hi guys
Yes Giant's Causeway was a sensational race horse...including undefeated G1 winner and G3 winner at two...and yes he was a worthy champion and super-star race horse at three in both England and Ireland...
...and yes he was brilliant (even in defeat) vs Tiznow in the BC Classic...and yes he was deserving of and bred to a fantastic first-book of mares which produced 138 two year-olds of 2004 (per bloodhorse.com 12/17/2004)...
but consider this...
Giant's Causeway has but 4 stakes-winners from 138 two year-olds (per bloodhorse.com up to 12/17/2004)...(approx 2.90% stakes winners).
in comparison...Successful Appeal has 6 stakes winners from 37 two year-olds (approx 16.22% stakes winners).
Yes It's True has 4 stakes winners from 64 two year-olds (approx 6.25% stakes winners)...
and Fusaichi Pegasus has 4 stakes winners from 82 two year-olds (approx 4.88% stakes winners)
furthermore...
Giant's Causeway has 63 runners including 17 winners (per bloodhorse.com up to 12/17/2004)...(26.98% winners from starters).
Successful Appeal has 22 runners including 15 winners (68.18% winners from starters).
Yes It's True has 41 runners including 15 winners (36.59% winners from starters).
Fusaichi Pegasus has 33 runners including 15 winners (45.45% winners from starters).
and consider these stud fees for 2005...(per bloodhorse.com)...
Giant's Causeway...$135,000
Successful Appeal...$25,000
Yes It's True...$25,000
Fusaichi Pegasus...$100,000
Based on these statistics etc...is it reasonable to suggest that Giant's Causeway does not compare favorably among the four 2004 Leading First Crop Sires?
When one considers the opportunities afforded Giant's Causeway...is it not fair to suggest that his showing thus far (as a sire) may leave a lot to be desired. Do you not agree that he was offered every opportunity for sire super-stardom?
Certainly the volume of offspring sired by Giant's Causeway bodes well for his sire-lists earnings...but is it not reasonable to suggest that every stallion (including the high profile ones) should not only be evaluated but also scrutinized based on the same standards that all other stallions are measured (including percentage of stakes winners...winners from starters...repeat winners...quality and quantity of mares bred as related to foal crops...stud fee...etc etc).
All things considered...is it unfair to suggest that Giant's Causeway (based on his northern hemisphere efforts) is disappointing thus far (at least to some extent) ?
Thoughts?
Respectfully
Giant'sCauseway..is he disappointing; all things considered?
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
-
louis finochio
- Darley line
- Posts: 9181
- Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:21 am
- Location: Alhambra-Calif.
- Contact:
Respectfully, we all seem to know nursery rhymes, yet learn nothing from them. Have you ever considered the point behind "The Ugly Duckling"... patience... wait for the "Swan". Nature doesn't work on our schedule.
They don't let 2 yr. olds compete in the "classics". Also, in my lifetime, there have been only 2 - 2yr. old champions also named "HOY". I am not overly concerned about any hype, success, or failure afforded a horse whose first crop has yet to turn 3. This need for immedicate validation is not natural, it is created. It is created by the marketing of youth and brilliance, which, by the way, is not confined to the horse track.
Sure, it is fine to point to the wonderful starts by Successful Appeal, Yes Its True, and More Than Ready. All three have exceeded many expectations. All three have labeled them as "stallions to watch". However, I certainly wouldn't put too much emphasis on the lack of production by any stallion... yet.
One really only needs to look so far as the bottom of Giant's Causeway's pedigree to see that, perhaps, patience should be taken. I think the future for the best stallion son's of Storm Cat will be found in those who require a little patience... GC, Forestry, and Tactical Cat among them (and you can probably throw in grandson Menifee).
Do you have a season to Giant's Causeway that you wish to give away? I'd be happy to take it. I have a feeling those breeding to GC last year are going to be quite happy... and those sending mares this year probably won't be disappointed (overall) in the long-run.
