What stallion in the next 15 to 20 years, will be the next great sire? Why?
p.s. How is the AEI figured out?
Next Great Sire?
Moderators: Roguelet, WaveMaster, madelyn
I wouldn't speculate on who the next great sire will be over the next 15 to 20 years, he'll let us know when he arrives.
As for AEI, it is more or less calculated by determining the average earnings for all horses in NA for a given year. That number is then equated to 1.00. A horse that earns 90% of the average earnings for that year would then be assigned 0.90 for that year. Therefore you can basically read AEI as a percentage of average (expressed as a decimal rather than a percentage). The reason that these statistics are generated is that it allows for a reasonable comparison of stallions between years since purse inflation is automatically adjusted. Therefore you can compare the AEI of Bold Ruler to the AEI of Storm Cat and you don't worry that Bold Ruler's foals were running for much smaller purses.
As for AEI, it is more or less calculated by determining the average earnings for all horses in NA for a given year. That number is then equated to 1.00. A horse that earns 90% of the average earnings for that year would then be assigned 0.90 for that year. Therefore you can basically read AEI as a percentage of average (expressed as a decimal rather than a percentage). The reason that these statistics are generated is that it allows for a reasonable comparison of stallions between years since purse inflation is automatically adjusted. Therefore you can compare the AEI of Bold Ruler to the AEI of Storm Cat and you don't worry that Bold Ruler's foals were running for much smaller purses.
I would only add to Dave's clear explanation that comparisons of older vs. younger stallions using AEI and CI can yield misleading results. Obviously, younger stallions don't have the number of racehorses competing as older horses. Their CI's may be very high (if they were bred to top class mares early on), but their AEI simply may have the number of racing age foals as an older stallion might. Also, stallions whose progeny are late bloomers are at a distinct diasdvantage when compared to more precocious sires. Finally, younger stallions who have produced a few good horses from small crops often have highly elevated AEI's, and are hard to compare with stallions who have sired hundreds of racing age foals.
Who's the better sire (statistically)?
FORESTRY---3 crops--151 foals---7% SW---2.28 AEI---3.51 CI
ARCH--4 crops---172 foals---6% SW---1.72 AEI---2.15 CI
MALIBU MOON--3 crops---156 foals----3% SW----1.77 AEI---1.10 CI
NORTHERN AFLEET---4 crops--173 foals--5% SW--2.13 AEI--1.21 CI
TEJANO RUN---5 crops---167 foals---3% SW---1.79 AEI--1.05 SI
COZZENE---16 crops---752 foals---9% SW---2.57 AEI---1.80 CI
Statistically (i.e. historically) you'd have to say Cozzene is the best sire here. But is a stallion's history a good way to evaluate your short list of mating choices? Without knocking Cozzene in the slightest (he's a real favorite of mine), is it fair to compare the combined results of his 16 foal crops against a horse like Northern Afleet, who has only had four crops to race, and has improved his mares by roughly 75%? Or to Malibu Moon, who has sired several top class horses from relatively pedestrian mares?
I think sometimes we rely too heavily on these methods of comparison to make our breeding decisions. It's really important to factor into these numbers the answers to such questions as, "is this stallion more likely to produce early runners or later developers, and has this fact impacted his AEI to date?" Should a precocious stallion like Forestry, or Swiss Yodeler, or most of the 'Valid' horses be expected to improve upon his overall record as his foals mature, or should more weight be given to horses like Arch and Tejano Run whose foals are proving that they need more time to come to hand?
And as for my choice of sires who will dominate in the next 10-15 years, I will offer A.P. INDY and his son MINESHAFT. I think the Storm Cat line for all its current sizzle will prove itself too unsound and problematic to last. JMO
Who's the better sire (statistically)?
