Vindication

[George William Smith]

Geez, Rokeby, You sure are hard to defend

All your questions were answered, almost point by point in the link I gave you and the others in my article on Vindication.

So either you are trying to help me get people to read the article by playing dumb...
or you did not even bother to read the article...

or the article was so boring you couldn't get past the first few pages in which case I'll take the blame.

Are you sure you aren't a main-stream media guy. All agenda, no fact checking.

Oh wait, maybe you are just a guy who throws in a few tidbits of fact and immerses it in so much agenda everybody just chases their tail.

[Georgerz]

There is hardly a thread that doesn't get hijacked to bash either a trainer or a stallion. It's getting old and boring.

[Rokeby Forever]

George,

Your article does answer the Queenie Cat question at the very bottom, but it begs the following question: If your advice was heeded in 2000 and the result was Vindication, and again in 2002 resulting in Scipion, why would your advice be shunned in 2004? Hmm.....

You call it "independent thought" that your non-support of Storm Cat for the 2004 mating was overruled. If someone had advised me only four years earlier and the result was an Eclipse Award champion, I wouldn't think to overrule that person's advice...why were you shunned? Or...were you? Why did Mrs Payson say in 2004, "George, screw your advice, I'm going with Storm Cat!" - It doesn't make sense.

As the for 2006 Giant's Causeway, you write that you had no input on the selection. What would your advice had been? You claim to have vetoed Storm Cat, and AP Indy hadn't done so badly in the past...would you have said, "Giant's Causeway is a good choice," or "Stay away from Giant's Causeway?"

About your statement about racing fast curtailing longevity, you certainly don't support it in your article. You write:

When he won the Kentucky Cup Juvenile in the pathetic time of 1:46.90, I must admit I was disheartened. Sure, he won by 6 easy lengths, but 1:46.90! He was no Seattle Slew who could run that fast in a common gallop. I kept a rather low profile until he won the Breeders' Cup Juvenile in the decent, but not outstanding time of 1:49.60. I shouted his name from the rooftop of Northlands Park. He had won by 2 1/2 lengths over horses that had ran fast times like Kafwain [5 furlongs in 57.50, 8.5f, 1:42.75] and Hold That Tiger [7fT in 1:20.40].

You write that Vindication defeated horses that had raced fast, but Vindication had not run very fast at all...your words for Vindication's final times are "pathetic" and "not outstanding." So, following your logic, Kafwain and Hold That Tiger had reason to retire early - they ran fast. What was Vindication's excuse? That question isn't answered by you here nor in your article. BDW offers an answer and supports it - Bob Baffert. But you choose to ignore Baffert as the reason...so what was it? The planets aligned against Vindication?

[Rokeby Forever]

There is hardly a thread that doesn't get hijacked to bash either a trainer or a stallion. It's getting old and boring.

Georgez....still frustrated that Giant's Causeway has only ONE (which is truly pathetic) Grade 1 dirt winning offspring, huh? (It's still First Samurai? Damn, that was a long time ago!!!)! I know...sooner or later, GC will have another one (law of averages, I guess), but until then, you're stuck being bitter while the rest of us that were right about Giant's Causeway enjoy life.

And you must be bashing your head against the wall over Pletcher this morning. I know...if he won 4 stakes yesterday, you'd be hootin' and hollerin,' but the fact that his best turf horse (English Channel) got beaten by a nobody while Sunriver didn't even hit the board after a 1:16 split has you crying in your cornflakes today. I almost forgot...Honey Rider stunk, too. So did Ramazutti - what did Ramazutti lose by...68 lengths or something like that?

[winds]

Rokeby,

I can answer your question as to why George's advice was shunned in 2004. I too have had to deal with the same thing. After awhile, though they do have more knowledge than when they started, most owners (like Mrs. Payson) think they know more than their advisers.

I worked for a gentleman who became a very good friend and we'd have knock down drag out fights. I was on salary so I could be vocal if I wanted to. Sometimes he would give in, then the end results would become stakes winnners/placed and he'd take the credit for the breeding. Thankfully, his best friend is also a very good friend of mine and she corrects him as to who advised the breeding.

