Sound, Hard Knockers
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
an intersting article and analysis of horses claimed twice at least.
the claimed twice criterion, by definition, biases the data (as the writers note) because those claimed more than once are more often those identified as having higher potential (hence someone claims it). It ignores those never claimed or those claimed only once.
They also note that horses may have been retired (and in most cases very little residual value), far more than those that move up to allowance or even starter company. They have taken the 'cream of the crop'. It does show though that claiming and racing the those identified claimers as having a little run can be profitable FOR THE NEW OWNER, not necessarily for the breeder who has years, probability and expenses to get the horse to the races stacked heavily against him or her.
jm
the claimed twice criterion, by definition, biases the data (as the writers note) because those claimed more than once are more often those identified as having higher potential (hence someone claims it). It ignores those never claimed or those claimed only once.
They also note that horses may have been retired (and in most cases very little residual value), far more than those that move up to allowance or even starter company. They have taken the 'cream of the crop'. It does show though that claiming and racing the those identified claimers as having a little run can be profitable FOR THE NEW OWNER, not necessarily for the breeder who has years, probability and expenses to get the horse to the races stacked heavily against him or her.
jm
Run the race - the one that's really worth winning.
Joltman wrote:an intersting article and analysis of horses claimed twice at least.
the claimed twice criterion, by definition, biases the data (as the writers note) because those claimed more than once are more often those identified as having higher potential (hence someone claims it). It ignores those never claimed or those claimed only once.
They also note that horses may have been retired (and in most cases very little residual value), far more than those that move up to allowance or even starter company. They have taken the 'cream of the crop'. It does show though that claiming and racing the those identified claimers as having a little run can be profitable FOR THE NEW OWNER, not necessarily for the breeder who has years, probability and expenses to get the horse to the races stacked heavily against him or her.
jm
Hi Jolt,
Not only the small breeder, but the small owner and trainer as well have the odds very much against them. It is toughest for the small breeder as so much time/money goes into them before you have a chance to make money. So often they've cost so much that when time comes to get them broke and to the races the expense will stop you from going forward. Yet the owner's that buy privately or claim still have quite a substantial financial investment right off the bat, in them. That's why some call this a game, other's a business.....to those that have long pockets it is just a game.....to those that try to turn a profit and call this a business, they find out early on how hard it is. Leroy Jolley, hall of fame trainer, said "This is not a game for little boys in short pants"....truer words were never spoken:>) TJ
TJ wrote:Joltman wrote:an intersting article and analysis of horses claimed twice at least.
the claimed twice criterion, by definition, biases the data (as the writers note) because those claimed more than once are more often those identified as having higher potential (hence someone claims it). It ignores those never claimed or those claimed only once.
They also note that horses may have been retired (and in most cases very little residual value), far more than those that move up to allowance or even starter company. They have taken the 'cream of the crop'. It does show though that claiming and racing the those identified claimers as having a little run can be profitable FOR THE NEW OWNER, not necessarily for the breeder who has years, probability and expenses to get the horse to the races stacked heavily against him or her.
jm
Hi Jolt,
Not only the small breeder, but the small owner and trainer as well have the odds very much against them. It is toughest for the small breeder as so much time/money goes into them before you have a chance to make money. So often they've cost so much that when time comes to get them broke and to the races the expense will stop you from going forward. Yet the owner's that buy privately or claim still have quite a substantial financial investment right off the bat, in them. That's why some call this a game, other's a business.....to those that have long pockets it is just a game.....to those that try to turn a profit and call this a business, they find out early on how hard it is. Leroy Jolley, hall of fame trainer, said "This is not a game for little boys in short pants"....truer words were never spoken:>) TJ
Good post! Also if you look at it from a different perspective, the claiming game is the grease that allows a small owner to get in and out easier since it allows a ready value to be placed on the runners. Now that is less true since there is so little claiming going on but as a small breeder and owner, I'm happy that there is a somewhat objective measure.
-
Shammy Davis
- Chef de Race: Classic
- Posts: 4451
- Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 8:23 am
Hi JM, TJ, Synsonby and all. This thread really perked my interest. I thought I would find more information on the subject of racehorses and profitability, but the link above was it.
There have been a few research articles on racehorse career lengths, but they were not connected to this subject. One was done in Hungary, so I don't know how valid it is.