FORESTRY---3 crops--151 foals---7% SW---2.28 AEI---3.51 CI
ARCH--4 crops---172 foals---6% SW---1.72 AEI---2.15 CI
MALIBU MOON--3 crops---156 foals----3% SW----1.77 AEI---1.10 CI
NORTHERN AFLEET---4 crops--173 foals--5% SW--2.13 AEI--1.21 CI
TEJANO RUN---5 crops---167 foals---3% SW---1.79 AEI--1.05 SI
COZZENE---16 crops---752 foals---9% SW---2.57 AEI---1.80 CI
Statistically (i.e. historically) you'd have to say Cozzene is the best sire here. But is a stallion's history a good way to evaluate your short list of mating choices? Without knocking Cozzene in the slightest (he's a real favorite of mine), is it fair to compare the combined results of his 16 foal crops against a horse like Northern Afleet, who has only had four crops to race, and has improved his mares by roughly 75%? Or to Malibu Moon, who has sired several top class horses from relatively pedestrian mares?
I think sometimes we rely too heavily on these methods of comparison to make our breeding decisions. It's really important to factor into these numbers the answers to such questions as, "is this stallion more likely to produce early runners or later developers, and has this fact impacted his AEI to date?" Should a precocious stallion like Forestry, or Swiss Yodeler, or most of the 'Valid' horses be expected to improve upon his overall record as his foals mature, or should more weight be given to horses like Arch and Tejano Run whose foals are proving that they need more time to come to hand?
And as for my choice of sires who will dominate in the next 10-15 years, I will offer A.P. INDY and his son MINESHAFT. I think the Storm Cat line for all its current sizzle will prove itself too unsound and problematic to last. JMO
Mineshaft certainly should do well, with the mares he's gotten. However, I'm not so sure that the A.P. Indy's are any more sound than the Storm Cats. Take this weekend- while Declan's Moon was declared out of the Derby picture, the G1s of the weekend were taken by Storm Cats- Tarlow (Stormin Fever) won the Santa Something (Margarita?) and Sweet Catomine the SA Oaks. Bernstein had a couple of fillies run 1-2 in a Group 1 in Argentina, while Primary Suspect (Hennessy) won a graded stakes at Aqueduct and Old Forester (Forestry) won the Canadian Turf at Gulfstream. It seems to me like people are eagerly writing off the Storm Cat stallions, and they just keep performing. Most have had too large of books to have great stats at this young point in their careers, but they keep putting out (if a little inconsistently) high class runners. I feel like the Storm Cats have been hindered by their own initial hype and popularity- no matter how well they perform, people will always be disappointed.
hi ef
On the surface...your premise sounds somewhat reasonable...but it also seems clear that the perception of Storm Cat (as a sire-of-sires) may be negatively affected (at least to some extent) because he seems to have so many undeserving sons at stud. Possibly the only positive thing (or maybe negative is actually a better description) that can be said about them is that they are "intact." I suggest...GELD that kind and make them riding horses. They're probably sound enough for that...but (unfortunately) may lack the temperament.
All Things Considered...I suggest that many (if not most) Storm Cat stallions are to a degree...underachievers. Furthermore...I expect that Michael's description of "unsound and problematic" has to be taken seriously.
Obviously some of the Storm Cat sons (such as G1 winning Forestry...for example) have had respectable success at stud. Problem is that Forestry (as Michael pointed out in his AEI...CI stats) has been bred to an abundance of wonderful mares (year after year if I may add). With that in mind I ask...at a 2005 stud fee of $75,000 (raised from his previous stud fee of $50,000) where are his G1 winners...classic threats...superstar older horses ? hmmm
I suggest that a reasonably good case might be made for Forestry at $50,000...but at $75,000...Forestry has been elevated to the "unworthy" category (All Things Considered) and is now subject to scrutiny (like never before) and (sometimes harsh) criticism.
And I suggest that another Storm Cat son that could be harshly scrutinized (and/or criticized) when Ky breeders see for themselves what the overwhelming majority of his offspring look like...is Stormy Atlantic. I expect that the bloom could wilt quickly and fall off of that flower...sooner rather than later.