I was his farm manager/trainer, no I didn't run horses off the farm, I just got them ready for the races, or off of R& R. Anyway, we'd argue about gelding horses, we'd argue about entering horses in stakes etc. Sometimes I won at which point after the horse would win, he'd call me and thank me for my advise.

It drove/drives me crazy, but it is their money after all.

Now, I wasn't in the high stakes arena that George is in, we had a small private breeding operation in Middleburg, VA and had mostly NY Breds but I did do the breeding program.

We did have some dealings with Mrs. Payson, we had a nice mare named Torelia that we sent to St. Jovite. The owner after some negotiating gave the mare to Mrs Payson in leu of stud fee payment.

Torelia passed a few years ago. I miss her.

wind

[Rokeby Forever]

Winds!!!!

It's always good to see ya on the board! Welcome back!

I was actually looking forward to reading George's answer, but now that you've put words into his mouth that actually make some sense, I won't have to. LOL!

I still have yet to read how George defends himself on the statement that Vindication was destined to be retired early because he raced so fast, and yet, George refers to Vindication's final times as being "pathetic" and "not outstanding." That should be interesting.

[winds]

Rokeby,

LOL , yes it should.

winds

[Tucumcari]

BAffert and Lukas are sort of cut from the same mold as are many others but those are two very prominant trainers that come to mind. They have big numbers. Owners with deep pockets. It's a shame that Vindication didn't get to go on to the TC, but he was battling up hill. If they have a basically unlimited # of horses they press hard and the tough make it through their program. Alot don't. Vindication showed a ton of promise, and that last start was a miracle of modern medicine. He ran through stuff that others won't or don't. So clearly he had heart. With any luck he passed it on to his kids.
They are flesh and bone, and at some point something's gotta give. In Vindications case, at the very least he was valuable enough not to end up on the wagon headed to the blue room. Is it his fault he was pressed on solidly at the age of two and his body said no thanks... I think not.

[winds]

I've worked for several people, some on the farm as a manager or assistant manager, and others on the track. The one job that I loved the most (on the farm), I was in charge of the breeding and when they would go to the track.

My owner bred for distance and some turf. We didn't start our horses until they were 3. For one, we weren't interested in the TC trail. We wanted horses that would run for several years and be productive. We usually averaged only 3 to 4 horses running through the year. Not because we had a lot on the farm recuperating, but we only had 3 mares. If they didn't look like they would do much we sold them privately to one of our trainers other owners.

I'll tell you what, since they were all NY Breds, the quarterly checks would come in and we'd see names of horses we hadn't owned in years. Those checks helped.

But our horses earned more money each successive year.

Then a con artist got ahold of my friends ear and I was sent on my way.

He hasn't had near the sucess that he had when I was there.........

winds

[George William Smith]

3111 postings in half a year. Yikes. Rokeby

Your last one to me was a good one and hopefully you'll find my answers more than adequate.

wind nailed it on the answer why my advice was not used after Farda Amiga and Vindication. I call it the 5 year effect. It happens all the time. There were times I was heavily relied on by Mrs. Payson. It was always during the time that her horses were running like I do now at age 63. When her horses ran really well, she stepped back out of the daily game and let farm managers run much of the operation and when her inaction and their action led to bad horses, I would gladly help her as I consider her very much of a friend through good times and bad.

Wind, you showed tremendous insight. Are you sure you weren't a pedigree analyst of high class cause that's the way we stay poor, while bloodstock consultants sucking 5% here and there do well and end up with farms, we end up with many Kraft Dinner meals.

Back to Rokeby:
Re: force and fast. They go together, but injury does not have to result. If a thoroughbred were trained like a human athlete for the Olympics then force would be met by remodeling the bone to take more force then more speed could safely be added and so on. Thoroughbreds today are not trained much at all and steroids are legal so trainers rely on steroids to have the horse recover quickly from workouts. Imagine if horses today were trained like Dr. Fager. The stewards would not allow it.

While other horses that Vindication beat had run brilliant times, Vindication would not yet beat them in all his starts. I call that quality speed, but not brilliant and is usually indicated as Class. It's like a claiming horse can run and win all the time in 1:09's at Santa Anita, yet meets higher class horses and loses in 1:10's everytime.

