Giant's Causeway receives so much talk-reality-it is a fact he has been bred to some of the finest race mares in the world today but I will say a lot of the mare's have yet to prove themselves as producers-I also realize he has had only 2 crops of foals on the ground with only one crop being an American foal crop - I do think it is unfair to peg him as a flop with only 2 crops on the ground and I don't think he warrants a $200,000 stud fee based on what he has sired by the percentages - 53% starters from 285 foals,a paltry 21% winners and only 3% Stakes Winners-Now I do realize we still have 4 months left for this foal crop year but let's look at some comparisons to stallions from the past in their 1st 2 crops compared with Giant's Causeway - 142 starters from 285 foals,58 winners,8 stakes winners(3%).
Mr. Prospector - 62 starters from 77 foals,52 winners,15 stakes winners
Grand Slam - 193 starters from 236 foals,135 winners,16 stakes winners
A P Indy - 77 starters from 94 foals,65 winners,19 stakes winners
Alphabet Soup - 146 starters from 175 foals,106 winners,17 stakes winners
Sadler's Well's - 84 starters from 99 foals,61 winners,19 stakes winners
Storm Cat - 80 starters from 91 foals,60 winners,17 stakes winners
Seattle Slew - 56 starters from 70 foals,40 winners,11 stakes winners
Gone West - 68 starters from 77 foals,57 winners,14 stakes winners
Red Ransom - 102 starters from 116 foals,77 winners,15 stakes winners
Danzig - 64 starters from 82 foals,55 winners,20 stakes winners
Devil His Due - 128 starters from 152 foals,100 winners,13 stakes winners
Distorted Humor - 112 starters from 124 foals,90 winners,17 stakes winners
Kingmambo - 89 starters from 107 foals,61 winners,18 stakes winners
Forty Niner - 77 starters from 88 foals,66 winners,15 stakes winners
El Prado - 76 starters from 91 foals,66 winners,15 stakes winners
Elusive Quality - 146 starters from 162 foals,106 winners,15 stakes winners
Forest Wildcat - 112 starters from 123 foals,87 winners,15 stakes winners
Lost Code - 97 starters from 113 foals,83 winners,16 stakes winners
Smart Strike - 106 starters from 131 foals,90 winners,16 stakes winners
Not a one of these stallions has near the number of foals of Giant's Causeway in their 1st 2 crops and except for perhaps Sadler's Wells,Storm Cat and Danzig have bred near the caliber of mare's that GC has and I also realize that GC' still has 4,5 and 6 year olds yet to run but the early results are very dismal at best-now at a $200,000 fee I realize the majority of the population won't be able to breed to him but I get a kick out of people that don't look at the facts and rant and rave when he hits a Grade 1 stakes winner like the next coming of the Lord.I liked GC as a racehorse-his dam was sold with him in utero by a neighbor of mine here in Iowa and she had a ton of heart coming back to defeat Serena's Song in the Grade 2 Turfway Breeder's Cup after fracturing a hind leg at 3 but for the caliber of mare's he has bred and what he has sired is just not warranting the hoopla that some still have for him.Ever wonder why we Americans spend so much for gas-this is a game for the Arabs that we are making so wealthy depending on their foreign oil and they can go out and spend $200,000 stud fee's and if it doesn't pan out they can then dump them for what ever price and not worry about there loss-heck,there playing the game on our money anyways along with The Japan electronic empires that we also make wealthy to play this game of $200,000 stud fee's-give me the Holy Bull's,Devil His Due's,Smart Strike's,Northern Afleet's-I can afford to play that game along with the majority of us I believe and isn't it just great when those underated true sires do win the Derby,Preakness and Belmont over those 6 figure stud fee's and million dollar commercial breds.