Sure a couple of Storm Cat sons may sire some greats or near-greats...it's possible that any registered thoroughbred horse (even the teaser) could do that. Even the all-but-ignored Ole Bob Bowers sired a truly GREAT one...Hall-of-Famer John Henry.
All Things Considered...I suggest that Storm Cat as a sire-of-sires has been nothing short of disappointing...and for the most part even his "better" sons seem to be underachievers (All Things Considered...including opportunity).
I believe that Storm Cat's most lasting mark on the breed (if any) might be his significance as a broodmare sire.
Storm Cat is a wonderul horse...but his sons at stud...now that's another story.
Respectfully
On the surface...your premise sounds somewhat reasonable...but it also seems clear that the perception of Storm Cat (as a sire-of-sires) may be negatively affected (at least to some extent) because he seems to have so many undeserving sons at stud. Possibly the only positive thing (or maybe negative is actually a better description) that can be said about them is that they are "intact." I suggest...GELD that kind and make them riding horses. They're probably sound enough for that...but (unfortunately) may lack the temperament.
All Things Considered...I suggest that many (if not most) Storm Cat stallions are to a degree...underachievers. Furthermore...I expect that Michael's description of "unsound and problematic" has to be taken seriously.
Obviously some of the Storm Cat sons (such as G1 winning Forestry...for example) have had respectable success at stud. Problem is that Forestry (as Michael pointed out in his AEI...CI stats) has been bred to an abundance of wonderful mares (year after year if I may add). With that in mind I ask...at a 2005 stud fee of $75,000 (raised from his previous stud fee of $50,000) where are his G1 winners...classic threats...superstar older horses ? hmmm
I suggest that a reasonably good case might be made for Forestry at $50,000...but at $75,000...Forestry has been elevated to the "unworthy" category (All Things Considered) and is now subject to scrutiny (like never before) and (sometimes harsh) criticism.
And I suggest that another Storm Cat son that could be harshly scrutinized (and/or criticized) when Ky breeders see for themselves what the overwhelming majority of his offspring look like...is Stormy Atlantic. I expect that the bloom could wilt quickly and fall off of that flower...sooner rather than later.
Sure a couple of Storm Cat sons may sire some greats or near-greats...it's possible that any registered thoroughbred horse (even the teaser) could do that. Even the all-but-ignored Ole Bob Bowers sired a truly GREAT one...Hall-of-Famer John Henry.
All Things Considered...I suggest that Storm Cat as a sire-of-sires has been nothing short of disappointing...and for the most part even his "better" sons seem to be underachievers (All Things Considered...including opportunity).
I believe that Storm Cat's most lasting mark on the breed (if any) might be his significance as a broodmare sire.
Storm Cat is a wonderul horse...but his sons at stud...now that's another story.
Respectfully
FOS,
I really do agree that most Storm Cats, even the best of them, are over-priced. The moment a Storm Cat has any kind of success, his stud fee is immediately hugely boosted. If he isn't in KY, he is immediately shipped there, his fee raised ridiculously. The examples are plentiful: Raising Forestry to 75K, or Giant's Causeway to 125K, or bringing Stormy Atlantic and Storm Creek immediately to KY from FL after their initial successes. Other examples include Forest Wildcat's brief foray at 60K, Tale of the Cat's time at 85K, and (potentially), Bernstein's immediate boost to 15K. I think that, in the long haul, stud managers have done these stallions a huge diservice- they have made them bad values at their present prices and locations, which overshadows the fact that many have performed well with less than phenomenal books of mares (Forestry and Giant's Causeway excluded, of course). The two Storm Cat stallions that stand out in my mind as absolute success stories are Storm Boot and Harlan, and I know that I doubtless feel this way because both were always reasonably priced and non-hyped stallions. Hype is a double-edged sword; stallion managers should wield that sword with care, because good results, under the glare of insane expectations, can look like crap.
