I have a question? Who is the WORST Stallion you know?

[brogers]

Saint Ballado is going to be remembered more of a great sire of A (as in one) dam than a great sire.

Time will tell if he is considered a great but I'd sure love to have a stallion that started at $3,500 and sired 68 stakes winners at a rate of 9% SW to FOALS, had an AEI of 2.15 off a CI of 1.99, finished his career standing at $125,000 and sired horses like Ashado, Saint Liam, Sister Act, etc....

[Rokeby Forever]

Anyway, my point was not to compare the groups but just to point out that stallions that start from the bottom and make their way up to the top (like Kris S. and Saint Ballado), especially those who start their careers in regional programs, can often suffer when their first sons go to stud as these sons are out of less than stellar female lines. Later in their careers when they get better mares and get a good son, they are the ones that invariably keep the "sireline" going (like Arch and Dr. Fong).

How would you apply that to Valid Appeal? He was, for the most part, bred to Ocala broodmares throughout his career, and yet, several early sons and later sons had/have success for the opportunities afforded.

[Maven]

How do I degrade a stallion? I offer stats to back up my reasoning...if some people don't like actual stats, there's not much I can do about it.

The stats you supply are quite significant, but the discussion is about value. Not age, number of crops, or overall foals of racing age. Strictly, it's about what have the racing offspring done. And the Brisnet stats support that Evansville Slew is a better value (IMO, at least).

I can't believe I'm discussing and arguing over $3,500 stallions. LMAO!!!!

Sorry to hear about your filly....much better luck next time!

But you're not using the stats. You're using only the numbers that help your argument.

And if you're talking value, then age, number of crops, and overall foals of racing age are some of the MOST important things to look at! It's the tell of class and the ability of a regional stallion to be able to make it in the Kentucky ranks!

[Maven]

Anyway, my point was not to compare the groups but just to point out that stallions that start from the bottom and make their way up to the top (like Kris S. and Saint Ballado), especially those who start their careers in regional programs, can often suffer when their first sons go to stud as these sons are out of less than stellar female lines. Later in their careers when they get better mares and get a good son, they are the ones that invariably keep the "sireline" going (like Arch and Dr. Fong).

How would you apply that to Valid Appeal? He was, for the most part, bred to Ocala broodmares throughout his career, and yet, several early sons and later sons had/have success for the opportunities afforded.

Why would anyone compare Valid Appeal to Kris S. or Saint Ballado? The only thing in common is they all made success of themselves starting in Florida.

Also, I would say the stallion market was a lot different when Valid Appeal was at the height of his career. He was also getting the very best of what Florida had to offer and had a great breeding mind behind his success.

Furthermore, Florida has always bred for speed, while Kris S. and Saint Ballado were more two turn producing stallions. So, of course Valid Appeal sons and daughters would find a more comfortable niche in Florida than say descendants of Kris S. Wouldn't you think?

Valid Appeal is one of my all-time favorite stallions, but it's more like a case of Sunday Silence being a big fish in a small pond, than a super stallion who was shunned by Kentucky. He certainly deserves all the respect in the world, but asking for a comparison to Kris S. or Saint Ballado is apples and oranges to me.

[Sam]

Yes but all the Kris S. horses were G1 winners and were given a hell of a lot more opportunity than the Saint Ballado's.

That's arguable, at least in Evening Kris' case and Kissin Kris' to some degree.

[Rokeby Forever]

Isn't the AEI an excellent indicator of value? Isnt it a statistic that is strictly about what the racing offspring have done? So.....why don't you use it in comparing these 2 stallions? You use the CI, why not the AEI?

CI is a judge of broodmares, agreed. AEI can be skewed by one or two successful offspring. What is Elusive Quality's AEI is you subtract Smarty Jones? Yes, SJ was was fast and talented, but what if he bowed as an early two year old? Who's to say that similar offspring of other stallions haven't made it to the races?

AEI also does not take into account breeding nicks. Suppose one nick produces a very high AEI for a stallion, and one produces a weak AEI. Is it broken out? No...it's a composite. If a stallion is bred to only one or two nicks (let's just suppose) and they're very successful, he'll have a high AEI. But when bred to a full book of mares of all shapes and sizes, it'll decrease proportionately. So, what does it tell us?

When we get to the high echelon stallions, AEI never matters. Detractors will say that if a book has a composite 3.80 CI, it's almost impossible for a stallion to match it. And, that's true.

If anything, I'd sooner follow a moving average of AEI. Suppose a stallion hasa banner first year (like a Posse). Then, the stallion has a three year slump, presumably with stronger mares. The high AEI will be mixed in with the overall AEI...why isn't it broken out year to year?

There are more arguments against it. But, I think those are the most relevant.

[halo]

Isn't the AEI an excellent indicator of value? Isnt it a statistic that is strictly about what the racing offspring have done? So.....why don't you use it in comparing these 2 stallions? You use the CI, why not the AEI?

CI is a judge of broodmares, agreed. AEI can be skewed by one or two successful offspring. What is Elusive Quality's AEI is you subtract Smarty Jones? Yes, SJ was was fast and talented, but what if he bowed as an early two year old? Who's to say that similar offspring of other stallions haven't made it to the races?