Giant's Causeway Comparison's To The Past
Moderators: Roguelet, WaveMaster, madelyn
-
JCBloodstock
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 193
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 2:19 pm
- Location: Iowa
- Contact:
Well the great Fu Peg is in the same boat. He's getting 35% starters and 16% winners. He has 2% stakes winners. I don't think either one of these stallions are worth $200k. Successful Appeal and Yes It's True are still sporting the highest numbers, and they stand for a fraction of the stud fee, and got half the quality of mares. But Roman Ruler and Maid's Causeway, First Sumari etc are fresh in the mind of Coolmore.
And on the list you mentioned Devil His Due is a hugely underated sire. And a real deal for $10K. He's great for breed to race with 75% starters and 53% winners. His biggest knock is his sales numbers.
And on the list you mentioned Devil His Due is a hugely underated sire. And a real deal for $10K. He's great for breed to race with 75% starters and 53% winners. His biggest knock is his sales numbers.
My earlier guess was that Coolmore didn't shuttle GC this year because they wanted to give his recently retired son, Footstepsinthesand, a boost in his first season at stud in Australia. However I was recently told by someone who should know that it really was an insurance issue. The rate to send GC down there was going to be prohibitive, so they decided to give him a season off.
I get a similar kick out of people who rant and rave about GC's fee. If you don't believe he is worth $200K, don't book to him. It's really that simple.
BTW, the first poster is comparing the entire careers of the first crop of certain stallions to a portion of the careers of GC's first crop. Either the analysis should wait for a few years or it should be apples to apples for a meaningful comparison. There is also the issue of comparing a mixture of European earnings with straight American earnings.
BTW, the first poster is comparing the entire careers of the first crop of certain stallions to a portion of the careers of GC's first crop. Either the analysis should wait for a few years or it should be apples to apples for a meaningful comparison. There is also the issue of comparing a mixture of European earnings with straight American earnings.
-
JCBloodstock
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 193
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 2:19 pm
- Location: Iowa
- Contact:
Sysonby wrote:
BTW, the first poster is comparing the entire careers of the first crop of certain stallions to a portion of the careers of GC's first crop. Either the analysis should wait for a few years or it should be apples to apples for a meaningful comparison. There is also the issue of comparing a mixture of European earnings with straight American earnings.
[/b]No,Sysonby-I did not compare the 1st crop on the others but there 1st 2 crops as I did the 2 crop numbers of Giant's Causeway-I also stated that GC still has 4,5 & 6 year olds to run-I also never compared earnings whatsoever-I only compared number of foals in 2 crops,starters,winners and stakes winners-I stated that it wasn't an accurate comparison but it was general perspective of comparing numbers.
Re: Giant's Causeway Comparison's To The Past
JCBloodstock wrote:Giant's Causeway receives so much talk-reality-it is a fact he has been bred to some of the finest race mares in the world today but I will say a lot of the mare's have yet to prove themselves as producers-I also realize he has had only 2 crops of foals on the ground with only one crop being an American foal crop - I do think it is unfair to peg him as a flop with only 2 crops on the ground and I don't think he warrants a $200,000 stud fee based on what he has sired by the percentages - 53% starters from 285 foals,a paltry 21% winners and only 3% Stakes Winners-Now I do realize we still have 4 months left for this foal crop year but let's look at some comparisons to stallions from the past in their 1st 2 crops compared with Giant's Causeway - 142 starters from 285 foals,58 winners,8 stakes winners(3%).
