After spending the last 10 days at Keeneland, I humbly offer some observations on what I saw.
1. The yearling market has moved totally toward the athlete and away from pedigrees. If you had a correct individual, it sold well - good page or not. But buyers were merciless on even small conformational faults. I watched several well-bred horses (two Theatricals come to mind) get absolutely hammered in the ring. Even fillies with good pages sold poorly. I also saw a fairly nice Deputy Commander colt out of a dam who had six prior foals with two of winners, one graded-stakes winner, sell for $47,000. Oh - did I mention all of her previous foals were bred and raced in BRAZIL?
2. The Tiznow's looked pretty good and sold well.
3. California breeders - unless Barretts changes my mind, I will never again sell a select-quality yearling in California. If you have a mare good enough to get a yearling in book 4-6, and it looks good and vets clean, I'm convinced you'll get better money in Keeneland then in California. Don'tsellmeshort's yearling full brother was OK (a little upright in the pasterns for my taste) and went for $150,000 to the pinhookers. No way does he get that price at Del Mar.
4. They've made it a lot easier to check x-rays and scopes. All the large consignors had printouts of both that you could check in the ring - no more running to the vet trailers in the parking lot at $60 a pop.
It's all about conformation, baby...
Anyone who was there want to disagree/comment/chastise me?
Keeneland observations
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
Hope the Tiznows do well at the track, too, and that trainers have sense enough not to rush them. If they take after their daddy, they're going to need time to grow into themselves and develop bone.
"A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher...You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse." C. S. Lewis
[quote="Ruffian"]I love tiznow! I saw some weanlings last year and thought they were gorgeous just like dad 
Held off though on mating/buying any just to make sure he does well. I would rather pay more and have a better chance at success than just another horse by a failed sire in the barn 
is that mean? lol[/quote]
I remember that Fred Hooper won a season to Secretariat (I think in the Matchmaker Stakes) and wouldn't use it for Susan's Girl because Secretariat was, at the time. an unproven sire. (In other words, Ruffian, you're in good company!)
Held off though on mating/buying any just to make sure he does well. I would rather pay more and have a better chance at success than just another horse by a failed sire in the barn is that mean? lol[/quote]
I remember that Fred Hooper won a season to Secretariat (I think in the Matchmaker Stakes) and wouldn't use it for Susan's Girl because Secretariat was, at the time. an unproven sire. (In other words, Ruffian, you're in good company!)
I've been blown away by photos of the Tiznows. I also hope that they aren't pushed too hard as 2 year olds; though they look very mature (and smart), one can only imagine what such good looking colts will grow into when they reach true racing age. They don't look like they'll be the short-necked, fat 2 year olds that breeze a furlong in 10 seconds though, so hopefully there will be no temptation to rush them!
-
Green Hills
- Starters Handicap
- Posts: 653
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 11:37 am
- Location: New York
- Contact:
Alhoo wrote:I've been blown away by photos of the Tiznows. I also hope that they aren't pushed too hard as 2 year olds; though they look very mature (and smart), one can only imagine what such good looking colts will grow into when they reach true racing age. They don't look like they'll be the short-necked, fat 2 year olds that breeze a furlong in 10 seconds though, so hopefully there will be no temptation to rush them!
We got ourselves a Tiznow filly, which we promptly named Tizzie Millie.
[quote="judi"]Couldn't agree more that conformation is what the buyers are looking for. They are passing up a lot of excellent female families, don't really understand that in the case of the fillies.
Everyone is looking for a runner, but with no catalog page, what makes them think they are getting one.
Judi[/quote]
You have a far better shot of getting a runner with the athlete standing right in front of you, then with merely a catalog page. Its been proven time and time and time again. Very few people go to the Kee September sale looking for broodmare prospects. You are 5 years away from getting any return for your money. This is the major gripe I have with breeders piecing pedigrees together, trying to match this sire or this dam in the 3rd or 4th generation to formulate what they feel is the perfect pedigree. It aint gonna matter if you arent dealing with good racehorses to start with. You can take any major race horse you want and espound the virtues of the pedigree that produced him, but by the same token you can take the cheapest claimers at MNR (sorry Jessi) and do the same. Rather than worrying about taking your mare and finding a stallion that has the pedigree match you are looking for, find the stallion that physically complements your mare and has the best shot of producing an athlete.