My stallion prediction program in the Brilliant section relies a horse racing enough times to throw in a couple of really fast races. Obviously, the fewer starts, the few chances to have run really fast. Silver Deputy is a terrific sire, yet started only twice at two so my program had to penalize him. In effect it is almost a soundness penalty, though it may not have been the horse's fault....a bad step....sickness....trainer error....jockey error....and 1001 other possibilities.

A not so funny thing happened on the way to the market with Vindication and I'm surprised that someone with your knowledge hasn't graced us with the answer unless you
a. didn't know it
b. were so busy slagging trainers and today's racing that your agenda would not allow it.

If (a) here is the logic. It's early evening so I should have not have an excuse.

1. Vindication is a very good looking individual. I have the foal sheet and yearling reports and can move very well in the fields. Since there may only be a few Seattle Slews left in the old boy at the time, we hope that his looks and athletism overshadowed his first two St. Jovite foals. [background material] The first of which was plenty talented with speed [Holy Reason], but did not stay sound as it turned out and started but 5 times. The second I could outrun as she was a stayer. So the mare had thrown two entirely different types with the same stallion

2. Mrs. Payson would only go to high priced stallions over her dead body or if a good looking foal could not miss bringing a really good price. Any time she went up to a middle level stallion she usually got a horse that no one would pay any money for if she tried to sell it. It was a hugely difficult task to tell her that she had to go all the way up to the best stallions to get the commercial return. Finally, she paid to play the high end game and got a live foal that was really good looking and athletic. Yet, as soon as this colt got near sale time, the naysayer's were inventing things wrong with him that were not supported by those who took care of the colt and he vetted great. Still, some felt that by driving his price down that they would get a higher price for theirs. Mrs. Payson got 2.15 million for him.

3. So we have a yearling colt that cost a fortune by a leading sire out of a G3 winning dam. This meant nothing unless he got to be a very good horse and then it became everything. He wins his first race. He is now undefeated. He now represents a fair return on their money if he can stay undefeated or run really fast and win a couple more races and maybe lose one or two in the process and win a graded stake race. Vindication, despite not showing racing brilliance wins 3 in a row and is undefeated and a G3 winner of the KY Cup. He then goes and wins the Breeders Cup in a very good time for a 2yo, but the time is only mediocre for good older horses. Importantly, it is the way he wins it that is impressive, not the time. Yet I am screaming I want him to show the real brilliance that sets successful stallions apart from ordinary stallions. I can't wait for his first start at three on a track that gives fast times.

4. He is now worth much more than he cost. However, since he has not shown classic Seattle Slew, Affirmed, Alydar, Dr. Fager, speed, etc., if he loses many races it will really hurt the stud fee that he can command. In fact, if he loses any races, his stud fee will drop dramatically unless he can win the KY Derby. So I assume you now get it Rokeby. Unless 100%, it is not worth the risk to the owner to race him. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

5. If he had anything less than a perfect record or just a very good pedigree, the owner would have had to race him to make him a top stallion prospect. Take time off, let him heal or grow up, etc., and get him back racing. Did anyone ever tell you what the injury was or even if there was a real injury? What if it was as simple as he was not going to move forward and be a better 3yo. Remember, by this time his older half brother had been injured and retired.

What we really have to wonder about Rokeby is whether Vindication's foals will stand up to modern training. I designed him to be bullet-proof, which clearly failed as he did not make a start at three if truly retired due a career ending injury and this may support your argument. It will sure be interesting to see if they train on as 3yo's.

I'm never easy on trainers, but instead of Baffert, I have put the blame on the fact that the horse was worth more not to race than to race and perhaps, lose.

[bdw0617]

While other horses that Vindication beat had run brilliant times, Vindication would not yet beat them in all his starts. I call that quality speed, but not brilliant and is usually indicated as Class. It's like a claiming horse can run and win all the time in 1:09's at Santa Anita, yet meets higher class horses and loses in 1:10's everytime.

handicapping 101.. it's not the final time that matters, it's how you got there

[reese]

While other horses that Vindication beat had run brilliant times, Vindication would not yet beat them in all his starts. I call that quality speed, but not brilliant and is usually indicated as Class. It's like a claiming horse can run and win all the time in 1:09's at Santa Anita, yet meets higher class horses and loses in 1:10's everytime.

handicapping 101.. it's not the final time that matters, it's how you got there

Did anyone here SEE the race?