They don't let 2 yr. olds compete in the "classics". Also, in my lifetime, there have been only 2 - 2yr. old champions also named "HOY". I am not overly concerned about any hype, success, or failure afforded a horse whose first crop has yet to turn 3. This need for immedicate validation is not natural, it is created. It is created by the marketing of youth and brilliance, which, by the way, is not confined to the horse track.
Sure, it is fine to point to the wonderful starts by Successful Appeal, Yes Its True, and More Than Ready. All three have exceeded many expectations. All three have labeled them as "stallions to watch". However, I certainly wouldn't put too much emphasis on the lack of production by any stallion... yet.
One really only needs to look so far as the bottom of Giant's Causeway's pedigree to see that, perhaps, patience should be taken. I think the future for the best stallion son's of Storm Cat will be found in those who require a little patience... GC, Forestry, and Tactical Cat among them (and you can probably throw in grandson Menifee).
Do you have a season to Giant's Causeway that you wish to give away? I'd be happy to take it. I have a feeling those breeding to GC last year are going to be quite happy... and those sending mares this year probably won't be disappointed (overall) in the long-run.
It seems hypocritical to bemoan the fact that TB racing is currently tilted in favor of the fast and precocious two year old and then label a stallion a failure when his first crop has yet to turn three. All of these horses had their first runners hit the track about eight months ago. I'd hardly call that enough time to make or break a career.
Successful Appeal and Yes It's True have both had a great year. Nobody disputes that, no matter how many times the information is trumpeted on this forum. But maybe we could wait and see what happens next year and maybe even the year after before annointing them as gods and casting Giant's Causeway as a failure?
Successful Appeal and Yes It's True have both had a great year. Nobody disputes that, no matter how many times the information is trumpeted on this forum. But maybe we could wait and see what happens next year and maybe even the year after before annointing them as gods and casting Giant's Causeway as a failure?
-
Intrinsic Worth
- Starters Handicap
- Posts: 691
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 2:27 pm
-
George William Smith
- Restricted Stakes Winner
- Posts: 756
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 1:48 pm
- Location: Edmonton, Alberta
- Contact:
Giant's Causeway
Good points all around
However, it is most important to remember what breeders are expecting before judging Freshman sires:
For Successful Appeal, with his pedigree his foals needed to show well from the gitgo to get his book past the hump. He certainly exceeded what was expected, hence the move to KY.
For Giant's Causeway, with his pedigree and his number of 2yo's, he needed about 10 winners and a couple of them to show high class. He certainly exceeded expectations here, but for him the breeders are waiting to see how he does with his 3yo's. He will be successful if his foals train on. So his fate has yet to be decided.
Many, many,......no make that MOST stallions who start out fast as 2yo sires, do not have runners that train on as 3yo's. They might make good sprinters, but they do not train on.
.....So the test is yet to be decided as Successful Appeal's foals need to train on to move up the stud fee ladder to the position that Giant's Causeway already occupies and for Giant's Causeway's 3yo's to be good enough to maintain his high stud fee because his runners did train on.
It is a lot easier to plummet down in stud fee than to rise up to a high 5 number fee or 6 number fee.
best George
ps. I'm leaning to Giant's Causeway because I don't think most breeders that used him thought he'd be this good at this point.
However, it is most important to remember what breeders are expecting before judging Freshman sires:
For Successful Appeal, with his pedigree his foals needed to show well from the gitgo to get his book past the hump. He certainly exceeded what was expected, hence the move to KY.
For Giant's Causeway, with his pedigree and his number of 2yo's, he needed about 10 winners and a couple of them to show high class. He certainly exceeded expectations here, but for him the breeders are waiting to see how he does with his 3yo's. He will be successful if his foals train on. So his fate has yet to be decided.
Many, many,......no make that MOST stallions who start out fast as 2yo sires, do not have runners that train on as 3yo's. They might make good sprinters, but they do not train on.
.....So the test is yet to be decided as Successful Appeal's foals need to train on to move up the stud fee ladder to the position that Giant's Causeway already occupies and for Giant's Causeway's 3yo's to be good enough to maintain his high stud fee because his runners did train on.
