Unproven Stallion Prospects

FloridaGators · Postby **FloridaGators** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 9:52 pm

Interesting piece on current unprovens:

www.ThoroughbredReview.com

louis finochio · Postby **louis finochio** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 7:16 am

A TB breeder would do best to avoid the temptation to breed his best mares to an unproven stallion.

A TB breeder would be wise to purchase quality mares that have produced those superior runners with many different stallions.

Those types of mares come from a strong female family as like begets like.

sparta · Postby **sparta** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 12:36 pm

I think I remember that Fred Hooper turned down the opportunity to breed Susan's Girl to Secretariat--she had won the season in the Matchmaker Stakes--on the grounds that he was an unproven sire....

louis finochio · Postby **louis finochio** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 1:45 pm

I always felt that Secretariat would be a better BMS than a sire of sires.

Fred Hooper was not a gentleman to pay those elevated stud fees. Thats why the mating between Secretariat and SG was never made, plus Mr. Hooper like to breed to proven stallions.

griff · Postby **griff** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 10:01 pm

How does an unproven stallion become "proven" if no on brreds to him?

Would anyone consider the sires of Northern Dancer or Saettle Slew to be "proven" stallions? That is "proven" at the time they sires Northern Dancer and Seattle Slew.

griff

louis finochio · Postby **louis finochio** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 7:03 am

For every ND and Seattle Slew their are thousands of stallions that dont break the ice.

Those TB breeders that can breed to those unproven stallions and stay out of the red are few and far between.

Most all leading TB breeders will breed the majority of their mares to proven sires. They will breed a small minority of their mares to unproven stallions.

sparta · Postby **sparta** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:53 pm

Susan's Girl won the season to Secretariat; Hooper wouldn't have been out any money.

The Matchmaker was a wonderful concept. In 1969, for instance, Gallant Bloom's owners won a season to Dr. Fager; runner-up Gamely's connections got a season to Sea-Bird, and the owners of third-place finisher Singing Rain got the right to breed to Nearctic. Not shabby, and there was purse money as well![/quote]

louis finochio · Postby **louis finochio** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 3:53 pm

The matchmaker was a wonderful program. It should be carried on today.

xfactor fan · Postby **xfactor fan** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 5:03 pm

How did the foals resulting from the matchmaking turn out?

louis finochio · Postby **louis finochio** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 7:23 pm

Some of those foals went on to greater heights and some didnt.

griff · Postby **griff** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:26 am

OK, people who are successful do not breed to unproven stallions, and, sence successful people probably own the better mares, it means an unproven stallion must prove himself with offsprig from low quality mares.

I had always thought "proven" stallions became "proven" with the help of being bred to quality mares.

griff

louis finochio · Postby **louis finochio** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 2:54 pm

Griff: It takes two to tango. If you have an unproven stallion and his book of mares is rated as C - that unproven stallion will have to catch fire to attract those quality mares.

Look at the AEI and CI and you will see which stallions are out producing their mares by a country mile.

Unusual Heat fits the mold here as their is a big gap between his AEI and CI.

griff · Postby **griff** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 7:05 am

Louis

If the smart successful peope, who usually own the quality mares, only breed to proven stallions how can an unproven stallion attract quality mares?

Granted, breeding the best to the best is the system most breeders use to help with the odds. however, in the end it's still a huge crap shoot and every now and then unproven stallions produce surprising results when bred to unpriven mares.

Actaully ever now and then, and only ever now and then, proven stallions produce exceptional horses out of proven mares; i.e., there are a ton of Storm Cat and Seattle Slew get out there, out of quality mares, that never amounted to a hill of beans.

griffsy

louis finochio · Postby **louis finochio** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 7:34 am

An unproven stallion will attract quality mares when he produces a prolific amount of superior runners with mediocre mares.

Successful Appeal fits this pattern here. Now that SA is in Ky. he will be bred to quality mares, and now all eyes are on SA to see what quality of runners will be forth coming.

Unproven stallions will producing suprising results when those stallions are bred to the right mares that will have a bloodline affinity with those unproven stallions.

Its has been many years that we have seen the quality TB of the past. Why is this happening ?

When you have the same gene pool on the sire and dam side you are watering down the breed.

Look at the past champions and their pedigrees you wont find the same gene pool top and bottom in their pedigrees. What you will find is those NP sire lines that give hybrid vigor and soundness to the breed.

Just because there is a prolific amount of Storm Cats in the breeding shed, that doesnt mean they will all be a carbon copy of the original Storm Cat.

A TB breeder must separate the wheat from the chaff and be selective when they are selecting their mates for their mares.

DerbyDude · Postby **DerbyDude** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:29 am

I understand what Louis is saying and there is some truth to it, but Griff is also right, if no one breds to an unproven sire than how do they become proven? As a market breeder sometimes the best thing to do is breed to an unproven sire with a "proven" mare. It isn't wise to breed an unproven mare to an umproven sire. But if your mare has proven she can produce a quailty runner than why not breed at a decent price to a "HOT" unproven sire with an outstanding race record and female family?

Makes smart sense to me. people will pay big bucks for a hopeful sire.