Aldebaran

Inish Glora · Postby **Inish Glora** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 9:31 am

Someone mentioned in another thread that they were surprised his initial stud fee was $50,000 considering his physical appearance. I have not seen the horse, so I was wondering what exactly does he look like, besides being a bay? Is he really offset or does he have some other flaw?

Intrinsic Worth · Postby **Intrinsic Worth** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 9:37 am

I took a mare to him last year and from what i saw, he's small and fine boned.

Inish Glora · Postby **Inish Glora** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 9:39 am

Ok, is that it?

roving boy · Postby **roving boy** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 10:08 am

While Aldebaran is not a massive, heavily muscled horse, he is 16 hands. He does have little Mr. P feet and could have a bit more bone. He is a very pretty horse and has a deceivingly strong hip, as he has a bit of a flat croup. I know Darby Dan is looking for Seattle Slew mares for him - probably for the Myrtlewood play as well as the bone.

Interestingly, he may be physically perfect for some of the Roberto and His majesty mares at Darby Dan.

henthorn · Postby **henthorn** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 8:09 pm

I was the one who said I didn't think he would get a lot of mares at $50K. He was a wonderful racehorse, and I love the Mr. Prospector and Private Account. He's close in front, according to my notes from last spring. As I recall, he appeared base narrow. Otherwise I liked him.

Inish Glora · Postby **Inish Glora** » Wed Jan 05, 2005 10:24 am

Yes, I believe it was you Henthorn. I was just curious because I love the pedigree on him, and I had never seen him. Thanks!

roving boy · Postby **roving boy** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:53 am

I think that when one looks at Aldebaran one should remember what Mr. Prospector looked like right off the track and in his early years at stud. Mr. P was not a muscle bound horse with great substance, and was considered by some to be too light and elegant. Sounds a bit familiar doesn't it?

henthorn · Postby **henthorn** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:00 am

For the record, I believe Aldebaran has a great shot at being a good sire. I just think that when I saw him at Darby Dan in May of 2004 he did not look like a $50K stallion. $25K might have been more reasonable until/unless he produced commercial foals and/or winners.

roving boy · Postby **roving boy** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 4:45 pm

Fair enough. I am frustrated with stallion pricing in general.

As a breeder I want to make decisions that will give my mares their best chance of producing a stakes horse. However, since I have yet to find oil in the backyard, I am forced to use unproven horses more often than I would like. Until the oil wells come in, I have to play along with what the market wants.

Consider what happened to Aptitude when his first yearlings sold in 2004. As a whole his sales yearlings were a pretty good lot, a few were exceptional. The exceptional ones brought good money and were purchased by end users. The rest were hard pressed to be sold because the pinhookers did not want them (Aptitude was not precocious, the AP Indy's are generally not considered to be precocious, and they did not have Quarter Horse butts). So if you just look at the numbers, Aptitude was a big disappointment.

However, I will bet you that in the spring of 2006 there will be more than one Aptitude on the Derby trail and by Travers Day Aptitude will be the "hot" horse!

roving boy · Postby **roving boy** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 4:46 pm

By the way, I did not have an Aptitude yearling to sell in 2004, so my use of him as an example was not "sour grapes"!

LSB · Postby **LSB** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:25 pm

roving boy, I think there's also a possibility that pinhookers are basing their decisions about Aptitude at least partially on the Northern Dancer-as-broodmare-sire jinx. Another interesting wrinkle to a sometimes hard to fathom game.

FOS · Postby **FOS** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:01 pm

hi roving boy

You wrote "I think that when one looks at Aldebaran one should remember what Mr. Prospector looked like right off the track and in his early years at stud. Mr. P was not a muscle bound horse with great substance, and was considered by some to be too light and elegant. Sounds a bit familiar doesn't it?"

Sorry...I suggest that your information and description (to a very large degree) is not accurate.

Mr. Prospector was definitely NOT light (by any stretch of the imagination) or elegant...he was extremely masculine but NOT musclebound...he had LOTS of substance...LOTS of muscle...LOTS of bone...LOTS of forearm...LOTS of quarters...clean knees and joints...excellent pasterns (and angles) and a particularly strong hock and hind leg.

He was not what might be referred to as a "pretty" horse...but it was clear that he was Very Strong...Beautifully Proportioned...and Exceptionally Well Balanced...

...he was LOADED with outstanding qualities...although his front legs were set somewhat close and he splayed-out a bit. That was a concern to some...(at least early on)...

...but WOW....what a horse.

Best to you always.

Respectfully

Intrinsic Worth · Postby **Intrinsic Worth** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:21 am

I saw Mr. P many times and he had very little bone. In fact, his old exercise rider who works at Overbrook will tell you that.

FOS · Postby **FOS** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:52 am

hi intrinsic worth

Wrong...TOTALLY. Sorry.

You may have seen him later in his life as he seemed to "shrink"...but off the track...and in his earlier years he was EXACTLY as I described.

Respectfully

roving boy · Postby **roving boy** » Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:01 pm

FOS:

While it is evident that you are "never in doubt", could it be that you are "sometimes mistaken"?

In the course of this week's January Sale I have spoken with several people who knew Mr. P well. Their unanimous comment was that he was not musclebound (which you did not dispute), and was never a horse with a lot of bone. As all stallions do, he did add bone after retiring and standing stud. Per these same individuals, he never stood 16 hands, and although he had very good quarters, was never what they would call a masculine horse. And all commented on the small feet.

Of course, it is the eye of the beholder.

Respectfully.