PHALARIS

[Barcaldine]

I admire Louis' tenacity in making his case about Phalaris. He also seems like a nice man who wants to help people and horses. I dont happen to agree with some of his conclusions but I do think he is absolutely correct in looking at pedigree as a major contributor to unsoundness.

Having said that, I want to explore the central villain of his campaign--PHALARIS.

Anne Peters' excellent review of PHALARIS on Thoroughbred Heritage details his racing and stallion careers. I highly recommend it: http://www.tbheritage.com/Portraits/Phalaris.html

Anne points out that, as a late foal, PHALARIS made only three starts at two, winning a pair, and was rated only fifth among that year's juveniles. At three he started seven times and won three, from six furlongs to 10 furlongs, but not at the highest level of competition.

At four PHALARIS blossomed into a top-class sprinter. He won seven of nine races, five to eight furlongs, plus a walkover at two miles.He carried heavy weights, often times giving away dozens of pounds.

Brought back at age five, he won all but one of five starts, from five to eight furlongs.

Peters wrote, "This is the record of a great weight carrier, since Phalaris won carrying more than 130 pounds on at least seven occasions, and won carrying more than 140 pounds three times, including once with 147 pounds aboard. "

PHALARIS was retired at age six with 16 wins in 24 starts. No mention of physical infirmities appears in Anne's discourse, nor in any other that I have read.

PHALARIS was a son of leading sire POLYMELUS, a fast horse who was best at 10 furlongs. POLYMELUS also raced from two to five, winning 11 of 31 starts. PHALARIS' dam, BROMUS, only won one race (at two), but according to Peter's was purchased by Lord Derby strictly due to her excellent conformation.

BROMUS was inbred 2 x 3 to the brilliant sprinter SPRINGFIELD (17 wins in 19 starts, 2 to 4).

Although PHALARIS lived only until age 16, he sired many great and notable racehorses and progenitors:

FAIRWAY (won 12 of 15 starts, 2 to 4)

PHAROS (won 14 of 30 starts, 2 to 5)

MANNA (?, Derby, 2000 guineas)

COLORADO (won 9 of 16, at 2 and 3)

*SICKLE (won 3 of 10, at 2 and 3)

*PHARAMOND (won 4 of 11, at 2 and 3)


Given that English racehorses have never made as many annual starts as those in America, it seems to me that neither PHALARIS, his sire or damsire, or his best progeny were guilty of any unsoundness beyond the norm. Yes, some of his later sons were retired after their three-year--old year, but it seems likely this was due to the overwhelming stallion success of PHALARIS and his early sons.

Just to compare PHALARIS and his offspring with other leading horses of their time I found this information:

GAINSBOROUGH (5 wins, 9 starts, at 2 and 3)

SWYNFORD (8 wins, 12 starts, 2 to 4)

BLANDFORD (3 wins, 12 starts, 2 to 4)

PERSIMMON (7 wins, 9 starts, 2 to 4)

TEDDY (6 wins, 8 starts, 3 and 4)

This is not by any means a thorough evaluation but I think it does illustrate that PHALARIS, as both a racehorse and sire, did not exhibit fragility. He came from relatively sound stock and most of his better-known offspring (the ones we see in today's pedigrees) did not appear to be any different. In fact, it could be said that by comparison PHALARIS actually imparted soundness in contrast to other great sires of his day.

[Bast]

That is a clear presentation of facts.

Facts should be a part of a discussion like this, as should a basic understanding of genetics.

[louis finochio]

The doom of Ph. in the present, is those FB with 25--29 crosses of Ph. stallions, & 21--15 crosses of Ph. mares in those FB 5 generation pedigree.

How many crosses of those NP sire lines, are found in Ph. progeny ? I would expect a high number, as in Ph. time frame, those NP sre lines were dominant, not recessive like in the present.

[Barcaldine]

Since we've found that PHALARIS and his best sons were not unsound racehorses, and were not known for siring such, it seems to me that inbreeding to him INCREASES the probability for producing sound horses.

Conversely, inbreeding to known unsound stallions such as BLANDFORD would appear a recipe for disaster.

Perhaps, Louis, any unsoundness from the Phalaris sire line can be attributed not to his contributions, but to those of the mares which hail from BLANDFORD and other blatantly unsound stallions.

[ElPrado]

Mares mean nothing except which stallion they were descended from. Such is the Gospel according to the guru.
And all I'm doing is repeating what he just said.

[Bast]

those NP sre lines were dominant, not recessive like in the present.

Individual genes can be dominant or recessive. Individuals are NOT dominant or recessive. This is standard genetics and goes back as far as the work of Mendel.

[brogers]

I'm unsure why people on this forum (and others) have the misguided opinion that "unsoundness" or "soundness" (terms themselves that have been poorly qualified) can be treated as if it is a single genetic mutation that is faithfully transmitted down generations and can be traced to a source or sources (as if it is like the mutation in the KIT gene that causes grayness). It is so far away from the realities of equine physiology, genetics or science it is almost incomprehensible that this forum has spent so much time on it. Any name in a pedigree appearing beyond the fourth generation of a foal is just that - a name. They have next to zero impact on the foal.

[Bast]

..

[DDT]

brogers

To my knowledge, Louis is the only poster on the forum that does not understand the misguided opinion on unsoundness or soundness. Good luck with the genetic science and incomprehensible attitude, may be you can get through to him. I doubt it, but no harm in trying.

DDT

[Barcaldine]

Apparently the nickster's market research has found no buyers willing to pay thousands of dollars for Louis' research, in spite of a methodology surprisingly similar to their own.

[Bast]

brogers

To my knowledge, Louis is the only poster on the forum that does not understand the misguided opinion on unsoundness or soundness. Good luck with the genetic science and incomprehensible attitude, may be you can get through to him. I doubt it, but no harm in trying.

DDT

Not quite. Whirlaway drops by every 6 months or so and offers support.

[Tappiano]

I believe it's been shown that the more bone a horse has the longer it may that to harden and therefore it could be said that by not allowing this to happen before a horse races you are, in effect, perpetuating unsoundness by choosing to breed to a horse who broke down because he was not allowed to mature. Since at least half the offspring should inherit this trait it seems easy to say that he's passing on unsoundness when all he's contributing is something that is wrecked by the environment the horse is in.

I agree with the influence being significantly lower as time goes on EXCEPT that certain dominant traits like this are passed on. One would presume it's because it's an either/or and by definition it would be found in 50% of ancestors in a pedigree.

[louis finochio]

The FB are bred for speed, so they can work in a rapid 10, they are hot housed in a small pen so they wont get injured before the sale. In the sales preview they are whiped a driven all out to break the sound barrier.

There is too much stress placed on their weak immature bones, when their bones have not matured. Thats why i dont like to go to those sales previews. Those FB are sacrificed for the $.

[diomed]

Louis, the thread is not about your theory. It's about Phalaris, who was a very sound horse.
Send the FB and NFB drivel to the other thread please.

[xfactor fan]

Ditto.

Louis you have had 800 plus pages to promote your theory. This thread is a bout real science, not your ideas.