Forum Replies Created
- Posts
There’s not many around, true enough. Montmartre’s greyness obviously comes from his Linamix damside. Hail Caesar, who won at Tipperary the other day for O’Brien is apparantly grey too – he’s from the dam family of Alborada, which explains his.
I don’t know what all this rubbish is about the Aga Khan and Coolmore ‘doing business’ because of Moonstone and Montmartre.
I presume you think they are because Moonstone is by an Aga Khan sire and Montmartre is by a Coolmore sire?
But Moonstone wasn’t bred by Coolmore – she was bred by Britton House and then sold in their dispersal sale. Coolmore presumably bought her because she is a half-sister to L’Ancresse and is a fabulous female family to buy into.
And Montmartre was not bred by the Aga Khan. He was bred by the late Jean-Luc Lagardere and then bought as a block by the Aga Khan in the Lagardere dispersal.
I don’t think either enterprise ever had a embargo on the other – certainly the Aga Khan has previously used Coolmore stallions. Simply because these two horses have cropped up in their ownership in the same year does not mean there is now a partnership going on, it is purely coincidental.
I don’t disagree – and I wouldn’t recommend him for every mare, but I think they would be a good match.
The problem when a sire becomes so fashionable so quickly is that they become the stallion-of-choice for so many unsuitable partners – a mare is sent to them purely for the name and future sale price without any consideration of compatibility.
A great stallion can usually keep producing the goods, where as a so-so stallion can suffer.
I’d be happy to take a punt of Shamardal. With what Bosra’s achieved as a broodmare so far with established stallions, I don’t think it would be a loss-making exercise to try an unknown.
Oddly enough, I can’t find her returns for 2007, or for this year. I presume she was rested last year, but can’t find a covering or foal for her. As it appears she will be going through the ring at Tatts later in the year, I suppose we will find out then who her 2008 and 2009 produce are by.
It will only be a backwater if the forumites make it so.
If everyone gives it a fair go to begin with, then it should become clear whether it will work in the long term or not.
If everyone grumbles and says “I’m not going to post in there because no-one ever posts in there”, then failure becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
It’s only a case of clicking a different folder, so it shouldn’t be too much of a challenge for most people on here…
It’s upset me greatly that she was sent to Rainbow Quest, Singspiel and SW – none of whom were suitable for her, IMO. I’d like her to visit Giant’s Causeway, she should have gone to Danehill – or Shamardal or Cape Cross.
These are the rules for stallions:
E. Recognition of Stallions covering in Germany
50. Stallions which are used for covering in Germany and are a thoroughbred in the sense of no. 39 can be entered in the stallion register once they have been presented for inspection and evaluation and have been recognized. Stallions having already covered before will be inspected at the respective studs.51. Recognition
The Breeding Commission will recognize stallions for breeding purposes which seem suitable to improve the thoroughbred breed regarding genetic health, performance and conformation.
a) This is considered to be the case if the colt/stallion is free of genetic diseases,he has achieved a rating of at least 95 kg on the annual end of the season German General Handicap Weight or a respective rating of 110 on the World Thoroughbred Racehorse Rankings and having placed at least third in a Group race or has achieved at least 94 kg on the annual end of the season German General Handicap Weight and won at least a Group race in Europe.
These rules apply to all stallions being presented for recognition on the basis of the annual end to the season German General Handicap Weights from 1997 onwards.
If the colt/stallion in question has run in other countries, a special expert
commission consisting of a handicapper, the Chairman of the Breeding
Commission and a member of the Breeding Commission who is nominated
by the stallion owner/applicant will decide whether the necessary rating has been achieved.