It is a lot easier to plummet down in stud fee than to rise up to a high 5 number fee or 6 number fee.
best George
ps. I'm leaning to Giant's Causeway because I don't think most breeders that used him thought he'd be this good at this point.
-
Intrinsic Worth
- Starters Handicap
- Posts: 691
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 2:27 pm
hi KAL
You wrote "This need for immedicate validation is not natural, it is created. It is created by the marketing of youth and brilliance, which, by the way, is not confined to the horse track."
KAL...are you working under the assumption that the Coolmore guys are NOT attempting to do everything possible to make Giant's Causeway happen? Or that 17 winners from 63 runners (for example) is impressive?
I suggest that such performance might be considered embarrassing...especially when one considers that Giant's Causeway was a brilliant, undefeated G1 winning (and G3 winning) two year-old (who won only at 6 and 7 furlongs)...that has no less than 138 two year-olds in his first crop of racing age (from a book of mares...whose quality...few stallions have the opportunity to match).
The 'be patient...let's give them time' way-of-thinking may work for a son of (for example) Pleasant Colony...but I suggest that should not be the case with Giant's Causeway. He was a brilliant...fast...undefeated 2 year-old son of Storm Cat...out of a high class racemare that also won as a year-old. I would expect that Giant's Causeway's connections may not be particularly excited (and that may be a gross understatement) about the reality that their super-star seemed to show virtually NOTHING in North America...as a sire of 2 year-olds.
And I suggest that High Yield (obviously another brilliant son of Storm Cat and under the same umbrella as GC)...who was a G1 winner at two (that finished first, second or third in 7 of 8 starts as a two year-old) is certainly not brightening-up their day either. How do you justify (or rationalize) his performance (or lack thereof) as a sire of 2 year-olds?
I'm surprised with your premise KAL...in my opinion, it appears that (at least sometimes) you are too willing to justify (or rationalize) a stallion's limited performance (even when the circumstances and/or opportunities surrounding the stallion are above-and-beyond). That may be considerate and/or compassionate of you...but is often the road-to-collapse (or maybe failure is a better word) in the breeding game.
KAL...I wrote "All things considered...is it unfair to suggest that Giant's Causeway (based on his northern hemisphere efforts) is disappointing thus far (at least to some extent) ?"
I believe the question I raise is certainly reasonable...especially as it relates to North America...and even more specifically the USA.
As for your comment I have a feeling those breeding to GC last year are going to be quite happy... and those sending mares this year probably won't be disappointed (overall) in the long-run."
KAL...there is a difference between "quite happy" and "won't be disappointed"...I suggest that he has been disappointing thus far (at least to some extent)...and I am not willing to accept your premise (which might suggest) that GC's $135,000 stud fee is reasonable."
To answer your question KAL ""Do you have a season to Giant's Causeway that you wish to give away? I'd be happy to take it." I suggest that receiving a "give away" season to GC would certainly be fine...but I suggest at $135k...even if you had the mare (and you may) that justified a stallion of consequence (standing for a substantial stud fee)...you'd stay clear of GC at $135k.
Aside from sire performance...have you scrutinized some GC offspring...if not...I suggest you do so...you might rethink your premise.
It is certainly possible that Giant's Causeway may ultimately prove to be very special...but..."All things considered" I suggest Giant's Causeway is not worthy of a $135,000 stud fee (at least not now)...and his runners (in general) have rarely (especially in North America) performed to the level which could justify it.
Best to you always.
Respectfully
You wrote "This need for immedicate validation is not natural, it is created. It is created by the marketing of youth and brilliance, which, by the way, is not confined to the horse track."
KAL...are you working under the assumption that the Coolmore guys are NOT attempting to do everything possible to make Giant's Causeway happen? Or that 17 winners from 63 runners (for example) is impressive?