I also agree that there are many crap Storm Cat stallions out there, but this phenomenon always happens with the dominant sires of the day- there are lots of not so great Mr. Prospectors, Danehills, and now A.P. Indy's that really just don't deserve to stand at stud. It happens with all the super fashionable sires of the period. Ultimately, the Storm Cat line will be caried on by only a few of his best sons, but there's no doubt in my mind that it will be carried on.
I don't understand this assumption that Storm Cat is going to be a great broodmare- to me, that is a much greater reach than his legacy as a sire of sires. He is an EXTREMELY hit and miss broodmare sire. We are 3.5 months into 2005, and he is the broodmare sire of ONE stakes winner so far this year- the Japanese G1SW Meisho Bowler. On the other hand, his sons have sired at least 22 stakes winners so far this year, some being among the best in the world (Grand Armee, Madcap Escapade, Tarlow, Forest Danger, etc). I know his sons have many more foals out there than his daughters, but 22:1 is a pretty big difference. While he is the broodmare sire of Speightstown, Buddha, and some others of note, he is the sire of sires of many, many times that number of equal or greater class. Again, I do realize that Storm Cat has many more paternal grandkids than maternal grandkids. I just don't understand the intense criticism regarding his record as sire of sires, when his present record as a broodmare sire is also still up in the air. Maybe it all comes down to hype- it's easy for hyped Storm Cat stallions to underperform under tremendous expectations and great scrutiny, but how can one hype broodmares? With less hype comes less scrutiny and, thus, less attention paid to disappointing results.
As for Forestry- I also think Forestry was a good buy at 50K and a not-so-good-buy-until-he-gets-a-G1SW-or-two at 75K. His present crop of 3 year olds hasn't yet shown the tremendous class of his now 4 year old first crop, but they have been later developing than perhaps was expected (though Forestry didn't even race at 2, so I'm not sure why they were expected to be precocious). As for not having any older stars- his first crop is barely 4! Two of them have won stakes so far this year, Deputy Storm a 6f sprint at Oaklawn, and Old Forester a 1 1/16T stake at GP. Forest Danger is just waiting to be a superstar, and Reforest is on her way back with Bobby Frankel. There is no doubt that Forestry's first crop was special (14% SWs from foals, 25% stakes horses from foals!). Now it's up to his next crops to help determine if Forestry is going to be one of the Storm Cats that will carry the line on.
I really do agree that most Storm Cats, even the best of them, are over-priced. The moment a Storm Cat has any kind of success, his stud fee is immediately hugely boosted. If he isn't in KY, he is immediately shipped there, his fee raised ridiculously. The examples are plentiful: Raising Forestry to 75K, or Giant's Causeway to 125K, or bringing Stormy Atlantic and Storm Creek immediately to KY from FL after their initial successes. Other examples include Forest Wildcat's brief foray at 60K, Tale of the Cat's time at 85K, and (potentially), Bernstein's immediate boost to 15K. I think that, in the long haul, stud managers have done these stallions a huge diservice- they have made them bad values at their present prices and locations, which overshadows the fact that many have performed well with less than phenomenal books of mares (Forestry and Giant's Causeway excluded, of course). The two Storm Cat stallions that stand out in my mind as absolute success stories are Storm Boot and Harlan, and I know that I doubtless feel this way because both were always reasonably priced and non-hyped stallions. Hype is a double-edged sword; stallion managers should wield that sword with care, because good results, under the glare of insane expectations, can look like crap.
I also agree that there are many crap Storm Cat stallions out there, but this phenomenon always happens with the dominant sires of the day- there are lots of not so great Mr. Prospectors, Danehills, and now A.P. Indy's that really just don't deserve to stand at stud. It happens with all the super fashionable sires of the period. Ultimately, the Storm Cat line will be caried on by only a few of his best sons, but there's no doubt in my mind that it will be carried on.
