Bloodstock Question

D

DukeofMarmalade

At the Start
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
201
I've never really been that into the bloodstock / breeding side of horse racing beyond taking consideration from a betting perspective but there is something I have been wandering for a while.

Certain sires seem to have a year or two where they produce a disproportionate number of quality horses. For example if we consider Oscar and King's Theatre, both established NH sires. In both cases 4 of their top 6 rated NH progeny (on RPR's) were all sired in the same year. On the flat, Galileo's crop of 3 year olds from last year were outstanding. There are loads more similar examples.

So is it a known phenomenon whereby certain sires have a short period of time where they are (for want of a better term) firing super bullets:D or is there a simpler explanation i.e to do with a sire taking a while to establish themselves and then getting sent the best mares at the same time?
 
It will coincide with years when they got better books for the most part. You do get exceptions like Sadler's Wells who are just utterly consistent in upgrading their mares.

As an example, you'd expect Iffraaj's best crop to date be the foals of 2011 (so 2013 two year olds) on the basis he was likely to get a higher class of mare in 2010 when his first two year olds hit the track and were visually impressive. That should have been convincing enough for people to send better mares to him. You can get a performance "spike" with a stallions first crop as people will send better mares on spec when more deals are being done and he's fashionable straight off the track (especially with sales breeders). That would be more common with high class colts commanding a bigger fee (Rip Van Winkle etc.)
 
Miesque is right, but there's a "fooled by randomness" effect going on as well.

We humans have a tendency to look for patterns in observed events, which works well in many aspects of our lives, but can lead us to find patterns where none exist.

Oscar, for example, was a well-hyped stallion from the word "go" and has been covering much the same selection of mares during all of his stud career so far, and the current spike is probably just random.
 
Breed the best to the best and hope for the best is the mantra of breeders who can afford it. Whether breeders are breeding to race or breeding to sell is another matter. Can anyone explain why Old Vic is yet to get a Grade 1 winning hurdler after all his years at stud?
 
Back
Top