Mr. Prospector - 62 starters from 77 foals,52 winners,15 stakes winners
Grand Slam - 193 starters from 236 foals,135 winners,16 stakes winners
A P Indy - 77 starters from 94 foals,65 winners,19 stakes winners
Alphabet Soup - 146 starters from 175 foals,106 winners,17 stakes winners
Sadler's Well's - 84 starters from 99 foals,61 winners,19 stakes winners
Storm Cat - 80 starters from 91 foals,60 winners,17 stakes winners
Seattle Slew - 56 starters from 70 foals,40 winners,11 stakes winners
Gone West - 68 starters from 77 foals,57 winners,14 stakes winners
Red Ransom - 102 starters from 116 foals,77 winners,15 stakes winners
Danzig - 64 starters from 82 foals,55 winners,20 stakes winners
Devil His Due - 128 starters from 152 foals,100 winners,13 stakes winners
Distorted Humor - 112 starters from 124 foals,90 winners,17 stakes winners
Kingmambo - 89 starters from 107 foals,61 winners,18 stakes winners
Forty Niner - 77 starters from 88 foals,66 winners,15 stakes winners
El Prado - 76 starters from 91 foals,66 winners,15 stakes winners
Elusive Quality - 146 starters from 162 foals,106 winners,15 stakes winners
Forest Wildcat - 112 starters from 123 foals,87 winners,15 stakes winners
Lost Code - 97 starters from 113 foals,83 winners,16 stakes winners
Smart Strike - 106 starters from 131 foals,90 winners,16 stakes winners
Not a one of these stallions has near the number of foals of Giant's Causeway in their 1st 2 crops and except for perhaps Sadler's Wells,Storm Cat and Danzig have bred near the caliber of mare's that GC has and I also realize that GC' still has 4,5 and 6 year olds yet to run but the early results are very dismal at best-now at a $200,000 fee I realize the majority of the population won't be able to breed to him but I get a kick out of people that don't look at the facts and rant and rave when he hits a Grade 1 stakes winner like the next coming of the Lord.I liked GC as a racehorse-his dam was sold with him in utero by a neighbor of mine here in Iowa and she had a ton of heart coming back to defeat Serena's Song in the Grade 2 Turfway Breeder's Cup after fracturing a hind leg at 3 but for the caliber of mare's he has bred and what he has sired is just not warranting the hoopla that some still have for him.Ever wonder why we Americans spend so much for gas-this is a game for the Arabs that we are making so wealthy depending on their foreign oil and they can go out and spend $200,000 stud fee's and if it doesn't pan out they can then dump them for what ever price and not worry about there loss-heck,there playing the game on our money anyways along with The Japan electronic empires that we also make wealthy to play this game of $200,000 stud fee's-give me the Holy Bull's,Devil His Due's,Smart Strike's,Northern Afleet's-I can afford to play that game along with the majority of us I believe and isn't it just great when those underated true sires do win the Derby,Preakness and Belmont over those 6 figure stud fee's and million dollar commercial breds.
These are the numbers for GC from 2005 from the B-H:
6 GIANT'S CAUSEWAY(97, Storm Cat), Ashford Stud, KY $200,000 131/54 7/10 5/4 Shamardal, $1,572,090 $4,807,623
And from 2004:
4 GIANT'S CAUSEWAY(97, Storm Cat), Ashford Stud, KY $200,000 144 66/18 4/5 $271,090 Shamardal, $359,680 $1,137,026
What you have done is ADD Giants Causeway's 2 year numbers together and then COMPARED a stallion, GC,with a huge books of mares to stallions of yesteryear with 66 CAREFULLY selected mares.
LOOK at GC on a single year basis. He is a good stallion. Look at his G-1 winners... B-H has GC ranked 4th as a first year sire, and 6th OVERALL IN 2005. The conclusion from the B-H figures are alot different from what you have concocted.
I view Coolmore as "a breeding factory"...the stallion equivalent of a poultry farm. Sure, GC had some nice mares and some blueblood mares, but NOT ALL of those 258 covers could have been to top tier mares . If you pay the fee to Coolmore, they are not as strict as other farms in selecting mares.
If I had 200k and a good mare, I'd breed to GC in a heartbeat. I've seen several of his racers run this year, and they are tenacious, talented runners winning stakes races on dirt and grass.
GC was a hellava race horse. How many American dirt racers could fly to Europe, get off the plane, and run their first ever turf race in the "BC race in Europe and lose by a nose"?
hi reese
If I might add my two cents re: a couple of comments you wrote in response to JCBloodstock...