I don't understand this assumption that Storm Cat is going to be a great broodmare- to me, that is a much greater reach than his legacy as a sire of sires. He is an EXTREMELY hit and miss broodmare sire. We are 3.5 months into 2005, and he is the broodmare sire of ONE stakes winner so far this year- the Japanese G1SW Meisho Bowler. On the other hand, his sons have sired at least 22 stakes winners so far this year, some being among the best in the world (Grand Armee, Madcap Escapade, Tarlow, Forest Danger, etc). I know his sons have many more foals out there than his daughters, but 22:1 is a pretty big difference. While he is the broodmare sire of Speightstown, Buddha, and some others of note, he is the sire of sires of many, many times that number of equal or greater class. Again, I do realize that Storm Cat has many more paternal grandkids than maternal grandkids. I just don't understand the intense criticism regarding his record as sire of sires, when his present record as a broodmare sire is also still up in the air. Maybe it all comes down to hype- it's easy for hyped Storm Cat stallions to underperform under tremendous expectations and great scrutiny, but how can one hype broodmares? With less hype comes less scrutiny and, thus, less attention paid to disappointing results.
As for Forestry- I also think Forestry was a good buy at 50K and a not-so-good-buy-until-he-gets-a-G1SW-or-two at 75K. His present crop of 3 year olds hasn't yet shown the tremendous class of his now 4 year old first crop, but they have been later developing than perhaps was expected (though Forestry didn't even race at 2, so I'm not sure why they were expected to be precocious). As for not having any older stars- his first crop is barely 4! Two of them have won stakes so far this year, Deputy Storm a 6f sprint at Oaklawn, and Old Forester a 1 1/16T stake at GP. Forest Danger is just waiting to be a superstar, and Reforest is on her way back with Bobby Frankel. There is no doubt that Forestry's first crop was special (14% SWs from foals, 25% stakes horses from foals!). Now it's up to his next crops to help determine if Forestry is going to be one of the Storm Cats that will carry the line on.
" think that, in the long haul, stud managers have done these stallions a huge diservice- they have made them bad values at their present prices and locations, which overshadows the fact that many have performed well with less than phenomenal books of mares (Forestry and Giant's Causeway excluded, of course). The two Storm Cat stallions that stand out in my mind as absolute success stories are Storm Boot and Harlan, and I know that I doubtless feel this way because both were always reasonably priced and non-hyped stallions. Hype is a double-edged sword; stallion managers should wield that sword with care, because good results, under the glare of insane expectations, can look like crap."
With respect to the thoughts above: How could it be a diservice to the stallion, As long as the quality of the mares he covers remains strong and as long as the his book is full, how is raising the price a diservice? You raise the price when ever you can because of REAL demand. The farm manager probably saw the secondary market shares selling for well above the said fees and adjusted the stalions price to the secondary market.
As far as being a good value at 50k and not at 75k.. Please when you paying those #'s to have the opportunity to race a potential champion is 25k really significant. If you are in the business to breed and sell then maybe it matters, but not nearly as much as the next 18 months of results on the track. IF and its a BIG IF, Forestry gets 2 or 3 grade 1 or group 1 winners the 25k will mean absolutely NADA.
Stud fees 5k and under have a lot more relevance The mare and the expectations from such foals are not Graded wins.
Respectfully,
With respect to the thoughts above: How could it be a diservice to the stallion, As long as the quality of the mares he covers remains strong and as long as the his book is full, how is raising the price a diservice? You raise the price when ever you can because of REAL demand. The farm manager probably saw the secondary market shares selling for well above the said fees and adjusted the stalions price to the secondary market.
As far as being a good value at 50k and not at 75k.. Please when you paying those #'s to have the opportunity to race a potential champion is 25k really significant. If you are in the business to breed and sell then maybe it matters, but not nearly as much as the next 18 months of results on the track. IF and its a BIG IF, Forestry gets 2 or 3 grade 1 or group 1 winners the 25k will mean absolutely NADA.
Stud fees 5k and under have a lot more relevance The mare and the expectations from such foals are not Graded wins.
