werk ratings

[DDT]

griff

Again, I am not saying that nicking programs in general and Werk in particular are useless, but, when you cite a statistic remember that the statistic is only as valid as the information utilized to generate that statistic. As an example, how many "A" nick rated horses fail to start or fail to win a race? Based on overall statistics for the breed as a guide, I would say the number of non-starters and non-winners far outnumber the stakes winners.

Keeping in mind that the "A" rated stakes winners add to the information that eventually is utilized to generate the "A" rating, I would think that the 30% stakes winners without an "A" rating is actually more significant in the long run.

Again, opinion shapes this industry, and you are certainly entitled to yours.

DDT

[Rahy85]

If you insist on using nicking... at least utilize TrueNicks. They utilize the entire population as opposed to Jack Werk's voo doo system of studying only the stakes population and ignoring the dynamics represented in the balance of the population.

[Patuxet]

Roger Lyons is really pissed off!

http://werk2.werkhorse.com/experts/

[foxtale]

I agree with Ascot on 2 things... the nicks change when the runners become stakes winners, therefore it may not have been an A++ nick , at the time of conception... also I have never based a sale purchase on a nick... I like Cecil Seaman and his biomechanics though... that is something!

[AscotStud]

Roger Lyons is really pissed off!

That article was pretty damn funny!!!

Disrespectful: That same post also charges, without any historical evidence whatever, that the WTC nick rating was “created with the sole intention of ’selling seasons’,” a wildly irresponsible indictment of the very origin of the WTC nick rating.

That indictment forgets that the WTC rating, unlike their rating, was created 20 years ago, long before it had entered anyone’s head that a nick rating could be used to sell seasons, long before they created their nick rating. The WTC nick rating could not possibly have been “created” with the “intention of selling seasons,”

I guess this email from "Jack" kind of contradicts this point, by telling us stallion owners that it is the most effective ways of luring mares and selling seasons...even in these tough times.

During these turbulent financial times, stud farms need every possible advantage to attract mares to their stallions. I believe that our eNicks stallion program may be the single, most effective tool in attracting those mares.

Who cares what your stallion looks like or did on the track when we can put an A next to a mating so mare owners will flock to your farm...Pay me a little more and I will write that I think your stallion is going to be the next BIG thing in your regional market.

I guess they can't handle a little competish, especially a more thought out system at that.

[Patuxet]

Here's an opportunity to measure the two nicking systems against each other. Journeyman Stud offers free nicking analysis to its dozen stallions with both eNicks and True Nicks. http://www.journeymanbloodstock.com/stallions.html

[Rahy85]

Lyons is a master of verbal smoke and mirrors. Don't let him fool you... the problem associated with their poor sample size is finally doing eNicks in. In time, eNicks will go by the way side.

Lyons is essentially arguing that WTC's paltry sample sizes shouldn't stop people from using their system over TrueNicks. How he makes sense of this in his twisted little world is beyond me. If larger samplings are available, they should be utilized...