I hate climbing on this soapbox. But its such a major gripe with me. I see every day, horses that are purchased for racing. And I see the ones that make the grade, and the ones that dont. I dont EVER EVER see racehorse prospects purchased by virtue of pedigree alone, EVER. But I see over and over again horses purchased for good money with little pedigree that are athletes, and are race horses.
We purchased a horse a couple of years ago for clients, and I couldnt BELIEVE the page. They paid 6 figures for the horse, and you could see right thru the page, not to mention the fact he was by a really bad producing stallion, who has since left the state. I was skeptical, but the horse went to California and won a grade 2 stakes race and nearly $300K to date. He may be the leading money earner for his sire. Off his page, you wouldnt have given killer price for him, but as an athlete, we had to go to 6 figures to buy him.
Looking at a pedigree page is easy. Picking out the athlete is whats tough. And it has nothing to do with straight legs, either.
Everyone is looking for a runner, but with no catalog page, what makes them think they are getting one.
Judi[/quote]
You have a far better shot of getting a runner with the athlete standing right in front of you, then with merely a catalog page. Its been proven time and time and time again. Very few people go to the Kee September sale looking for broodmare prospects. You are 5 years away from getting any return for your money. This is the major gripe I have with breeders piecing pedigrees together, trying to match this sire or this dam in the 3rd or 4th generation to formulate what they feel is the perfect pedigree. It aint gonna matter if you arent dealing with good racehorses to start with. You can take any major race horse you want and espound the virtues of the pedigree that produced him, but by the same token you can take the cheapest claimers at MNR (sorry Jessi) and do the same. Rather than worrying about taking your mare and finding a stallion that has the pedigree match you are looking for, find the stallion that physically complements your mare and has the best shot of producing an athlete.
I hate climbing on this soapbox. But its such a major gripe with me. I see every day, horses that are purchased for racing. And I see the ones that make the grade, and the ones that dont. I dont EVER EVER see racehorse prospects purchased by virtue of pedigree alone, EVER. But I see over and over again horses purchased for good money with little pedigree that are athletes, and are race horses.
We purchased a horse a couple of years ago for clients, and I couldnt BELIEVE the page. They paid 6 figures for the horse, and you could see right thru the page, not to mention the fact he was by a really bad producing stallion, who has since left the state. I was skeptical, but the horse went to California and won a grade 2 stakes race and nearly $300K to date. He may be the leading money earner for his sire. Off his page, you wouldnt have given killer price for him, but as an athlete, we had to go to 6 figures to buy him.
Looking at a pedigree page is easy. Picking out the athlete is whats tough. And it has nothing to do with straight legs, either.
halo wrote:It aint gonna matter if you arent dealing with good racehorses to start with. You can take any major race horse you want and espound the virtues of the pedigree that produced him, but by the same token you can take the cheapest claimers at MNR (sorry Jessi) and do the same.
Halo you know you are my hero no matter what! When I grow up I wanna be just like you! And you know I agree with you (well duh you have pounded into my brain over the years) that it doesnt matter what the pedigree looks like if the horse doesnt have an ounce of talent. Thats why I really go for 'breed a runner to a runner' and 'dont consider stallions that had no racing ability unless they are really proven.' Might breed WTG next year but since she has won 15 races from less than 60 starts I feel she has earned it.
Jessi, you know how anal I get about this subject. I hate to even start into it. You know the horses we see and what we buy and what record we have. We have had so many horses come to us for training that have been purchased by so-called pedigree experts that move like friggin egg beaters. Oh but the sire is so and so, and the dam is so and so, and the pedigree...blah blah blah. Ninety percent of breeders are breeding for what is going to be popular in the sales ring. How many people have you heard making breeding plans because they think the horse will be a good racehorse? No, they breed what they think will be commercial 2 years down the road. Everyone is breeding mares, but no one wants the product.
I saw an ad the other day for horses for sale. Im still shaking my head over it. The ad had weanlings, yearlings and 2 year olds for sale because......get this....they want to concentrate on breeding. Well duh!! What do you think is the result of breeding?? Its weanlings, yearlings and 2 year olds! If you dont want your own product that you are producing, how can you expect anyone else to want it?
Off soapbox....
I saw an ad the other day for horses for sale. Im still shaking my head over it. The ad had weanlings, yearlings and 2 year olds for sale because......get this....they want to concentrate on breeding. Well duh!! What do you think is the result of breeding?? Its weanlings, yearlings and 2 year olds! If you dont want your own product that you are producing, how can you expect anyone else to want it?