Respectfully,
freddymo wrote: As far as being a good value at 50k and not at 75k.. Please when you paying those #'s to have the opportunity to race a potential champion is 25k really significant. If you are in the business to breed and sell then maybe it matters, but not nearly as much as the next 18 months of results on the track. IF and its a BIG IF, Forestry gets 2 or 3 grade 1 or group 1 winners the 25k will mean absolutely NADA.
I agree with ef that that 25K does make a big difference. I'm one of the biggest Forestry supporters around. I have a filly from his second crop that I adore (the filly in my avatar) and even I think he's currently overpriced. I would love to send a mare to him but right now he simply isn't a good value for the money.
You're right to say "IF he gets 2 or 3 grade 1 or group 1 winners the 25k will mean absolutely NADA" but that's a big IF. The time to raise his stud fee (by 50%) should have been after he accomplished that, not before.
hi ef
As always...some very good points you make. And let's not forget the title of this thread "Next Great Sire?" The key word is GREAT...and that's a very big order to fill.
You wrote "I don't understand this assumption that Storm Cat is going to be a great broodmare-(sire)..."
With that in mind...please understand that the description "broodmare-sire" was intended to include all aspects of a broodmare sire...not the least of which is a broodmare-sire of sires. Possibly that might add some clarity to my suggestion re: Storm Cat's legacy. Examples: The broodmare-sire of both Sky Mesa and Speightstown (for starters) is Storm Cat...as each is out of a Storm Cat daughter.
I suggest that if a successful sire (or sires) that is/are out of Storm Cat daughter(s) (as both examples Sky Mesa and Speightstown are) is/are ultimately more "breed-shaping" and remarkable than a direct son (or sons) of Storm Cat is/are (All Things Considered)...I would suggest that Storm Cat's daughter(s) may be his "great" legacy...and not his son(s). Very simply...his daughters may have more "great" influence on the breed (All Things Considered) than his sons.
And it is also possible that Storm Cat will ultimately not be considered GREAT in any category...just a very good sire of race horses that had an abundance of sons and daughters that overall did a lot of things...none of which (All Things Considered) might be deemed as great (as breeding-shaping...remarkably influential stock).
As of now I do not see any son of Storm Cat emerging as a breed-shaping...remarkable influence...or "Next Great Sire"...and it is abundantly clear that Storm Cat has had more than his fair share (and that may be a gross understatement) of opportunities to do so. That is not to say he will not (ultimately) have a GREAT son or sons...but the results thus far have certainly not sent a clear signal that he has arrived...at least not yet.
I suggest that before a sire is even considered as possibly "great"...we must first see with our own eyes (and not be persuaded and/or misguided and/or have our vision blurred as a result of hype or spin) that his level of accomplishment (All Things Considered) is related to his prowess...and not solely (or even to a large degree) to the opportunity afforded him.
When a sire is truly GREAT...is it fair to suggest that he could have probably been bred to rather average or ordinary stock (at least at the outset) and elevated a significant portion of the resultant foals (both fillies and colts) to heights as runners (on turf and dirt...short and long) and/or breeding stock (as sires and/or broodmares) well beyond hopes...dreams...or expectations. When those results are clear and consisistent is it not reasonable to expect that a sires "book" will improve...and will continue to do so as the sire's abilities and accomplishments become clearer and clearer ?
I do not see such a son of Strom Cat out there doing this...at least not yet. And as we all know some of his sons started their careers in the breeding shed with the benefit of exceptional books (and that may be an understatement) and never had to overcome the issues related to average (or ordinary) books...that some stallions started with at the outset of their career...but despite that when on to true GREATNESS (example : Mr. Prospector).
Needless to say...the heat is on even higher (and rightfully so)...on those young stallions (whether sons of Storm Cat or not) that are handed the creme-de-la-creme (and huge volume) of mares on a silver platter...such as Giant's Causeway (for example). And Forestry's books have been excellent (to exceptional) overall also.
