Multiple choice...
Who is overpriced?
Who is the bargin?
Who is getting his job done?
Who should be doing better than he is?
Who is probably on his way out of Kentucky?
All the following stallions are standing in KY and all by the same sire with at least 4 crops on the ground.
A. $3.5k -- 126 FoRA, 77 Starters (61%), 45 Wnrs (36%, 58% wnrs/strs), 0 SWnrs, AEI 0.85, CI 1.09
B. $25k -- 151 FoRA, 57 Starters (38%), 22 Wnrs (15%, 39% wnrs/strs), 3 (2%) SWnrs, AEI 1.49, CI 2.39
C. $30k -- 167 FoRA, 97 Starters (58%), 67 Wnrs (40%, 69% wnrs/strs), 7 (4%) SWnrs, AEI 1.67, CI 1.07
D. $80k -- 277 FoRA, 195 Starters (70%), 128 Wnrs (46%, 65% wnrs/strs), 20 (7%) SWnrs, AEI 2.27, CI 3.25
E. $12.5k -- 104 FoRA, 54 Starters (52%), 28 Wnrs (27%, 52% wnrs/strs), 2 (2%) SWnrs, AEI 1.69, CI 1.46
Pop Quiz
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
Without looking at a stallion register, any bets that D. is Pulpit? OK record on the stats, but no bargain at $80K unless you're breeding for the sale ring; he should be doing better with the quality of mares he's been getting.
If A's still in KY, he won't be long.
B should be doing better given the class of mares he's been getting. Given his production to date, he's overpriced. Could still be pretty early in his stud career, so percentage of winners would be affected by relatively large number of unraced juvies.
C is moving up his mares nicely. Assuming he's also a young stallion with only a couple of crops to race, his percentage of winners from foals should improve.
E also looks like a young sire's profile. He's on the edge, could go either way. Assuming this is his first crop to race, much will depend on whether his progeny are likely to improve with age.
Now let's see how much egg I have on my face.
If A's still in KY, he won't be long.
B should be doing better given the class of mares he's been getting. Given his production to date, he's overpriced. Could still be pretty early in his stud career, so percentage of winners would be affected by relatively large number of unraced juvies.
C is moving up his mares nicely. Assuming he's also a young stallion with only a couple of crops to race, his percentage of winners from foals should improve.
E also looks like a young sire's profile. He's on the edge, could go either way. Assuming this is his first crop to race, much will depend on whether his progeny are likely to improve with age.
Now let's see how much egg I have on my face.
"A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher...You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse." C. S. Lewis
Mahubah, bet I get more egg than you 
Who's overpriced? B at $25,000 would be my first choice simply due to the really bad percentages on starters and winners and the fact that he's dragging his mares down badly. D is an offender also dragging his mares down slightly more than B, but at least he's getting more of them to the track, but that may be because he's has more crops to race than B.
Who's the bargain? C improves his mares the most and gets a fair percent of starters and winners from foals. E may not be a bad value at $12,500 depending on his age.
Who is getting his job done? C and E are providing good value to breeders and D is doing what that price range wants him to do, get stakes winners.
Who should be doing better than he is? B is getting the type of mares that he should be showing something at this point.
Who is on his way out of Kentucky? I cheated and looked
A will probably stay in KY because he's typical of that farm's stallions. I could see E being shipped out though cause he's just not flashy enough (although I think he's a useful enough horse).
Actually that was a pretty interesting exercise. I didn't look until after answering all but the last question (because I had an idea of who A was and if I was right he probably wasn't going anywhere soon) and had I looked beforehand there was one stallion I was kind of biased against. That really would have messed up my answers.
Good puzzle Sam!
Who's overpriced? B at $25,000 would be my first choice simply due to the really bad percentages on starters and winners and the fact that he's dragging his mares down badly. D is an offender also dragging his mares down slightly more than B, but at least he's getting more of them to the track, but that may be because he's has more crops to race than B.
Who's the bargain? C improves his mares the most and gets a fair percent of starters and winners from foals. E may not be a bad value at $12,500 depending on his age.
Who is getting his job done? C and E are providing good value to breeders and D is doing what that price range wants him to do, get stakes winners.
Who should be doing better than he is? B is getting the type of mares that he should be showing something at this point.
Who is on his way out of Kentucky? I cheated and looked
A will probably stay in KY because he's typical of that farm's stallions. I could see E being shipped out though cause he's just not flashy enough (although I think he's a useful enough horse).
Actually that was a pretty interesting exercise. I didn't look until after answering all but the last question (because I had an idea of who A was and if I was right he probably wasn't going anywhere soon) and had I looked beforehand there was one stallion I was kind of biased against. That really would have messed up my answers.