Thoroughbred racing is played very close to the vest by those who are successful or in control. Past and current literature is very limited and to my dismay very general. You are almost forced to pay your way in or work in the industry, either in breeding or racing, to gain valuable knowledge and make valuable connections. Simply, good business sense is important, but having an MBA is not going to give you more of edge unless your pockets are filled w/money. The guild system used by the JC and at tracks is not effective either.
It is rare that the small breeder or owner makes his/her way in this business without dipping into the savings or 401's.
There have been a few research articles on racehorse career lengths, but they were not connected to this subject. One was done in Hungary, so I don't know how valid it is.
Thoroughbred racing is played very close to the vest by those who are successful or in control. Past and current literature is very limited and to my dismay very general. You are almost forced to pay your way in or work in the industry, either in breeding or racing, to gain valuable knowledge and make valuable connections. Simply, good business sense is important, but having an MBA is not going to give you more of edge unless your pockets are filled w/money. The guild system used by the JC and at tracks is not effective either.
It is rare that the small breeder or owner makes his/her way in this business without dipping into the savings or 401's.
Re: Profitability
On the other hand, there is a ton of data for review to decide on profitability. Pick up a Daily Racing Form and look at lifetime and yearly earnings. It is especially revealing at this time of year.
In my neck of the woods you better be able to run a 70 Beyer if you want to make money. And by "make money" I mean enough to cover your training expenses.
If you can, as a 2YO or Maiden 3YO, run in the 70's you should be able to win a MSW that will pay you enough for 1 year of training. If you can't win at MSW you can run Maiden claiming but then you'll likely need to win and place in a few more. (Ironically, even then you likely need to run around a 70 Beyer, maybe you can get away with something in the 60's)
If you can run in the 70's you likely don't need to be "hard knocking" to earn enough to cover costs. If you are in the 40's and 50's, yes you will need to run often, get lucky and be consistent. I'd say if you're running in that ranges, cut your losses. High 60's is the minimum grinder in my mind.
In general if you're running at the bottom 3 claiming levels in your area you are hard pressed to make back any money through purses (some places are very skewed because of slot purses) You may also have to adjust the Beyer number for your circuit, though it seems pretty stable across NA.
In my mind there's a whole host of legitimate reason to bail out on any homebred running less than 70's, and likely the mare producing them.
A: You're likely not making money overall, and B: The mare's page is not improving for resale of her or offspring.
If you are interested in grinding out a living as an owner trainer, why not claim a good one?
If you are interested in being an owner/breeder and grinding out a living, I personally believe, ones resources are better deployed to upgrading the stock and breeding faster horses.
If you are interested in breeding slow horses and grinding out a living because, hey you've invested 4 + years in that mare and 3+ stud fees and I am damn well owed something out of this so I'm going to plow ahead and go into debt and see if one of these nags will turn things around.....(Can you tell I speak of experience???).... I don't think a system of low level allowance and eliminating claiming is going to help.
I'm sure most do this already, but I always find it enlightening to pick up a Form and find horses that have won $30K for the year and analyzing how they did it.
As equibase is free now, I'd be interested in some names of horses we can analyze.
My two cents. (And don't get me wrong, I like hard knocking races horses. It's just that I like them to be fast as well)
On the other hand, there is a ton of data for review to decide on profitability. Pick up a Daily Racing Form and look at lifetime and yearly earnings. It is especially revealing at this time of year.
In my neck of the woods you better be able to run a 70 Beyer if you want to make money. And by "make money" I mean enough to cover your training expenses.
If you can, as a 2YO or Maiden 3YO, run in the 70's you should be able to win a MSW that will pay you enough for 1 year of training. If you can't win at MSW you can run Maiden claiming but then you'll likely need to win and place in a few more. (Ironically, even then you likely need to run around a 70 Beyer, maybe you can get away with something in the 60's)
If you can run in the 70's you likely don't need to be "hard knocking" to earn enough to cover costs. If you are in the 40's and 50's, yes you will need to run often, get lucky and be consistent. I'd say if you're running in that ranges, cut your losses. High 60's is the minimum grinder in my mind.
In general if you're running at the bottom 3 claiming levels in your area you are hard pressed to make back any money through purses (some places are very skewed because of slot purses) You may also have to adjust the Beyer number for your circuit, though it seems pretty stable across NA.
In my mind there's a whole host of legitimate reason to bail out on any homebred running less than 70's, and likely the mare producing them.
A: You're likely not making money overall, and B: The mare's page is not improving for resale of her or offspring.
If you are interested in grinding out a living as an owner trainer, why not claim a good one?
