Sales & the nick ratings

[Shammy Davis]

What do you think of this?

The breeding industry has become enslaved by nick ratings . . .

Jason Hall, Pedigree Perspectives - March 06/M-Atlantic TB

[LSB]

I think he's entitled to his opinion, but I don't agree.

[Derring]

First off, let me say that I like to use nicks as a research tool.

I think what he may be refering to is that some people are usings nicking as the 'end all' for auction purchases and breeding decisions. This should not be the case.

[jagger]

Where's the popcorn?

[austique]

I think 99% of people in the industry know the limitations of nicks and few would be foolish enough to base a decision on them. I think most use them (at least I do) as Derring said as a tool which you take with a grain of salt and move on.

[jagger]

Nicks ARE tools and like tools, some are more valuable than others. Some can be very helpful and some only confuse. All nicks are definitely not equal.

[Pretty]

What nick rating? Sorry not a racehorse person, but am interested.

[Shammy Davis]

The following is from WERK:

Nick ratings are based on the percentage by which a certain sire line, when combined with a certain broodmare sire line, exceeds its performance, on average, with other lines. To make the rating easier to understand, we have developed a scale which converts the percentage to a letter grade ranging from "F" to "A". In rare cases, the rating may be as high as "A+" or even "A++". We emphasize that an "A" rated nick does not guarantee success, nor does an "F" rated nick guarantee failure. An "A" rated nick indicates that a far greater percentage of stakes winners has resulted from that cross than expected. An "F" rated nick indicates that the number of stakes winners resulting from a cross is at least 50% below expectations. This does not mean that there cannot be success or will not be success from such a mating in the future. It does mean that in all the experience of the last 20 years of winners of open stakes races, that type of mating has had a lack of success as measured by stakes winner production.

In short consultants are standing by to take your fee and they will rate a potential mating for you. As you may have noticed, the same disclaimer used by WERK is used by every diet pill advertiser, every hair restoration remedy, every supplement to enhance what you want enhance, and that everything provided is not typical of the average product. Simply, BUYER BEWARE!

[Pete]

Hi all,

Pretty, in case you didn't understand what a Werk rating is from Shammy's quote: It's an alpha rating given to a potential mating based on the past success of the sire line when mated to the sire line of the dam. The initial problem is that there's rarely a large enough number of foals of racing age to make the comparison between sire and dam-sire directly so they use more distant ancestors.

Austique, I agree with Jason Hall. These ratings are being proliferated by stallion farms on their sites (e-Nicks) and people who want a quick fix answer to base their matings on.

I know advisors who use them because it makes their job simple and everyone likes to get a good grade whether at school or in a hypo mating. It’s a placebo for people to feel that they’ve made a scientific approach to breeding. Any pedigree advisor that’s ‘selling’ Werk ratings should be viewed with suspicion.

I always qualify that Jack Werk seems to be a gentleman but his system is flawed from the outset since it relies on the assumption that affinities are inherited and they rarely are. Every generation removed degrades the potential for the ‘nick’ to remain effective. At best it generalizes blood affinity and when you see a rating that says “Based on the Mr. Prospector - Northern Dancer nick" and these 2 stallions are each removed by 2 generations then what are you really comparing?

Shammy, I think the Werk disclaimer is actually a responsible statement and their ratings have more potential than Dosage but using simplistic ‘tools’ like these cripple the ingenuity of breeding. A beer and a dartboard might be more accurate.

Regards,

Pete

[ragsdaj]

In using the werk tool I have noticed the In Realty line to be a good example in the difference a generation can make in the rating system.

Known Fact, Relaunch, Valid Appeal have change the werk rating Ive received with the same mare.

I receive an A rating for Copote Woodman cross. I only see one SW with that cross, Acceptable. Is this is a good cross because glamour is linebred? Goldmine suggests this might be the case. Why do I have to ask these questions? Why doesn't werk tell me in the rating I receive?

If the farms did not support the werk system by offering their stallions to nick with I would never pay for the service based on what I get. I should not have to go find out why the rating is what it is. Spit out a list of horses that justify the rating, so i can see if it is smoke and mirrors or if I have a compatible pedigree. $20 bucks is a lot of money to get a paper with an A, B, D+ on it.

[Pete]

Hi Jon,

As you point out, there's a fundamental problem when you don't know the calculations.

There's also no qualification about the quality of SW that the grade's based on.