Good puzzle Sam!
I don't have low self-esteem. I have low esteem for everyone else. ~ Daria
Okay, since it doesn't look like anyone else is going to offer their thoughts..
A. General Royal
B. Golden Missile
C. Malibu Moon
D. Pulpit
E. Stephen Got Even
General Royal is a nice breed-to-race blue collar performer. Not every stallion can be a superstar. Someone needs to sire the bread and butter horses
If it were anyone other than Stronach, I have a feeling Golden Missile would already be out of KY. As it is, I still think he may wind up in FL before too long.
Malibu Moon's numbers should improve, the big thing that works in his favour is how much he moves up his mares. It makes up for his lack of starters. The good thing is that IF they start, they are likely to win. The stakes winners should come.
I really just don't see how they can justify $80k for Pulpit based on his numbers. $50k maybe, but not $80.
Actually none of these guys have numbers I like (I tend to look for 75% starters/50% winners/10% stakes winner and a stud who improves his mares) but at least Pulpit is close. What absolutely kills him IMO is his AEI/CI ratio. He's killing those mares. I'd be willing to be the only reason his numbers are as good as they are is because of the mares he's seen. I'm sure if his CI was down around the 1.50 mark like Malibu Moon, he wouldn't have a single stake horse to his name. He's not getting it done, his mares are doing all the work for him.
I'm not sure what to make of Stephen Got Even. He's not something who I would have pegged as a sire in the first place and am kind of surprised he wound up at one of the bigger farms to start.
A. General Royal
B. Golden Missile
C. Malibu Moon
D. Pulpit
E. Stephen Got Even
General Royal is a nice breed-to-race blue collar performer. Not every stallion can be a superstar. Someone needs to sire the bread and butter horses
If it were anyone other than Stronach, I have a feeling Golden Missile would already be out of KY. As it is, I still think he may wind up in FL before too long.
Malibu Moon's numbers should improve, the big thing that works in his favour is how much he moves up his mares. It makes up for his lack of starters. The good thing is that IF they start, they are likely to win. The stakes winners should come.
I really just don't see how they can justify $80k for Pulpit based on his numbers. $50k maybe, but not $80.
Actually none of these guys have numbers I like (I tend to look for 75% starters/50% winners/10% stakes winner and a stud who improves his mares) but at least Pulpit is close. What absolutely kills him IMO is his AEI/CI ratio. He's killing those mares. I'd be willing to be the only reason his numbers are as good as they are is because of the mares he's seen. I'm sure if his CI was down around the 1.50 mark like Malibu Moon, he wouldn't have a single stake horse to his name. He's not getting it done, his mares are doing all the work for him.
I'm not sure what to make of Stephen Got Even. He's not something who I would have pegged as a sire in the first place and am kind of surprised he wound up at one of the bigger farms to start.
Malibu Moon was the one I've always had an issue with although his numbers are somewhat better than I expected. I always thought the last stud fee jump was hasty. At $17,500, he was better priced. I like the 75% 50% 10% standard also and none of those stallions match that. Stephen Got Even is actually my favorite of the group. I think he'll be a nice solid breed to race sire who occasionally gets some horses.
I don't have low self-esteem. I have low esteem for everyone else. ~ Daria
austique wrote:Malibu Moon was the one I've always had an issue with although his numbers are somewhat better than I expected. I always thought the last stud fee jump was hasty. At $17,500, he was better priced. I like the 75% 50% 10% standard also and none of those stallions match that. Stephen Got Even is actually my favorite of the group. I think he'll be a nice solid breed to race sire who occasionally gets some horses.
Pulpit has always been an overhyped pig in my mind, though I will begrudgingly admit he's doing okay (and better now than he was a few years ago). I still think he is and always has been overpriced though.
Stephen Got Even strikes me as a horse who is crying out for a regional market. Truthfully, I would think he would be a perfect replacement for the Texas(?, Maybe Oklahoma .. you know who I'm talking about, right?) Slew son who died recently (want to say Slewicide ... Slewdledoo is the one still alive in WA, right? ALWAYS want to flip those two).
I mentioned this once here before. I guess noone noticed. There is a graded stakes placed, full-brother to Slewacide, who still stands in Oklahoma.
It's not his fault he wasn't campaigned, therefore never gaining the recognition, IMO, that Slewacide had.
For the record, Slewacide was eutahnized on September 2, 2000, at the age of 20.
It's not his fault he wasn't campaigned, therefore never gaining the recognition, IMO, that Slewacide had.
For the record, Slewacide was eutahnized on September 2, 2000, at the age of 20.