If you are interested in being an owner/breeder and grinding out a living, I personally believe, ones resources are better deployed to upgrading the stock and breeding faster horses.
If you are interested in breeding slow horses and grinding out a living because, hey you've invested 4 + years in that mare and 3+ stud fees and I am damn well owed something out of this so I'm going to plow ahead and go into debt and see if one of these nags will turn things around.....(Can you tell I speak of experience???).... I don't think a system of low level allowance and eliminating claiming is going to help.
I'm sure most do this already, but I always find it enlightening to pick up a Form and find horses that have won $30K for the year and analyzing how they did it.
As equibase is free now, I'd be interested in some names of horses we can analyze.
My two cents. (And don't get me wrong, I like hard knocking races horses. It's just that I like them to be fast as well)
-
Shammy Davis
- Chef de Race: Classic
- Posts: 4451
- Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 8:23 am
Gallop58 wrote:
How stupid of me. You are exactly right. The DRF is the real source and you don't have to "google" it.
Your idea about following some horses is a great idea. This is the time to do it w/all the juvenile races going on.
Re: Profitability
On the other hand, there is a ton of data for review to decide on profitability. Pick up a Daily Racing Form and look at lifetime and yearly earnings. It is especially revealing at this time of year. . .
How stupid of me. You are exactly right. The DRF is the real source and you don't have to "google" it.
Your idea about following some horses is a great idea. This is the time to do it w/all the juvenile races going on.
Making Money with Horses
Doing it the hard way:
Of all horses (1571 of them) with 14 or more starts to date this year the average earnings is $14800.
Personally, my break even $cost/year assumption is $30K.
Of the 1571 horses who've run 14+ times this year, 308 (19%) have paid their way per my definition(>$30K)
(21 of them have made owners quite happy with $90K or more this year)
That leaves 1263 (81%) who are owned by people with "long pants" or at least one long pocket.
For interests sake, there are 144 brave soles who have started 14 or more times and have made less than $5K. (Someone please call the hprse adoption agency)
If your breakeven threshold is $20K/year, the numbers are:
558 runners >$20K out of 1571 (35%)
Hard way to make a livin'.....
The Knockerest of Knockers.......
22 or greater starts:
Beautiful Insight 25 $16K
La Quise Mucho 24 $9K
Sir Prize U 23 $14K
Legends Way 23 $10K
Stormy Stenovec 23 $5K
Ubetimfast 22 $55K
Lisa Lulu 22 $45K
Les Crime 22 $7K
Sensitive Cat 22 $4K
If that was your stable 9 horses x $20K per horse, $180K in day rates to date. $165K in earnings. On the bright side you could have a cheering interest in 200+ races for about $15K out of pocket....
Of all horses (1571 of them) with 14 or more starts to date this year the average earnings is $14800.
Personally, my break even $cost/year assumption is $30K.
Of the 1571 horses who've run 14+ times this year, 308 (19%) have paid their way per my definition(>$30K)
(21 of them have made owners quite happy with $90K or more this year)
That leaves 1263 (81%) who are owned by people with "long pants" or at least one long pocket.
For interests sake, there are 144 brave soles who have started 14 or more times and have made less than $5K. (Someone please call the hprse adoption agency)
If your breakeven threshold is $20K/year, the numbers are:
558 runners >$20K out of 1571 (35%)
Hard way to make a livin'.....
The Knockerest of Knockers.......
22 or greater starts:
Beautiful Insight 25 $16K
La Quise Mucho 24 $9K
Sir Prize U 23 $14K
Legends Way 23 $10K
Stormy Stenovec 23 $5K
Ubetimfast 22 $55K
Lisa Lulu 22 $45K
Les Crime 22 $7K
Sensitive Cat 22 $4K
If that was your stable 9 horses x $20K per horse, $180K in day rates to date. $165K in earnings. On the bright side you could have a cheering interest in 200+ races for about $15K out of pocket....
Re: Making Money with Horses
Gallop58 wrote:
If that was your stable 9 horses x $20K per horse, $180K in day rates to date. $165K in earnings. On the bright side you could have a cheering interest in 200+ races for about $15K out of pocket....
I think you are forgetting the $16K going to the trainers and the $8-10K going to the jocks (since not all earnings are from wins); not to mention vet and farrier etc. I'd put it more at $50K out of pocket.