Off soapbox....
I agree that conformation has been paramount at this sale. Also size. Everyone seems to want big and bigger, even if they're incorrect. A number of fillies with beautiful pages have been all been all but given away because they were small or somewhat crooked.
I have to disagree about the Tiznows though. My impression was that they weren't selling very well. Sure there were a couple of big sales, but there were plenty of Tiznows to go around and for a first crop stallion, he seemed to be averaging pretty low.
I have to disagree about the Tiznows though. My impression was that they weren't selling very well. Sure there were a couple of big sales, but there were plenty of Tiznows to go around and for a first crop stallion, he seemed to be averaging pretty low.
re Halo's posts
I respectfully disagree with Halo's posts about the catalog page and the athletic looking yearling. I'll choose the yearling out of the mare with the 80 - 100% good winners and a blacktype producer over the "athletic looking" yearling from a poor producer of race horses or a young mare that didn't do anything. I know that this is a minority opinion.
Incidentally, where are all the athletic Stephen Got Even 2 year olds that brought the high $ this year?
Incidentally, where are all the athletic Stephen Got Even 2 year olds that brought the high $ this year?
petersd
I understand your premise and certainly agree that if you have the super-star athlete at the end of the lead shank you may be in the driver's seat at the sale...but to some extent I believe you're excluding important issues in the yearling evaluation process...that will certainly affect what prospective buyers may be willing to pay for any yearling...not just the particularly athletic-looking yearling..
You are not going to get the "big bucks" for the athlete at a sale if he/she doesn't...vet and scope...no matter what he/she looks like or how impressive the pedigree is.
Furthermore...don't think for a minute that pedigree doesn't raise the bar on a grand looking athletic yearling that vets and scopes...or conversely be of little or no help in getting a bad individual sold that may not vet and scope.
Pedigree and individual aside...if your yearling does not vet and scope...forget about it...ALL BETS ARE OFF.
Even if there are no chips (or they've been removed)...no OCD's (even if they've been surgically repaired by Dr. Bramlage)...or no fractures...try selling a yearling (athlete or not) for the big bucks (or even a reasonable price) that has spurs in his knees (for example)...or a questionable throat (minor pharyngitis excluded).
Pinhookers (and many racing stables) will stay clear like the plague of those...even if the yearling is a knockout-looker.
I agree...bringing an athlete to the sale is where you want to be as a seller...but don't think for a minute that spurs...questionable throats...OCD's...chips (particularly those that are inoperable)...or fractures won't stand in the way of getting the best looking equine athlete in the world sold for any kind of money...no matter the pedigree either.
Many will accept various extrerior physical design flaws...but a yearling that does not vet and scope...Uh Uh...a near impossibility.
A filly may suffer less...for obvious reasons.
Respectfully
I understand your premise and certainly agree that if you have the super-star athlete at the end of the lead shank you may be in the driver's seat at the sale...but to some extent I believe you're excluding important issues in the yearling evaluation process...that will certainly affect what prospective buyers may be willing to pay for any yearling...not just the particularly athletic-looking yearling..
You are not going to get the "big bucks" for the athlete at a sale if he/she doesn't...vet and scope...no matter what he/she looks like or how impressive the pedigree is.
Furthermore...don't think for a minute that pedigree doesn't raise the bar on a grand looking athletic yearling that vets and scopes...or conversely be of little or no help in getting a bad individual sold that may not vet and scope.
Pedigree and individual aside...if your yearling does not vet and scope...forget about it...ALL BETS ARE OFF.
Even if there are no chips (or they've been removed)...no OCD's (even if they've been surgically repaired by Dr. Bramlage)...or no fractures...try selling a yearling (athlete or not) for the big bucks (or even a reasonable price) that has spurs in his knees (for example)...or a questionable throat (minor pharyngitis excluded).
Pinhookers (and many racing stables) will stay clear like the plague of those...even if the yearling is a knockout-looker.
I agree...bringing an athlete to the sale is where you want to be as a seller...but don't think for a minute that spurs...questionable throats...OCD's...chips (particularly those that are inoperable)...or fractures won't stand in the way of getting the best looking equine athlete in the world sold for any kind of money...no matter the pedigree either.
Many will accept various extrerior physical design flaws...but a yearling that does not vet and scope...Uh Uh...a near impossibility.
A filly may suffer less...for obvious reasons.
Respectfully