Maimonides got there easily--outbroke the field and never looked back.

Looked like Seattle Slew in that race...

[bdw0617]

did YOU see the race?

correction


Maimonides broke early, kept pace, and the rest of the field faded. Granted, the horse was not at any time asked for any run... but he didn't accelorate as much so as the other horses decelrated... the 2nd palce finisher finished in 1:06 and change.. that's Charles Town times

[Rokeby Forever]

George,

Your points are taken, and I'm sure that you're fully aware that I won't argue about the state of the business and that horses are shuttled off to stud before it's revealed that the Emperor wears no clothes. In reply (as best I can) to your post:

I recall Vindication's retirement was due to a purported leg injury, but I forget if it was a suspensory, chips, or what it actually was. In my mind, two things may have weighed more in the decision than any actual injury. (1) Vindication, perhaps, was showing signs that he wasn't maturing any further than he had from the season before, and/or (2) Satish Sanan had blown MILLIONS on stock that Wayne Lukas had purchased for him, and Vindication's early retirement without risking failure was a quick way to recoup some of it.

Back in the 1980s, Seattle Slew literally had a "slew" of good sons; Slew O'Gold, Swale, Capote, Slew City Slew, and others. While Swale unfortunately never made it to the breeding shed, the vast majority of his sons were failures; if not for AP Indy, I think Seattle Slew would go down in history as a tremendous failure as a sire of sires. He does have some decent regional type sons (Evansville Slew, Slew City Slew, even Capote is "OK"), but I don't think they measure up to what was expected from sons of the Slew.

After AP Indy, it's difficult to think of a top class Seattle Slew son for the next decade (give or take). When Vindication came along, I think people wanted him to succeed - he was Slew's last chance of siring a really good son and possibly an Heir Apparent to AP Indy for breeders wanting Seattle Slew 2X on the sire side.

I totally agree - time doesn't count as much as the quality of horses that are beaten...I think Alysheba is a perfect example of that. However, I think from a son of Seattle Slew, people wanted to see brilliance - a 1:09 sprint, a 1:34 mile, any eyepopping performance. Certainly, AP Indy's Belmont Stakes was an eyepopping performance, but Vindication had not yet delivered one...if anything, he visually fell short of Capote's BC Juvenile win. I think the offspring of certain sires are given a pass when they don't deliver a "WOW!" performance but prove that they were, nonetheless, top class horses - sons of AP Indy might fit into that mold. But for a son of Seattle Slew, I think people want that "WOW!" performance before an offspring goes to stud, no matter at what class level the offspring raced at.

Let's assume that Vindication's injury was minor and that he could have again raced at 100% capability. Let's also hypothetically argue that Bob Baffert could have wound up Vindication for a cut-and-slash effort, say a 10 length romp in some Derby prep in very fast time. Would it matter if Vindication fared poorly in the Derby and retired after that? So many horses today retire off a win in a Derby prep that the Derby itself becomes secondary - just ask Storm Cat.

What's my point? (Good question - LOL!). As far as Vindication's future success at stud, I think a lot more weighs on the success of his first crop or two as opposed to if he had delivered a "WOW!" racing performance that breeders/buyers could try to replicate with a future offspring. Had Vindication been able to race at 100% fitness as a three year old, I think it was a mistake in his case to retire him early - there's now more pressure on a foal or foals to deliver what Vindication couldn't. If, however, Vindication did have an injury worthy of a retirement, the point becomes moot.

Will Vindication offspring stand up to modern training? No other sire is having much luck (foals averaging 15 starts/career from a sire now makes him a source of soundness), but I hope Vindication's offspring do - I think any fan of Seattle Slew wants to see Vindication succeed.

[reese]

did YOU see the race?

correction


Maimonides broke early, kept pace, and the rest of the field faded. Granted, the horse was not at any time asked for any run... but he didn't accelorate as much so as the other horses decelrated... the 2nd palce finisher finished in 1:06 and change.. that's Charles Town times

Track was listed as "good". Heavy am rain. Maimonides raced in 2nd race.
You sound like Andy Beyer who said the same thing about Seattle Slew's race in the Flamingo Stakes...SS wasn't running fast...the rest of the field was "slow"