I happen to think the number of starts aren't just soundness driven but trainer driven. Here are some profitable hard knockers with the same trainer earning over $100K this year in 10 or more starts through Oct 15:
Lilly Fa Pootz (12 starts)
U R All That I Am (10 starts)
You Lift Me Up (10 starts)
Dakota Phone (10 starts)
not to mention
Dance To My Tune (9 starts)
City to City (8 starts)
Blind Luck (8 starts)
Lilly Fa Pootz (12 starts)
U R All That I Am (10 starts)
You Lift Me Up (10 starts)
Dakota Phone (10 starts)
not to mention
Dance To My Tune (9 starts)
City to City (8 starts)
Blind Luck (8 starts)
Can't figure out how to quote a post, but I am curious...
La Quise Mucho 24 starts, 9K in earnings, and Stormy Stenovic 23 starts with 5k of earnings...
Why keep going with these horses? The outlay must be substantially more than the income on these guys? At what point does a trainer pull the plug?
La Quise Mucho 24 starts, 9K in earnings, and Stormy Stenovic 23 starts with 5k of earnings...
Why keep going with these horses? The outlay must be substantially more than the income on these guys? At what point does a trainer pull the plug?
A woman needs 2 animals in her life-the horse of her dreams, and a jackass to pay for it!
Shannon wrote:Can't figure out how to quote a post, but I am curious...
La Quise Mucho 24 starts, 9K in earnings, and Stormy Stenovic 23 starts with 5k of earnings...
Why keep going with these horses? The outlay must be substantially more than the income on these guys? At what point does a trainer pull the plug?
La Quise Mucho runs in Puerto Rico which may have a different expense structure and Stormy Stenovec runs (and runs) up and down California for an owner (who is not the breeder incidentally) and a trainer. The horse is apparently in no danger of being claimed--they've run him for over a year--and only they can tell you what they are getting from this. It might be as simple as they like him and they like to run him and/or the trainer is in the business of running horses.
here is one of my favorites
http://www.pedigreequery.com/progeny/marie+jean
8 foals - an average of over 100 starts per foal (!), with only one having no record. One slacker only had 23 starts. It would be curious to know the background on this horse, owner where raced, etc.
jm
http://www.pedigreequery.com/progeny/marie+jean
8 foals - an average of over 100 starts per foal (!), with only one having no record. One slacker only had 23 starts. It would be curious to know the background on this horse, owner where raced, etc.
jm
Run the race - the one that's really worth winning.
Joltman wrote:here is one of my favorites
http://www.pedigreequery.com/progeny/marie+jean
8 foals - an average of over 100 starts per foal (!), with only one having no record. One slacker only had 23 starts. It would be curious to know the background on this horse, owner where raced, etc.
jm
Hi Jolt,
Here is a snipit I found concerning Marie Jean from a bloodhorse pedigree article. An interesting pedigree having the right to become such a hard knocking broodmare......below is the full article from Bloodhorse. TJ
".....The next dam in the lineage was stakes winner Marie Jean, dam of stakes winners Scipio and Mel Eppley. This line traces to the Regulus Mare, third dam of Epsom Oaks winner Ceres, fourth dam of Epsom Derby winners Rhadamanthus and Daedalus, and ancestress of St. Leger and Ascot Gold Cup winner Robert the Devil and Uruguayan Derby winner Debutante. Even farther back, this line traces to the Darley Arabian Mare. This mare was the ancestress of the great broodmare Julia. Through her daughter Princess, Julia was the ancestress of Oaks winners Music and Minuet; Kentucky Derby winner Grindstone; Epsom Derby winners Spearmint and Aboyeur; the great sire Princequillo; etc............" By Carly Silver
Read more: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/ ... z17o7x9R4b
SOUND HARD KNOCKERS ????
Found "FIGHT THE STORM" by Stormy Atlantic on HandRide:
37 starts with $211,304 in winnings..
Won 2 of her last 3 starts..
won 9 of 37 starts which is almost 25%
won, placed or show in 18 of 37 starts or in the money almost 50% of the time.
A great time to bick up some good hard knocking mares and here i am trying to sell.
griff
Found "FIGHT THE STORM" by Stormy Atlantic on HandRide:
37 starts with $211,304 in winnings..
Won 2 of her last 3 starts..
won 9 of 37 starts which is almost 25%
won, placed or show in 18 of 37 starts or in the money almost 50% of the time.
A great time to bick up some good hard knocking mares and here i am trying to sell.
griff
"We has met the enemy and he is us" [Pogo]