A colt/stallion can only be recognized on the premises that he has never raced under medication in the sense of article 6 in the International Agreement on Breeding, Racing and Wagering. This regulation applies to all colts/stallions presented for recognition from 30th September 1997 onwards.
b) For evaluation of the colt/stallion’s conformation, the Recognition Commission has to take the following listed features of the outer appearance in relation to the breeding aim into consideration and deal out a ten-point marking system with 30 points being the minimum:
1. Features typical of the breed and his sex,
2. conformation,
3. correct and proper way of movement,
4. swiftness and flexibility,
5. general impression, temperament, disposition and development.
c) Marking system
The above mentioned features under b) are to be marked according to the
numbers listed below:
10 = excellent
9 = very good
8 = good
7 = quite good
6 = pleasing
5 = sufficient
4 = poor, insufficient
3 = quite bad
2 = bad
1 = very bad
d) Performanc traits
Also to be taken into consideration are the physical ability and will to perform, toughness and genuity, rideability and character which should have been demonstrated in more than one racing season. The respective performances are published in the Annual Racing Calendar.
e) The Breeding Commission will also recognize a stallion in the case of his progeny having achieved an average German General Handicap Weight
which is the equivalent of the average annual end of the season German General Handicap Weight of the entire respective crop. In order to work out this average weight, a stallion needs to be represented by at least 10 three-year old progeny, seven must have raced and those not handicapped will be classified at 40kg.
f) Publishing of the stallion register A list of all recognized stallions standing and covering in Germany including the location is published annually in a special section of the Weekly Racing
Calendar.Sorry about the bad format – it doesn’t copy well from pdf! As far as I am aware it does not apply to mares – there are certainly unraced mares at stud in Germany, but I think the general attitude to quality is better over there.
Steady on Ginge – the photo marked as November in one post and December in another is only out by one day; surely not a hanging offence?
And I don’t think reverse imaging a photo counts as deception.
Don’t spill arguments from one thread over onto another, please.
I’m afraid the highlight for me today was Simon Holt’s spoonerism when attempting to say ‘wins the Hunt Cup’. Reason in itself for watching ATR.
Why should everyone be racing to win? That’s not in the rules of racing. It is performing to the best of their ability.
If the horse is happy in his work, happy on the racecourse, fit enough to race and putting in to the best of their current ability each time, why should they not race? If all horses in training who are incapable right now of winning a race off their current handicap mark were retired, we would probably halve the racehorse population.
Ditto if all the golfers who had no chance of winning the club tournament, London marathon runners who had no chance of winning the race, tennis players who can’t win a game against their neighbour, park footballers who had no chance of scoring a goal, all retired – there would be no SPORT.
As someone else said, hindsight is a wonderful thing – bad things happen in all sorts of circumstances, but also do not happen in the majority of instances, so it is ridiculous to expect connections to anticipate in this one case.
And to firefox (flaming?), you have to realise that all horses have different personalities. Some horses (my sister’s ex-racer) can be rehabilitated effortlessly. Some horses can be rehabilitated with some training, some with a great deal of patience and time. And some cannot be rehabilitated without a deal of suffering to the animal, with no guarantee of a happy final outcome. It depends entirely on the horse.
It’s similar to the broken leg situation – some horses can tolerate the extended immobilisation and box rest while the leg heals; others will simply fret themselves to death. Sometimes it is kinder to end the suffering rather than attempt to heal the leg.
I suppose with the horse population growing it makes sense for the Pattern to also grow – to reflect the top 10% of horses (for example) you would need more races if there are more horses in training.
But, yes I would agree that it can be a problem, with weak races giving a horse some undeserving black-type. It has been a problem in the past too though – at one point horses that finished fourth in Group races were given black-type; this practice has been discontinued because it was becoming meaningless.
Some races have been downgraded or had black-type status dropped completely. At the moment I can only think of the Beeswing Stakes, which has pretty much ceased to be, the Zetland, the Blue Riband Trial at Epsom and the Albany Stakes at Goodwood is now a conditions. Some get moved, so they look like new races, when they are actually just replacing an old one (like the Predominate). The Gran Premio d’Italia used to be Gr.1, it is now a Listed, and the French chop and change their races frequently. In addition, in the past, the big handicaps such as the Stewards’ Cup and Ebor carried black-type – that stopped in the 80s.
The Pattern is officially just the Group 1, 2 and 3 races – the Listed races are slightly separate and weren’t originally encompassed by the system.
It’s meant as a guide to races of a set standard – so in theory an Italian Gr.3 is of equal standard to an Irish or British Gr.3. Prizemoney ceased to become a useful measuring-stick, and of course was tricky to evaluate with different currencies and exchange rates, so Pattern races have instead set conditions – such as the ratings of the first four horses over a few years must reach a certain level.