As a matter of note...another highly successful sire (that comes to mind) that started at the opposite end of the spectrum of opportunities (as compared to horses like Giant's Causeway and Forestry) was Roberto's son Kris S. He clearly started at the bottom...and overcame huge adversity and obstacles. His opportunities were almost non-existent (and he was not even the beneficiary of self-serving spin or hype...no one would have listened anyway) yet his prowess prevailed.
Moving on (and getting back to Storm Cat)...I agree with you "ef" that Storm Boot is a nice horse and certainly worthy (if I may add) of a more generous description than underachiever.
You know from my comments that I agree totally with you and LSB re: the increase by $25k of Forestry's stud fee (from $50,000 to $75,000) and as LSB wrote "...that that 25K does make a big difference."
As freddymo wrote "IF and its a BIG IF, Forestry gets 2 or 3 grade 1 or group 1 winners the 25k will mean absolutely NADA."
If Forestry accomplishes that within some reasonable time-frame it's hard to disagree that "the 25k will mean absolutely NADA." But Forestry does not even have one G1 winner yet (and he's already got 4-year-olds)...and the bump in his stud fee for 2005 (from $50,000 to $75,000) seems hardly justified At This Time. His shortcomings (whatever they may or may not be) are certainly not for lack of opportunity.
And as I questioned earlier "...where are (Forestry's) G1 winners...classic threats...super-star older horses ? hmmm "
Best to you.
Respectfully
As always...some very good points you make. And let's not forget the title of this thread "Next Great Sire?" The key word is GREAT...and that's a very big order to fill.
You wrote "I don't understand this assumption that Storm Cat is going to be a great broodmare-(sire)..."
With that in mind...please understand that the description "broodmare-sire" was intended to include all aspects of a broodmare sire...not the least of which is a broodmare-sire of sires. Possibly that might add some clarity to my suggestion re: Storm Cat's legacy. Examples: The broodmare-sire of both Sky Mesa and Speightstown (for starters) is Storm Cat...as each is out of a Storm Cat daughter.
I suggest that if a successful sire (or sires) that is/are out of Storm Cat daughter(s) (as both examples Sky Mesa and Speightstown are) is/are ultimately more "breed-shaping" and remarkable than a direct son (or sons) of Storm Cat is/are (All Things Considered)...I would suggest that Storm Cat's daughter(s) may be his "great" legacy...and not his son(s). Very simply...his daughters may have more "great" influence on the breed (All Things Considered) than his sons.
And it is also possible that Storm Cat will ultimately not be considered GREAT in any category...just a very good sire of race horses that had an abundance of sons and daughters that overall did a lot of things...none of which (All Things Considered) might be deemed as great (as breeding-shaping...remarkably influential stock).
As of now I do not see any son of Storm Cat emerging as a breed-shaping...remarkable influence...or "Next Great Sire"...and it is abundantly clear that Storm Cat has had more than his fair share (and that may be a gross understatement) of opportunities to do so. That is not to say he will not (ultimately) have a GREAT son or sons...but the results thus far have certainly not sent a clear signal that he has arrived...at least not yet.
I suggest that before a sire is even considered as possibly "great"...we must first see with our own eyes (and not be persuaded and/or misguided and/or have our vision blurred as a result of hype or spin) that his level of accomplishment (All Things Considered) is related to his prowess...and not solely (or even to a large degree) to the opportunity afforded him.
When a sire is truly GREAT...is it fair to suggest that he could have probably been bred to rather average or ordinary stock (at least at the outset) and elevated a significant portion of the resultant foals (both fillies and colts) to heights as runners (on turf and dirt...short and long) and/or breeding stock (as sires and/or broodmares) well beyond hopes...dreams...or expectations. When those results are clear and consisistent is it not reasonable to expect that a sires "book" will improve...and will continue to do so as the sire's abilities and accomplishments become clearer and clearer ?
I do not see such a son of Strom Cat out there doing this...at least not yet. And as we all know some of his sons started their careers in the breeding shed with the benefit of exceptional books (and that may be an understatement) and never had to overcome the issues related to average (or ordinary) books...that some stallions started with at the outset of their career...but despite that when on to true GREATNESS (example : Mr. Prospector).
