Mudders

[RobinFromIreland]

Forgive me if this has been asked/mentioned before but my knowledge of historic American racehorses is patchy.

Watching the Derby this weekend, my first thought as Mine That Bird sluiced through the field was, "this is the only horse here that was made for the slop". He simply ran so much faster than the others in that last half mile.

As I understand it, there have been a number of talented racehorses in the US that had solid race records under normal, fast conditions, but absolutely thrived when it was sloppy. Names such as Riva Ridge and Waquoit I have seen mentioned.

Can some of you here please relay some memories you have about some specialist "mudders", their great triumphs, and whether their success in that sphere was mainly due to that preference, or the lack of such a preference amongst their comtemporaries.

[rwwupl]

Forgive me if this has been asked/mentioned before but my knowledge of historic American racehorses is patchy.

Watching the Derby this weekend, my first thought as Mine That Bird sluiced through the field was, "this is the only horse here that was made for the slop". He simply ran so much faster than the others in that last half mile.

As I understand it, there have been a number of talented racehorses in the US that had solid race records under normal, fast conditions, but absolutely thrived when it was sloppy. Names such as Riva Ridge and Waquoit I have seen mentioned.

Can some of you here please relay some memories you have about some specialist "mudders", their great triumphs, and whether their success in that sphere was mainly due to that preference, or the lack of such a preference amongst their comtemporaries.



Robin,

Many years ago ,at Santa Anita, there was an allowance horse named River Buoy and he was a"submarine"(The nickname then for a mudder). In the wet he could step up and beat stake horses . If it was sloppy I would back him blindly with both fists.

There have been many since then and I will leave it to others to name their favorite mudders.

The DRF used to have designations that signified if a horse excelled in the wet. Just like all surfaces there are varying levels of competency. There is mud and there is mud for different horses.

The great Steward Pete Pederson of California always said the first thing he learned when he came to So. Ca. from a San Francisco newspaper to become a Steward was the impact on performance the track surface was.

The current Kentucky Derby winner reminds me of a horse who has just been discovered a certain kind off off track specialist.

rwwupl

[Jinxed]

There were a few in the derby that had good mud breeding. They just met up with a rocket on Derby Day.

[riskman]

Here is a link from Breeding Winners.Com for mud sires based on data from 4/13/06-09

http://www.breedingwinners.com/aspspecial/pdfdisplay.asp?filename=topsirereports/TopMudSires.PDF

This is an excellent site for breeding info.

[46zilzal]

Mud Breeding.

Horse do well over it or they don't. It isn't genetic

[Cratos]

Forgive me if this has been asked/mentioned before but my knowledge of historic American racehorses is patchy.

Watching the Derby this weekend, my first thought as Mine That Bird sluiced through the field was, "this is the only horse here that was made for the slop". He simply ran so much faster than the others in that last half mile.

As I understand it, there have been a number of talented racehorses in the US that had solid race records under normal, fast conditions, but absolutely thrived when it was sloppy. Names such as Riva Ridge and Waquoit I have seen mentioned.

Can some of you here please relay some memories you have about some specialist "mudders", their great triumphs, and whether their success in that sphere was mainly due to that preference, or the lack of such a preference amongst their comtemporaries.

There is a major difference in a “muddy track” today than in a “muddy track” from years ago.

The big difference is “sealed” which means the surface is pressed with heavy rollers to allow for faster, better drainage and eventually quicker return to a normal surface.

Would MTB have performed as well running on a track that wasn’t sealed? That I cannot say because his performance was exemplary and probably against the same field he would have been good under any track surface conditions,

To me the greatest/best mudder in my 41 years in this sport is the great Secretariat and there was a horse which ran many years ago at Finger Lakes, the minor oval in Western New York that was named “Blue in the Face” and he came alive during wet tracks.

[PaceAdvantage]

Mud Breeding.

Horse do well over it or they don't. It isn't geneticUnless a certain size or shape foot does better over off surfaces. Then it would be genetic, now wouldn't it Mr. Zil?

[andicap]

This argument will rage on fruitlessly unless someone does a deterministic statistical study. And no one will convince the other side they are correct.

That however doesn't prevent me from having an opinion of course -- but I'm willing to be proved wrong.

There seems to be some evidence that the progeny of some horses race better on wet tracks -- as PA pointed out possibly due to conformational issues. Just like grass horses.

The trouble is that there are all different types of "wet" trucks from the sticky mud of Saratoga to the sandier Belmont. A horse that might love the Spa's slop might hate it elsewhere.

Yet breeding stats lump ALL of these wet tracks together. The result might be statistical noise.