AEI also does not take into account breeding nicks. Suppose one nick produces a very high AEI for a stallion, and one produces a weak AEI. Is it broken out? No...it's a composite. If a stallion is bred to only one or two nicks (let's just suppose) and they're very successful, he'll have a high AEI. But when bred to a full book of mares of all shapes and sizes, it'll decrease proportionately. So, what does it tell us?

When we get to the high echelon stallions, AEI never matters. Detractors will say that if a book has a composite 3.80 CI, it's almost impossible for a stallion to match it. And, that's true.

If anything, I'd sooner follow a moving average of AEI. Suppose a stallion hasa banner first year (like a Posse). Then, the stallion has a three year slump, presumably with stronger mares. The high AEI will be mixed in with the overall AEI...why isn't it broken out year to year?

There are more arguments against it. But, I think those are the most relevant.

You can't have it both ways. You use the average earnings/runner as a statistic on your side....can it not also be skewed if theres one Smarty Jones type runner? We aren't talking about any Smarty Jones type runners with these 2 horses. You cant use average earnings per runner in your argument and then say the AEI can be skewed with one or two successful runners. And what the hell does breeding nicks have to do with this? Thats exactly why you use figures like this, to find the AVERAGE, whether with the AEI or with the average earnings per runner. I think youre stretching here...

And I dont understand your argument with Posse as an example , if he has a slump for several years with better mares, his AEI will go down and his CI will go up. A very significant statistic, I think.

[FOS]

hi Maven

Furthermore, Florida has always bred for speed, while Kris S. and Saint Ballado were more two turn producing stallions.

How about What a Pleasure (who stood at Waldemar Farm, near Ocala)...he sired a pretty-nice caliber two-turn horse...don't ya think? Examples: Foolish Pleasure, Honest Pleasure and For the Moment.

Respectfully

[Maven]

And Silver Buck sired Silver Charm. That doesn't mean Florida isn't geared for speed and speed stallions are better fits for the majority of the mare population.

[Rokeby Forever]

You can't have it both ways. You use the average earnings/runner as a statistic on your side....can it not also be skewed if theres one Smarty Jones type runner? We aren't talking about any Smarty Jones type runners with these 2 horses. You cant use average earnings per runner in your argument and then say the AEI can be skewed with one or two successful runners. And what the hell does breeding nicks have to do with this? Thats exactly why you use figures like this, to find the AVERAGE, whether with the AEI or with the average earnings per runner. I think youre stretching here...

I never wrote that. I prefer to use the median earnings per runner - the 50% point between runners above it and runners below it. Using median earnings, Smarty Jones has a minimal effect on Elusive Quality offspring stats. One or two "big" horses can't skew a median.

Note that I make the comparison in my original argument: Evansville Slew's median is $22,443, and SSS's median is $18,042. That's not a made up number...it comes from Brisnet. Toss it and turn it any way you want, but that's the way it is.

What do nicks have to do with it? That's exactly what's wrong with breeding today. Suppose a sire has an excellent nick going for him, but it's with a certain type ofcheap mare - the sire owner will probably reject the cheaper mares if ones with more value are available, no matter how they're bred (higher book value). That's why we see high priced failures....if a mare throws a Grade 1 winner by a lesser stallion, the mare owner will immediately look to breed her to a high end stallion, rather than breeding her back to the stallion that was successful. It makes no sense.

Take any stallion - if you look at his nick patterns, you'll see successful ones and not so successful ones. The AEI doesn't break it out....successful nicks are combined with complete failure nicks. Having an "average" says nothing - what works and what doesn't?

To say that a sire has a .4 differential of AEI/CI to a .3 differential of another sire says nothing. Maybe the lesser one has been bred to more unsuccessful nicks - with can't they be separated out from the successful ones? Using AEI alone, I don't know what sire line is successful with my mare and what one isn't...the .1 differential between the two sires means squat.

I can't help if you see this point as "stretching."

[Rokeby Forever]

Why would anyone compare Valid Appeal to Kris S. or Saint Ballado? The only thing in common is they all made success of themselves starting in Florida.

Our good friend Brogers wrote:

....especially those who start their careers in regional programs, can often suffer when their first sons go to stud as these sons are out of less than stellar female lines. Later in their careers when they get better mares and get a good son, they are the ones that invariably keep the "sireline" going (like Arch and Dr. Fong).

Valid Appeal stayed in Florida (regional market) and he never suffered when his first sons went to stud - some even went on to help keep the "sireline" going. His sires (early and late) were never afforded much of a "big" chance, but many had offspring that excelled beyond the regional markets they were bred in. In Valid Appeal's case, I don't think his early sons at stud held him back, as is argued in the case of Saint Ballado - Valid Appeal didn't need a bluehen KY mare to foal a successful stallion to carry on his sire line.

The one thing I always hated about Mockingbird breds was that I always confused their names. A foal might be named, "Valid And Truthful," and a full sib would be named "Truthful and Valid." Grrr!!!!