The Pattern was specifically for Europe – now the International Cataloguing Standards applies the method more or less world-wide. Hence why American races are referred to as Graded races, while European are called Group races – it is actually a slightly different system in the different continents.
A win in a Gr.1, 2, 3 or Listed race will give a horse upper-case black-type in a catalogue, so obviously the best horses will stand out on the page. A place in any of those races will give lower-case black-type – the horse will stand out on the page more than an ordinary winner, but not as much as a black-type race winner. Obviously, the more black-type on a catalogue page, the better the breeding of the animal, as they are related to more big race winners. A filly winning some black-type greatly enhances her breeding value.
Sorry for the much longer answer than was probably necessary!
That would solve a mystery!!
I tried several variations – Sheerzar, Sherzaar, Scherzar, Sherzah, and so on, but no joy. Bit of a pain to transliterate into cyrillic as well!
I can’t really add anything much, Rory! Don’t know anything about Sherzar I’m afraid – no TBs of that name that I can find.
Mistnik, as Ven said, was a sprinter – he won 2 Sprinters races as a 3 year old including the Sprinting Championship Stakes, and was third in the colts Trial Stakes (equivilent to the 2000 Guineas).
His numbers of foals registered in the Russian Stud Book are a little erratic – up to 10 foals some years (quite high for Russia), 1 or 2 other years and with some years missing completely. I’m missing form for the early 90s, when most of his progeny were born, so I can’t really tell how he got on. He sired the 2000 Guineas equivilent winner Yupiter in 1996 and a Czech 1000 Guineas placed filly Mest in 1992. He’s also the damsire of Masstab, who won the Russian Derby and St Leger in 1998.
If you have any more clues about Sherzar I’ll have another look for you. Good luck with your filly!
I can’t have distance, the hoof or ‘just not being good enough’ as factors in his defeat. He was beaten a very, very long way out, he appeared completely sound (and fit, so missed work not a factor), and he had already given a thorough kicking to most of the field.
My initial thought was ‘got at’, followed by the more prosiac ‘anti-got at’ – that without his usual medicated routine he is not the same horse. Either reason would be extremely sad for US racing.
TBH I think a third reason is more realistic – simply that the Triple Crown was too intense a demand for him and he was burnt out, unable to produce a third strenuous effort in the short space of time.
Sean Rua, the whip is used as an ‘artificial aid’.
In riding terms, there are natural aids (legs, hands, voice) and artificial aids (whip, spurs, elements of tack such as martingales).
All of the aids are used for basically the same thing, to help the jockey tell the horse what to do. None are used purely for one thing, such as to make a horse go faster, they are also used to slow a horse down, encourage them to move in a certain direction or to make them concentrate.
Whips are used in exactly the same way as the natural aids – a kick of the jock’s legs to go faster, a shout of encouragement, a shake of the reins. The stick has to be used skillfully in conjunction with the other aids to tell the horse the same message – keep going.
In a race, more so than with other riding, the whip is a valuable aid. Jockeys ride shorter than normal, so the leg is often ineffectual as an aid for direction or encouragement. The noise in a race, particularly a finish, can make the voice a difficult aid to use (particularly if the jockey is out of breath!). Hands in a race are important, but when at full stretch they are more useful for stopping than anything else.
The problem with banning the whip is not so much that horses will stop, or that they will misbehave. It is more that they will not be able to understand what their jockey is telling them to do, which is a problem when they are travelling at 30mph.
I’ve never ridden in a race, so maybe you will think all these points have no validity – this is purely from years of pony-girl experience and subsequent non-riding racing involvement.
I still believe the answer is education and attitude change – which will be slow. I don’t think disqualifying is the answer – enforcing existing penalties fairly, with maybe an additional fine for jock and trainer as an additional disincentive.
Having ridden in the dim and distant past, I would not be in favour of banning the whip. As an artificial aid it is extremely useful – even more so with a light saddle and riding short.
I don’t like seeing horses thrashed in a finish, but I think the answer is jockey education rather than a whip ban – and I think British racing is taking good steps towards it, particularly with the Hands and Heels races. Changing attitudes is slow work, but watching races from even only 10 years ago there is a definite difference. I think the current rules are fine, as long as they are applied justly and consistently.