I prefer to use the the old Barney, Smith breeding method, work to earn it.

Regards,

Pete

[ragsdaj]

Pete,

I agree the Smith Barney way is still the best.

If you don't mind my asking, "Where do Agents come from?"

I don't see Colleges out there that offer Pedigrees 101, Thoroughbreds the Early Years, or Hypo-Mating in the 21st Century.

I am not poking fun, I am interested in what education there is available out there.

Thanks,

[louis finochio]

When I started researching nicks in 1973, the 1st breeder I researched was the Canadian breeder E. P. Taylor.

E.P. Taylor bred mares to his stallions by Chop Chop---Bull Page---and New Providence, all these mares male sire line traced to Teddy.

EPT attained great success with the offspring of these individuals.
When a leading breeder finds a hit mating or strikes oil with a bloodline affinity, its time to go back to the well.

Those breeders that dont use this tool to guide them to consistently breed those superior runners will fail to breed those superior runners.

Lets use the full brothers Graustark and His Majesty for an example.

Graustark had a bloodline affinity with Swynford. His Majesty did not have a bloodling affinity with Swynford. Thats why it is very hard to breed those superior runners, as this example is given.

[ragsdaj]

when you get an A++ nick from Repriced and Relaunch and then go to the progeny and see 5 names with 100K+ earnings I believe that is an affinity between the two. Because Capote Woodman achieved 1 SW, I am not convinced that is an affinity or worthy of an A rate.

I am interested in putting successful lines together, but where I get the information and who I pay for that information is different. I just think I should get more output from werk. They have the data to make the grade, so how hard would it be to substantiate the rating with some names and earnings. If I went to an Agent and said here is $105.26 select a stallion for me, I believe the Agent will hand me back a lot more detail (at least I hope they would).

Werk states on their website that 25% of racers today are rated A nicks. They are not stating that the horses were the result of their system. It is possible to achieve an A nick without even knowing their product exists.

[Pete]

Hi Jon,

Agents develop normally in their mothers’ womb but during child birth, usually with an errant push, they are forced out the rear, emerging fully clothed in a plaid suit and patent leather shoes. Agents will be delivered to the family home by a vulture rather than the familiar stork.

I call myself a Bloodstock Advisor though I do function as an agent. Agents have some authority from the owners to act on their behalf whether selling or buying stock. It’s not uncommon for an advisor to discuss strategy with an agent. Consignors are agents that sell stock for owners, generally at auction sales. I’ll lump advisors (born by cesarean section) and agents together for this post.

Many advisors have or still work within the industry and may have considerable experience to share. Some large commercial farms have programs where their employees can wok in the different phases of their operation to build a foundation. Anyone that hires an advisor needs to judge them not only on expertise but character. You are the watchdog of their ethics. I advised a client against a pre-sale purchase offered by another advisor who made claims of ability that weren’t verified yesterday when the horse had a poor work, (slow time and bad action), and its value is perhaps 1/5th the first asking price.

The fact is that anyone can present themselves as an advisor whenever they want, whether they have expertise or not but that’s the same in any field. If you pass muster with the people that pay you then you’re an expert until they decide that you’re not. Owners seeking advice need to be vigilant until the advisor has proven their mettle.

A generic problem in the thoroughbred industry is the expectation that advisors are experts in all areas of the business and the problem is compounded when they believe it themselves. It’s important for advisors to know their limitations. As an advisor I believe it’s necessary for me to know experts that can guide my clients in areas that I can’t.

Generally I’m asked to give advice though I occasionally present myself to potential clients. Often the advisor has a reputation that brings people to them or they get involved with a high profile horse that adds to their prestige. Some develop gimmicks that give them notoriety.

You’ll find that advisors (and others) are quick to challenge the competency or ability of another advisor and that’s the same in any business. Don’t be too quick to defend or to doubt your advisors. Consider them on the basis of what they do for you and if they give you insight that improves your operation they have value.

An owner and their advisors should work to develop strategies that consistently create opportunities with quality thoroughbreds whether breeding or racing. This is a business where on any given horse a guess can be as good as an educated opinion so you need to increase potential wherever you can.

Thoroughbreds is a business of accumulated knowledge on many levels. Development of a discerning eye can (should) take many years and even then you may be superior in evaluation of conformation that you are at movement. I believe a good advisor should help you develop your own abilities and if that means that they’re no longer needed to advise then you’ll just have to do lunch.

Regards,

Pete