I suggest that such performance might be considered embarrassing...especially when one considers that Giant's Causeway was a brilliant, undefeated G1 winning (and G3 winning) two year-old (who won only at 6 and 7 furlongs)...that has no less than 138 two year-olds in his first crop of racing age (from a book of mares...whose quality...few stallions have the opportunity to match).
The 'be patient...let's give them time' way-of-thinking may work for a son of (for example) Pleasant Colony...but I suggest that should not be the case with Giant's Causeway. He was a brilliant...fast...undefeated 2 year-old son of Storm Cat...out of a high class racemare that also won as a year-old. I would expect that Giant's Causeway's connections may not be particularly excited (and that may be a gross understatement) about the reality that their super-star seemed to show virtually NOTHING in North America...as a sire of 2 year-olds.
And I suggest that High Yield (obviously another brilliant son of Storm Cat and under the same umbrella as GC)...who was a G1 winner at two (that finished first, second or third in 7 of 8 starts as a two year-old) is certainly not brightening-up their day either. How do you justify (or rationalize) his performance (or lack thereof) as a sire of 2 year-olds?
I'm surprised with your premise KAL...in my opinion, it appears that (at least sometimes) you are too willing to justify (or rationalize) a stallion's limited performance (even when the circumstances and/or opportunities surrounding the stallion are above-and-beyond). That may be considerate and/or compassionate of you...but is often the road-to-collapse (or maybe failure is a better word) in the breeding game.
KAL...I wrote "All things considered...is it unfair to suggest that Giant's Causeway (based on his northern hemisphere efforts) is disappointing thus far (at least to some extent) ?"
I believe the question I raise is certainly reasonable...especially as it relates to North America...and even more specifically the USA.
As for your comment I have a feeling those breeding to GC last year are going to be quite happy... and those sending mares this year probably won't be disappointed (overall) in the long-run."
KAL...there is a difference between "quite happy" and "won't be disappointed"...I suggest that he has been disappointing thus far (at least to some extent)...and I am not willing to accept your premise (which might suggest) that GC's $135,000 stud fee is reasonable."
To answer your question KAL ""Do you have a season to Giant's Causeway that you wish to give away? I'd be happy to take it." I suggest that receiving a "give away" season to GC would certainly be fine...but I suggest at $135k...even if you had the mare (and you may) that justified a stallion of consequence (standing for a substantial stud fee)...you'd stay clear of GC at $135k.
Aside from sire performance...have you scrutinized some GC offspring...if not...I suggest you do so...you might rethink your premise.
It is certainly possible that Giant's Causeway may ultimately prove to be very special...but..."All things considered" I suggest Giant's Causeway is not worthy of a $135,000 stud fee (at least not now)...and his runners (in general) have rarely (especially in North America) performed to the level which could justify it.
Best to you always.
Respectfully
I can not say he is a dissapointment , he was not matched properly to mare is the only fault I see . Fupeg has had the same problem , it was not a match to the mare but a thought of getting more money . I am in love with one of Giant's babies My Typhoon , she is a great little filly . But yes as a whole his crop is not what I would have expected . Time , it is what is needed .
-
Intrinsic Worth
- Starters Handicap
- Posts: 691
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 2:27 pm
hello LSB
Your comments are always appreciated.
I submit that Giant's Causeway's success (which I suggest is limited at best) may be directly related to his enormous volume of foals (out of many high-class mares). I believe it is not unreasonable to raise the question (for debate)...what might be GC's level of success if he had but 37 two year-olds (as is the case of Successful Appeal) or 64 (as in the case of Yes It's True) or 35 (like Bernstein) or 17 (like Dance Master) etc etc...and out of ordinary mares vs his 138 (out of so many very good ones). hmmm
I suggest that we must separate the wheat from the chaff and certainly take into account the quality and quantity of opportunity as it may relate to a stallion's success (that is if we are attempting make an honest...and thorough evaluation).
Many of the great ones started with varying degrees of lesser quality...and proved their worth by injecting something special into their offspring. Examples...Mr. Prospector...Danzig...and even the well-managed Storm Cat. Rarely does a stallion start with great quality books...such as Seattle Slew (for example) and succeed.