And there are different types of wet -- there's a world of difference between the surfaces of muddy and sloppy tracks. Not to mention "good" or even "wet fast." Some horses prefer drying out tracks, others like the really wet ones.

I remember Spanish Riddle back in the 70s turned into the world's greatest sprinter/miler when even a few drops of rain fell on the track. Other "mudders" may not kick in until the track gets sloppier.

So, trying to determine what influences "mudders" is -- ahem -- a slippery slope.

[strapper]

I miss the old DRF designations for superior mudders (x with a circle), good mudders, just an X, and fair mudders, an asterisk *

[rwwupl]

This argument will rage on fruitlessly unless someone does a deterministic statistical study. And no one will convince the other side they are correct.

That however doesn't prevent me from having an opinion of course -- but I'm willing to be proved wrong.

There seems to be some evidence that the progeny of some horses race better on wet tracks -- as PA pointed out possibly due to conformational issues. Just like grass horses.

The trouble is that there are all different types of "wet" trucks from the sticky mud of Saratoga to the sandier Belmont. A horse that might love the Spa's slop might hate it elsewhere.

Yet breeding stats lump ALL of these wet tracks together. The result might be statistical noise.

And there are different types of wet -- there's a world of difference between the surfaces of muddy and sloppy tracks. Not to mention "good" or even "wet fast." Some horses prefer drying out tracks, others like the really wet ones.

I remember Spanish Riddle back in the 70s turned into the world's greatest sprinter/miler when even a few drops of rain fell on the track. Other "mudders" may not kick in until the track gets sloppier.

So, trying to determine what influences "mudders" is -- ahem -- a slippery slope.



Well said and I agree with you.

Once in a while a horse comes along that excells on any kind of a wet surface,but that is rare.

Determining what each horse is best at takes experience and observation,but clues can be gained from breeding.

Thats why the saying that "There is mud, and then there is mud and then there is mud".

[fmolf]

I miss the old DRF designations for superior mudders (x with a circle), good mudders, just an X, and fair mudders, an asterisk *
life was so much simpler then strapper!

[fmolf]

Well said and I agree with you.

Once in a while a horse comes along that excells on any kind of a wet surface,but that is rare.

Determining what each horse is best at takes experience and observation,but clues can be gained from breeding.

Thats why the saying that "There is mud, and then there is mud and then there is mud".
i believe on todays sealed tracks a lighter smaller horse like mtb is given extra credit because he will not sink in as deep as a heavier horse...also a big hoof will prevent him from sinking into the track as well....similar to turf horses being bred with bigger hoovesall a sealed track is is a tamped down packed first layer .....

[A. Pineda]

Can some of you here please relay some memories you have about some specialist "mudders", their great triumphs, and whether their success in that sphere was mainly due to that preference, or the lack of such a preference amongst their comtemporaries.

George Navonod won a stakes with a speed rating of about 32. Since he ran very slowly on that muddy surface, I would have to say that his opposition liked that track condition much less than George N. did.

[cj's dad]

Mud Breeding.

Horse do well over it or they don't. It isn't genetic

There you go PA - you can now officially close the thread as ALL relevant information is now in.

[46zilzal]

Years back I went around and discussed what makes a mudder with about 20 trainers and three vets. They all said just about the same thing: HORSES fear unsure footing and some take to it better than others and one cannot tell which INDIVIDUAL horse will, or won't. NONE like it, but some just dislike it less than others.

It is all about he same thing that keeps cattle in the corral with a cattle guard: they won't go across an area of unsure footing.

[46zilzal]

Unless a certain size or shape foot does better over off surfaces. Then it would be genetic, now wouldn't it Mr. Zil?
IF that were the ONLY reason yes, but it is far from being even close. It is all about perceived balance, a central nervous system aspect.

Also can you tell us the genetic correlates to hoof size, shape, consistency, color, frog sensitivity, strength, correlation to gait, conformation, or for that matter how some animals cope with and others don't?

[The Judge]

A few years ago I posted that Cure The Blues(deceased)and his prodigy were excellent mud sires. It was raining cats and dogs at Belmont Park there were two horses in the race were Cure The Blues was the grand-sire. Later that day or maybe the next day poster here was going to pass the race until he remembered my post about Cure the Blues and his prodigy the $1 exacta paid $400 + they ran 1,2 for a buck.

The question isn't what horses can preform well on the slop it how do you tell before they establish themselves as liking the slop .After they are established everybody knows.

Say you are going to play a pick 6 ,5,4, or some combination bet like a tri etc. and its a sloppy track and you know a horse has good slop breeding I think think most people would include such a horse even though he hadn't established himself as a slop loving horse. Can he flop in the slop of course.

