Bloodstock News 2010

We've had this argument before, Ven and I am afraid your assertion that I'm wrong still doesn't hold water! You very conveniently have chosen to forget that it's impossible to compare the stallion/mare population of 50+ years ago and the then accepted commercial market with that which exists now.

I can't say I have an opinion on the stallion in question - I haven't seen him so have no idea what sort of conformation he has - he's only won once - Class 5 2yo - placed in a couple of Listeds but what I do hold against him is he's only run 5 times. Why should this horse get a chance ? He'll lkely only get the sort of mares you deplore anyway because we do now, rightly or wrongly, exist in a commercial market and he won't get good mares.

I would like to support limited books for stallions and approved mares at the middle and top end but you can't legislate for that and it would still leave room for a lot of dross to be bred from and if someone wants to breed their crap mare, then it simply isn't possible to stop them. However, if we do limit the books of proven stallions and which then leaves room for stallions of this calibre to start covering books of 10 - 20 mares per season, multiply that by a factor of 30 - 40 stallions who will be only too ready to take up the slack (only 3 - 4 of which will be any good), and your model soon starts to look just as bad as over-covering by relatively better stallions.
 
krizon said:
G-G - I don't follow the logic that another one should be added to the pot! I thought we were overpopulated with poor animals, there was far too much racing, 60% reductions at sales, world without end. Why on earth would we wish to add to more low-performing sires when there are HUNDREDS of good ones to choose from? It's not as if we're short of decent Group winners, not placers in Listed races.

QUOTE]

I didn't say he should be standing - I stated the point that there with worse records who are.
Click to expand...
 
Was i involved in the arguement about this before because i think i said that it was the mares fault. The mares dont have to go to the stallion the stallion man is only doing a service they dont have to use him
 
Dylan Thomas said:
Was i involved in the arguement about this before because i think i said that it was the mares fault. The mares dont have to go to the stallion the stallion man is only doing a service they dont have to use him
Click to expand...

Because the stallion man makes money out of it so he's not going to turn mares away no matter how crap they unless the stallion in question was a top class performer or has proven himself as a top class sire. Personally,as I've said before, both mare and stallion owners should have some sort of responsibility regarding the quality of animals used for breeding.
 
I'm involved in bloodstock for a long time and i believe and many other people believe that it is the mare owners that are causing the biggest problem. I agree that some stallion owners should turn away mares but it's just not going to happen. What needs to happen is for there to be a scheme to get rid of the very bad mares and they should just be put down it is the only way to solve the problem many wont agree with it but when your out around the studs in Ireland the amount of shit mares is unreal. I have one or two bad mares but i try my best to improve the breed by covering them with fairly good stallions but i'm not going to pay a high stud fee for a bad mare when i know the return will be low. By getting rid of the very bad mares the stallion ranks will get smaller and only the best will survive.
 
Dylan Thomas said:
I'm involved in bloodstock for a long time and i believe and many other people believe that it is the mare owners that are causing the biggest problem. I agree that some stallion owners should turn away mares but it's just not going to happen. What needs to happen is for there to be a scheme to get rid of the very bad mares and they should just be put down it is the only way to solve the problem many wont agree with it but when your out around the studs in Ireland the amount of shit mares is unreal. I have one or two bad mares but i try my best to improve the breed by covering them with fairly good stallions but i'm not going to pay a high stud fee for a bad mare when i know the return will be low. By getting rid of the very bad mares the stallion ranks will get smaller and only the best will survive.
Click to expand...


So how come it's OK for you to breed from your bad mares but not anyone else ?? And just because you think a mare is bad - or Ven considers some to be slow / poorly conformed, it does not mean that that is the reality - it's an opinon only and none of us are infallible.

I won't breed from a mare that hasn't won - learnt that the hard way - but it still doesn't follow their progeny will win but commercially it means they'll get a second look at the sales. My winner to runner ratio from the foals I've bred is pretty average but at least it's there to be seen. Plus I've a decent track record in the other breeding stock ventures I do - ie breeding Weimaraners and British Blues, so I've faith in my judgement as a stockman. I think I'd have a bit more respect from the strong opinions cited on here if those of you with broodmares with these opinions would be a bit more open about what you have actually bred. Probably a raft of Group winners for all I know but knowing a bit more about your successes would be good to know as I like to be able to learn something about the job everyday.
 
I know what i've bred and you dont really need to know. I come on to voice my views thats all. The reason i breed with my 2 bad mares is because i try to improve the breed by going to good stallions that is not the case with most other people who have average mares and we all do. I've tried to sell them but havent been lucky. If there was a scheme in place to get rid of bad mares only one would fall into the category but there isn't so as a commercial breeder i breed for the sales ring and hope that runners will give my mares a chance.
 