In the case of Giant's Causeway...it appears to me that he depends too much on his mares for influence...and even with the benefit of his GREAT book...I suggest he is not doing what he should...at least not yet.
Best to you.
Respectfully
Your comments are always appreciated.
I submit that Giant's Causeway's success (which I suggest is limited at best) may be directly related to his enormous volume of foals (out of many high-class mares). I believe it is not unreasonable to raise the question (for debate)...what might be GC's level of success if he had but 37 two year-olds (as is the case of Successful Appeal) or 64 (as in the case of Yes It's True) or 35 (like Bernstein) or 17 (like Dance Master) etc etc...and out of ordinary mares vs his 138 (out of so many very good ones). hmmm
I suggest that we must separate the wheat from the chaff and certainly take into account the quality and quantity of opportunity as it may relate to a stallion's success (that is if we are attempting make an honest...and thorough evaluation).
Many of the great ones started with varying degrees of lesser quality...and proved their worth by injecting something special into their offspring. Examples...Mr. Prospector...Danzig...and even the well-managed Storm Cat. Rarely does a stallion start with great quality books...such as Seattle Slew (for example) and succeed.
In the case of Giant's Causeway...it appears to me that he depends too much on his mares for influence...and even with the benefit of his GREAT book...I suggest he is not doing what he should...at least not yet.
Best to you.
Respectfully
hi Intrinsic Worth
No less than 40 mares were sent from North America to Ireland (by North American breeders) to enter the court of Giant's Causeway his first season at stud. Coolmore ran an advertisement proclaiming that all those mares were in foal.
Many returned to foal in North America (including mares that had "dirt" pedigrees or had produced quality runners on North American surfaces)...but as yet not even one of those now-two-year-olds that resulted from a breeding to GC in Fethard County, Ireland...has made a mark in North America.
Is it unreasonable to suggest that's somewhat disappointing?
Respectfully
No less than 40 mares were sent from North America to Ireland (by North American breeders) to enter the court of Giant's Causeway his first season at stud. Coolmore ran an advertisement proclaiming that all those mares were in foal.
Many returned to foal in North America (including mares that had "dirt" pedigrees or had produced quality runners on North American surfaces)...but as yet not even one of those now-two-year-olds that resulted from a breeding to GC in Fethard County, Ireland...has made a mark in North America.
Is it unreasonable to suggest that's somewhat disappointing?
Respectfully
-
st. louis kid
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 8:56 pm
Two year old horses are like teenagers, we are watching high school games when it comes to 2 year old races. Anyone in sports knows that the high school stars often don't go on to be the best players in their sport as they move up, it is often the later maturing athlete that achieves greatness. Michael Jordan was cut from his sophmore team in high school.
The market has GC and Fu Peg where they are because smarter people than I know they have the breeding and showed the pure talent to possibly create the best horse of his age group. Of this dreams are made. Put a $135,000 stud fee on Successful Appeal and he would get few if any takers, smarter people than I know that although he has shown the ability to produce talented young horses, the chances of him producing a champion 3 or 4 year old that can win past a mile and and eighth and go on to be a top stud himself are very limited. Cherokee Run was the rookie crop champ a few years ago, same story, nice horses, but tough to get a distance. Don't put too much weight on judging sires just on their two year old crops, as my old coach said, they don't give out prizes at halftime.
The market has GC and Fu Peg where they are because smarter people than I know they have the breeding and showed the pure talent to possibly create the best horse of his age group. Of this dreams are made. Put a $135,000 stud fee on Successful Appeal and he would get few if any takers, smarter people than I know that although he has shown the ability to produce talented young horses, the chances of him producing a champion 3 or 4 year old that can win past a mile and and eighth and go on to be a top stud himself are very limited. Cherokee Run was the rookie crop champ a few years ago, same story, nice horses, but tough to get a distance. Don't put too much weight on judging sires just on their two year old crops, as my old coach said, they don't give out prizes at halftime.