...for starters...you wrote "What you have done is ADD Giants Causeway's 2 year numbers together and then COMPARED a stallion, GC,with a huge books of mares to stallions of yesteryear with 66 CAREFULLY selected mares"
Mr Prospector (for one example) was not bred at the outset to "..CAREFULLY selected mares" (your words). It was more like...whoever was willing to sign a contract to him for $7,500 got it..."CAREFULLY selected mares" (your words) were not an issue...and getting a season to him and booking a mare, sometimes on one or two days notice, was not rare...and that's a FACT.
I am confident that "Carefully selected mares" (your words) were not the case with many of the stallions on JCBloodstock's list...and certainly not even one stallion on that list comes close to having the quantity of foals (and quality pedigrees) in his first two crops that GC has in his first two crops. Does any stallion?
You wrote "If I had 200k and a good mare, I'd breed to GC in a heartbeat."
I suggest that it's easy to speculate (and/or dream) what one would do if they had the "$200k and a good mare"(your words). Respectfully...I expect that if you had the $200k to spend on a stud fee and were a serious commercial breeder...you would probably consider all of your options. I expect that if you did your thorough due diligence you might conclude what a poor-percentage high-risk-play GC is...but if you had the $200k to burn...and money was no object...that's another matter all together.
You wrote "Sure, GC had some nice mares and some blueblood mares..."
Reese...respectfully...he had arguably the largest book of quality mares that any stallion in the history of the breed has ever had. "...some nice mares..." (your words)...an understatement if I've ever heard one. "...some blueblood mares..."also an understatement.
You also wrote "I view Coolmore as "a breeding factory"...the stallion equivalent of a poultry farm."
Very funny.
You wrote "I've seen several of his racers run this year, and they are tenacious, talented runners winning stakes races on dirt and grass."
Obviously you have not seen most...although a few do meet your description (including one on the dirt).
Reese...your comments are appreciated...but I suggest...do some more research and look beyond earnings lists. With the HUGE quantity of foals that GC has (both northern and southern hemisphere) it'll be almost impossible for him not to be high on the Earnings lists...
...I suggest look at percentage of winners from foals...and percentage of stakes-winners from foals. Paltry might be the best word to describe his stats in those categories.
In an effort to make an honest evaluation...I suggest that All Things must be Considered in the process.
Respectfully
If I might add my two cents re: a couple of comments you wrote in response to JCBloodstock...
...for starters...you wrote "What you have done is ADD Giants Causeway's 2 year numbers together and then COMPARED a stallion, GC,with a huge books of mares to stallions of yesteryear with 66 CAREFULLY selected mares"
Mr Prospector (for one example) was not bred at the outset to "..CAREFULLY selected mares" (your words). It was more like...whoever was willing to sign a contract to him for $7,500 got it..."CAREFULLY selected mares" (your words) were not an issue...and getting a season to him and booking a mare, sometimes on one or two days notice, was not rare...and that's a FACT.
I am confident that "Carefully selected mares" (your words) were not the case with many of the stallions on JCBloodstock's list...and certainly not even one stallion on that list comes close to having the quantity of foals (and quality pedigrees) in his first two crops that GC has in his first two crops. Does any stallion?
You wrote "If I had 200k and a good mare, I'd breed to GC in a heartbeat."
I suggest that it's easy to speculate (and/or dream) what one would do if they had the "$200k and a good mare"(your words). Respectfully...I expect that if you had the $200k to spend on a stud fee and were a serious commercial breeder...you would probably consider all of your options. I expect that if you did your thorough due diligence you might conclude what a poor-percentage high-risk-play GC is...but if you had the $200k to burn...and money was no object...that's another matter all together.
You wrote "Sure, GC had some nice mares and some blueblood mares..."
Reese...respectfully...he had arguably the largest book of quality mares that any stallion in the history of the breed has ever had. "...some nice mares..." (your words)...an understatement if I've ever heard one. "...some blueblood mares..."also an understatement.
You also wrote "I view Coolmore as "a breeding factory"...the stallion equivalent of a poultry farm."
