she could ride using only one arm (she was much better than me!), but he was certainly not scared or repelled. He’s not mentioned Cerrie’s arm since.