Needless to say...the heat is on even higher (and rightfully so)...on those young stallions (whether sons of Storm Cat or not) that are handed the creme-de-la-creme (and huge volume) of mares on a silver platter...such as Giant's Causeway (for example). And Forestry's books have been excellent (to exceptional) overall also.
As a matter of note...another highly successful sire (that comes to mind) that started at the opposite end of the spectrum of opportunities (as compared to horses like Giant's Causeway and Forestry) was Roberto's son Kris S. He clearly started at the bottom...and overcame huge adversity and obstacles. His opportunities were almost non-existent (and he was not even the beneficiary of self-serving spin or hype...no one would have listened anyway) yet his prowess prevailed.
Moving on (and getting back to Storm Cat)...I agree with you "ef" that Storm Boot is a nice horse and certainly worthy (if I may add) of a more generous description than underachiever.
You know from my comments that I agree totally with you and LSB re: the increase by $25k of Forestry's stud fee (from $50,000 to $75,000) and as LSB wrote "...that that 25K does make a big difference."
As freddymo wrote "IF and its a BIG IF, Forestry gets 2 or 3 grade 1 or group 1 winners the 25k will mean absolutely NADA."
If Forestry accomplishes that within some reasonable time-frame it's hard to disagree that "the 25k will mean absolutely NADA." But Forestry does not even have one G1 winner yet (and he's already got 4-year-olds)...and the bump in his stud fee for 2005 (from $50,000 to $75,000) seems hardly justified At This Time. His shortcomings (whatever they may or may not be) are certainly not for lack of opportunity.
And as I questioned earlier "...where are (Forestry's) G1 winners...classic threats...super-star older horses ? hmmm "
Best to you.
Respectfully
-
st. louis kid
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 8:56 pm
CI is Comparative Index and is calculated in somewhat the same way (converting dollars earned to a ratio of the average earnings for the year) but is calculated from the production of the mare when she was bred to different stallions than the one in question. Therefore if a stallions AEI is higher than the CI for his book of mares, then his foals are running better than their half siblings did, and the stallion is said to be improving his mares. If his AEI is lower than the CI for his book of mares then his foals are not doing as well as their half siblings and a stallion is downgrading his mares. As Michael indicated these are just statistics and although mostly accurate they can be misleading, particularly with small sample sizes, and also can be manipulated if a stallion manager so wishes. They are a useful tool, but they don't tell the whole story.
Hello - this is my first reply - Have you heard of Redoute's Choice?
He's in Australia - By Danehill from Shantha's Choice by Lunchtime.
From the famous Best In Show family - he offers the best of the Danzig/Bletchingly cross.
He Sired Stratum, who won the rich Golden Slipper 2yo Gr1 stakes in Sydney Australia yesterday.
He's the logical successor to Danehill "down under".
I hope he doesn't shuttle as he serves about 130 mares in the Hunter Valley
I hope that Afleet Alex will continue on as a brilliant 3yo
He's in Australia - By Danehill from Shantha's Choice by Lunchtime.
From the famous Best In Show family - he offers the best of the Danzig/Bletchingly cross.
He Sired Stratum, who won the rich Golden Slipper 2yo Gr1 stakes in Sydney Australia yesterday.
He's the logical successor to Danehill "down under".
I hope he doesn't shuttle as he serves about 130 mares in the Hunter Valley
I hope that Afleet Alex will continue on as a brilliant 3yo
Sir Malcolm
El Prado
El Prado is a great sire but with better mares he should only get better. He has not got great mares like those bred to Fusaichi Pegasus. Saint Ballado is showing greatness but unfortunately is not around anymore. I would say El Prado is the next great sire because he can get the big horse like Kitten's Joy and Medaglia D'oro and his big horses are not out of great mares like a Toussaud or Primal Force.
Keith
Keith