Very funny.
You wrote "I've seen several of his racers run this year, and they are tenacious, talented runners winning stakes races on dirt and grass."
Obviously you have not seen most...although a few do meet your description (including one on the dirt).
Reese...your comments are appreciated...but I suggest...do some more research and look beyond earnings lists. With the HUGE quantity of foals that GC has (both northern and southern hemisphere) it'll be almost impossible for him not to be high on the Earnings lists...
...I suggest look at percentage of winners from foals...and percentage of stakes-winners from foals. Paltry might be the best word to describe his stats in those categories.
In an effort to make an honest evaluation...I suggest that All Things must be Considered in the process.
Respectfully
-
JCBloodstock
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 193
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 2:19 pm
- Location: Iowa
- Contact:
Re: Giant's Causeway Comparison's To The Past
[quote="reese"] What you have done is ADD Giants Causeway's 2 year numbers together and then COMPARED a stallion, GC,with a huge books of mares to stallions of yesteryear with 66 CAREFULLY selected mares.
Yes Reese this is what I did-is add Giant's Causeway first 2 crops together as I did every other stallion I listed(this was the point I was trying to make)-when I look at stallions for client's to breed to I look at consistency in foal crops and not one big year(reality is GC had a larger crop of 1st crop foals in the US than he did in GB-it's called shuttling)-I also look at who owned the mare's of the big hitters and what they've done in the past---and carefully selected mares,anyone with money could have bred to the majority of the stallions I listed and if you had the connections you could get to El Prado for $3000 his 1st year and Devil His Due for $3500 and even Mr. P for $2500-do you honestly believe that stallions that stood there 1st seasons for $7500 or less received carefully selected mares.
[quote="reese"]LOOK at GC on a single year basis. He is a good stallion. Look at his G-1 winners... B-H has GC ranked 4th as a first year sire, and 6th OVERALL IN 2005. The conclusion from the B-H figures are alot different from what you have concocted.
Well since he has more foals than any other stallion out there in 2 crops and more 1st class connections he should be 1st and 1st don't you think and again I concocted nothing Reese.
Racing prowess does not transfer to sire production-Danzig,Red Ransom,Mr P have thrown that theory out the window-I did not concoct anything-you quote The Bloodhorse-well for your info that is what I used in the form of a stallion register-they have lots of facts than just pictures,race records and such.I used the Thoroughbred Times Stallion Register of 2005 for the older stallions and I used Brisnet.com stallion directory for the younger horses(which is updated on a weekly basis by the way)-what you do is look at a stallions foals by foal crop-Giant's Causeway has 2 crops of racing age-all the stallion's I listed were from there 1st 2 crops of racing age-not 66 carefully selected mares-I also stated that it's not an exacting comparison because GC has yet to have 4 and up horses to run yet-the closest comparison to number of foals is Grand Slam(and who by the way I only used his racing stats through 2004 and not this year which means his 1st crop of foals were 4 year olds and his 2nd crop were 3 year olds)236 foals in his 1st 2 crops(49 fewer than Giant's Causeway),193 starters(51 more than Giant's Causeway),135 winners(77 more than Giant's Causeway) and 16 Stakes Winners(8 more than Giant's Causeway)[/b]
Yes Reese this is what I did-is add Giant's Causeway first 2 crops together as I did every other stallion I listed(this was the point I was trying to make)-when I look at stallions for client's to breed to I look at consistency in foal crops and not one big year(reality is GC had a larger crop of 1st crop foals in the US than he did in GB-it's called shuttling)-I also look at who owned the mare's of the big hitters and what they've done in the past---and carefully selected mares,anyone with money could have bred to the majority of the stallions I listed and if you had the connections you could get to El Prado for $3000 his 1st year and Devil His Due for $3500 and even Mr. P for $2500-do you honestly believe that stallions that stood there 1st seasons for $7500 or less received carefully selected mares.