Dylan Thomas said:
I know what i've bred and you dont really need to know. I come on to voice my views thats all. The reason i breed with my 2 bad mares is because i try to improve the breed by going to good stallions that is not the case with most other people who have average mares and we all do. I've tried to sell them but havent been lucky. If there was a scheme in place to get rid of bad mares only one would fall into the category but there isn't so as a commercial breeder i breed for the sales ring and hope that runners will give my mares a chance.
Click to expand...

If she doesnt need to know, then don't post about it.

You are certainly not improving the breed by bringing your bad mares to good stallions, and it's worrying if you don't realise this and are spending £20/30k every time.
 
Sorry - I really don't want to start an argument here but it's very difficult to take at face value a lot of comments about breeding mares and what does and doesn't make a good stallion etc when there's absolutely no openess about the track record of those pontificating.

I've made a whole raft of mistakes breeding stock and, as there's never been any mystery as to what name I trade under as a breeder, my failures and occasional success are there for all to see. We all get it wrong (and how!) and, very rarely, we sometimes get it right and that's great.

After all, when it comes to backing and betting on this forum plus those with horses in training, everyone has been very generous in sharing their triumphs and also their 'failures' (not best word but can't think of a more tactful one!) - everyone seems to be extremely open and honest about their successes and failures, so why the secrecy if you're a bloodstock breeder ?
 
How can you not want to tell us about your progeny when you're writing in a bloodstock section, Dylan T? If you're breeding for the sales with two poor mares, you're just adding to the duff stock already abounding - what's the point of that? If breeders find they've bought a junk mare, they should get shot of her, end of, without waiting for some non-existent 'scheme' to come into force. You have to sometimes face the unpalatable truth that what you've bought is a waste of money, time, and effort and cut your losses. It doesn't take but a couple of seasons to find out that a super racehorse is a crap sire, and business drops off sharpish and the animal disappears (or falls to a very low price tag, revealing his true - low - worth). If you know you have poor mares and yet think you'll somehow miracle decent horses out of them by visiting middle-range sires, your results will be in by now. Has that unusual method paid off? Oh, of course, we won't be told.

I'm disappointed by your response to Songsheet. As she says, like the punters on here who've been generous in their discussions, and like the very frank postings from owners, I thought every section would be a similarly open exchange.

Obviously you must have a reason for not wanting to identify your business name or your animals, however, it's a bit like a punter saying how well he did with his system, but refusing to tell anyone what it is - a little hard to take seriously.
 
Look i know theres no rules to breeding but it has been something that has worked in the past so it's worth ago. I dont want to be having an arguement with ye i'm just saying what i think.
 
This forum has been accused many times in the past of being 'cliquey' (which is always strenuously denied). To forbid someone an opinion on a racing/breeding subject unless they name the horses they have bred/raced just backs up that theory really. No-one should be told they have to name what they've done before they are allowed an opinion on here; after all no-one insists that you must detail your experiences riding/training before expressing your opinion on horses or jockeys! I choose not to regale everybody on here about my horses as I don't want the world and his dog knowing everything about me and mine, and that is my - and anyone else's - prerogative.
 
Last edited:
What are you talking about? You've rubbished another person's views - and insulted them - citing your years of experience breeding, yada, yada.....then demanding to know what they've bred before you'll even think about taking their opinion seriously. Get a grip.
 
Nice to see Peintre Celebre have a big winner with Byword....shame we never got to see him as a 4 year old.
 
Sorry Gal! PEINTRE CELEBRE certainly seems very capaple of getting a couple of top class ones each season. What are his books like now ?
 
Baby Jacob 9lb 12oz born at 4.45am this morning

Makes me an aunty to 3 now!

Sad that mum isn't here to meet number three grandchild but at least she had plenty of time with previous two

Helen
 
I've learned absolutely TONS being on this and other forums - I don't, sadly, have the intelligence to take a lot of it in, or I'd be richer beyond the dreams of avarice by now, thanks to the tipping theories! But without TH taking over from the rudely-dumped Ch.4 forum, I wouldn't have met so many forumites and enjoyed their company. I am much the richer for having a cyberlife which corresponds to 'real' life, too.

I love that you've announced the new baby on the bloodstock section, Helen! Most apt. Very best wishes to all concerned - but I'm not sure that at 9lb 12oz Jacob was a bouncing baby, or just landed with a thud! That's got to feel more comfortable out than in now! I imagine you'll have him aboard the foal in the next week? :D
 
Back
Top