[quote="reese"]LOOK at GC on a single year basis. He is a good stallion. Look at his G-1 winners... B-H has GC ranked 4th as a first year sire, and 6th OVERALL IN 2005. The conclusion from the B-H figures are alot different from what you have concocted.
Well since he has more foals than any other stallion out there in 2 crops and more 1st class connections he should be 1st and 1st don't you think and again I concocted nothing Reese.
Racing prowess does not transfer to sire production-Danzig,Red Ransom,Mr P have thrown that theory out the window-I did not concoct anything-you quote The Bloodhorse-well for your info that is what I used in the form of a stallion register-they have lots of facts than just pictures,race records and such.I used the Thoroughbred Times Stallion Register of 2005 for the older stallions and I used Brisnet.com stallion directory for the younger horses(which is updated on a weekly basis by the way)-what you do is look at a stallions foals by foal crop-Giant's Causeway has 2 crops of racing age-all the stallion's I listed were from there 1st 2 crops of racing age-not 66 carefully selected mares-I also stated that it's not an exacting comparison because GC has yet to have 4 and up horses to run yet-the closest comparison to number of foals is Grand Slam(and who by the way I only used his racing stats through 2004 and not this year which means his 1st crop of foals were 4 year olds and his 2nd crop were 3 year olds)236 foals in his 1st 2 crops(49 fewer than Giant's Causeway),193 starters(51 more than Giant's Causeway),135 winners(77 more than Giant's Causeway) and 16 Stakes Winners(8 more than Giant's Causeway)[/b]
I appreciate comments from professionals and experts, JBbloodstock and FOS re GC, and understand your positions.
I just looked at the GC's selling at Keeneland and their prices.... GC is selling well. I checked a few of the mares' pedigrees and most are top drawer.
But I still question the fact that the 258 foals of GC in 2 crops were all from"outstanding" mares especially since at least 1/2 of his foals from 2004 were Australian.
Australia has great racing, etc., but I still believe that GC was sent to Australia so Coolmore could make $$$$ on GC without "flooding" the American market with his foals last year, but still recoup alot of $$$ from his initial syndication fee by breeding GC to huge books on two continents.
GC's stud fee in Australia THIS year is about 90k US, and I think it was alot less in 2004 like his fee was in the US. I'd reserve my opinion of GC's "numbers" and compare GC's 2/3 crops to stallions who stood only in the US. I think Australia skews the results.
Either way, imo, GC was a fearless racer. The racers of his I have seen race, have the same attitude. His 2004 get (at a lesser stud fee than 2005) are selling well at Keeneland, so someone must think GC has value.
As of now, GC looks to be a commercial success, and isn't that what the breeding market is about?
I just looked at the GC's selling at Keeneland and their prices.... GC is selling well. I checked a few of the mares' pedigrees and most are top drawer.
But I still question the fact that the 258 foals of GC in 2 crops were all from"outstanding" mares especially since at least 1/2 of his foals from 2004 were Australian.
Australia has great racing, etc., but I still believe that GC was sent to Australia so Coolmore could make $$$$ on GC without "flooding" the American market with his foals last year, but still recoup alot of $$$ from his initial syndication fee by breeding GC to huge books on two continents.
GC's stud fee in Australia THIS year is about 90k US, and I think it was alot less in 2004 like his fee was in the US. I'd reserve my opinion of GC's "numbers" and compare GC's 2/3 crops to stallions who stood only in the US. I think Australia skews the results.
Either way, imo, GC was a fearless racer. The racers of his I have seen race, have the same attitude. His 2004 get (at a lesser stud fee than 2005) are selling well at Keeneland, so someone must think GC has value.
As of now, GC looks to be a commercial success, and isn't that what the breeding market is about?
-
louis finochio
- Darley line
- Posts: 9181
- Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:21 am
- Location: Alhambra-Calif.
- Contact:
I would rather breed to a stallion that has been bred to bottom of the barrel mares like Unusual Heat, Northern Afleet, and Successful Appeal.
When those stallions offspring started running breeders were attracted to them because of their performance in high class races.
Breeders are now sending their best mares to those 3 stallions and will be rewarded.
I dont like stallions that fire blanks with the best quality of mares, as its the stallions that make or break their own destiny, not the mares.
When those stallions offspring started running breeders were attracted to them because of their performance in high class races.
Breeders are now sending their best mares to those 3 stallions and will be rewarded.
I dont like stallions that fire blanks with the best quality of mares, as its the stallions that make or break their own destiny, not the mares.
Those without sin cast the first stone.
Louis Finochio
Louis Finochio
Sysonby wrote:
BTW, the first poster is comparing the entire careers of the first crop of certain stallions to a portion of the careers of GC's first crop. Either the analysis should wait for a few years or it should be apples to apples for a meaningful comparison. There is also the issue of comparing a mixture of European earnings with straight American earnings.
[/b]No,Sysonby-I did not compare the 1st crop on the others but there 1st 2 crops as I did the 2 crop numbers of Giant's Causeway-I also stated that GC still has 4,5 & 6 year olds to run-I also never compared earnings whatsoever-I only compared number of foals in 2 crops,starters,winners and stakes winners-I stated that it wasn't an accurate comparison but it was general perspective of comparing numbers.
Sorry JC but your comparison is not!! nor is it anything like one. Its a complete waste of time. Wait a few years a then do it. Interesting to note that when comparisons are done, they normally sway in favour of the opinion of the "comparer"
On another matter,GC didn't come here to the SH because of an insurance cost problem. It was not economic.
BTW, the first poster is comparing the entire careers of the first crop of certain stallions to a portion of the careers of GC's first crop. Either the analysis should wait for a few years or it should be apples to apples for a meaningful comparison. There is also the issue of comparing a mixture of European earnings with straight American earnings.
[/b]No,Sysonby-I did not compare the 1st crop on the others but there 1st 2 crops as I did the 2 crop numbers of Giant's Causeway-I also stated that GC still has 4,5 & 6 year olds to run-I also never compared earnings whatsoever-I only compared number of foals in 2 crops,starters,winners and stakes winners-I stated that it wasn't an accurate comparison but it was general perspective of comparing numbers.
Sorry JC but your comparison is not!! nor is it anything like one. Its a complete waste of time. Wait a few years a then do it. Interesting to note that when comparisons are done, they normally sway in favour of the opinion of the "comparer"
On another matter,GC didn't come here to the SH because of an insurance cost problem. It was not economic.
Hi FOS
My oldest GC is only a yearling as of August 1st. The fisrt crop in Australia only turned 2 on the same date.
She is well thanks FOS and she will go through one of the sales series over here, and will be named by the new owners, unless I decide to retain her. She is growing well at the moment but is out of a maiden mare and I'm not sure that she will be any bigger than 15.3hh fully grown. She's the fastest of the eight in her paddock.
Currently, I'm waiting for my next out of the mare (due 8th October). The first crop of GC have their opportunity to show their speed today at Randwick. It's the first real trials in our area. I'm not sure whether GC has any in, but be assured that if he has and has a winner, I will let the forum know.
I am not holding any hope that we will see GC down here again, but could be wrong.
My oldest GC is only a yearling as of August 1st. The fisrt crop in Australia only turned 2 on the same date.
She is well thanks FOS and she will go through one of the sales series over here, and will be named by the new owners, unless I decide to retain her. She is growing well at the moment but is out of a maiden mare and I'm not sure that she will be any bigger than 15.3hh fully grown. She's the fastest of the eight in her paddock.
Currently, I'm waiting for my next out of the mare (due 8th October). The first crop of GC have their opportunity to show their speed today at Randwick. It's the first real trials in our area. I'm not sure whether GC has any in, but be assured that if he has and has a winner, I will let the forum know.
I am not holding any hope that we will see GC down here again, but could be wrong.