[RobinFromIreland]

Not to curtail an active discussion but I was hoping for racing anecdotes about past superior "mudders", as opposed to a debate about the genetic influences (or lack thereof) of such racehorses.

[PaceAdvantage]

Also can you tell us the genetic correlates to hoof size, shape, consistency, color, frog sensitivity, strength, correlation to gait, conformation, or for that matter how some animals cope with and others don't?I don't have to. If my original statement has any impact at all, then I am right and you are wrong.

[fmolf]

I don't have to. If my original statement has any impact at all, then I am right and you are wrong.mr pace you are absolutley 100% correct!.. mr.46 genetics that is the reason we have horses bred for turf...or genetically predisposed to like mud, because their physical attributes have been passed on from their parents.that is why the tomlinson ratings are a good indicator of preference for turf or off tracks....i am certain you have many traits both physical and psychological that have been passed on to you by your ancestors....we all ...do

[andicap]

Not to curtail an active discussion but I was hoping for racing anecdotes about past superior "mudders", as opposed to a debate about the genetic influences (or lack thereof) of such racehorses.

Well, there was my item that mentioned Spanish Riddle! :D

How about Beebeebee! in the Preakness circa 1972 beating Riva Ridge?



.

[46zilzal]

Three very good ones absolutely almost fell down on slop but ran well anyway: Riva, Easy Goer and Cougar II

[Jinxed]

I believe a lot of it is genetics in mudders. One great example is Pirate's Bounty's offspring. They were all great mud horses. There has to be something to it.

[Oaklawn]

This argument will rage on fruitlessly unless someone does a deterministic statistical study. And no one will convince the other side they are correct.

That however doesn't prevent me from having an opinion of course -- but I'm willing to be proved wrong.

There seems to be some evidence that the progeny of some horses race better on wet tracks -- as PA pointed out possibly due to conformational issues. Just like grass horses.

The trouble is that there are all different types of "wet" trucks from the sticky mud of Saratoga to the sandier Belmont. A horse that might love the Spa's slop might hate it elsewhere.

Yet breeding stats lump ALL of these wet tracks together. The result might be statistical noise.

And there are different types of wet -- there's a world of difference between the surfaces of muddy and sloppy tracks. Not to mention "good" or even "wet fast." Some horses prefer drying out tracks, others like the really wet ones.

I remember Spanish Riddle back in the 70s turned into the world's greatest sprinter/miler when even a few drops of rain fell on the track. Other "mudders" may not kick in until the track gets sloppier.

So, trying to determine what influences "mudders" is -- ahem -- a slippery slope.


Horse racing needs a "stimpmeter," like in golf to measure the speed of greens. Some objective measurement that is universally accepted that can differentiate between good, sloppy, really sloppy, etc. The man that invents such a thing is going to be wealthy.

[46zilzal]

I don't have to. If my original statement has any impact at all, then I am right and you are wrong.
Amazing that trainers and vets I've asked don't know what physical correlates there are that makes a great mudder yet YOU DO??? odd

[riskman]

The trouble is that there are all different types of "wet" trucks from the sticky mud of Saratoga to the sandier Belmont. A horse that might love the Spa's slop might hate it elsewhere.

Yet breeding stats lump ALL of these wet tracks together. The result might be statistical noise.

And there are different types of wet -- there's a world of difference between the surfaces of muddy and sloppy tracks. Not to mention "good" or even "wet fast." Some horses prefer drying out tracks, others like the really wet ones.

So, trying to determine what influences "mudders" is -- ahem -- a slippery slope.

All excellent points to consider.

[46zilzal]

To establish ANYTHING as cause and effect one FIRST has to establish, beyond a doubt, WHAT makes up said ability: form, function or integration of many factors ( and I would guess that there is NO singular avenue to make up a superior mud horse, i.e simple will power can overcome physical limitations)

Second, one has to determine WHICH, if any, of these factors, has a strong genetic prevalence, and what genes are responsible.

THIRD, as you see the complexity of this is beginning to become laughable, one has to find out how often a phenotype trait is found in an offspring just like the parent.

To date, NO ONE has been able to define part one so the rest is a bit of a joke.

[toetoe]

Cinteelo was the best I ever heard of --- a legitimate classified allowance/overnight runner on dry land, but a graded type monster on wet tracks. I thought Waquoit was that good, but he could only get third place in the 1988 BCC. :( .

Falconridge,

Who was the three-legged No-Cal claimer that moved WAY up on off tracks --- you know, "Just add water ?"

[toetoe]

Revidere.

[PaceAdvantage]

Amazing that trainers and vets I've asked don't know what physical correlates there are that makes a great mudder yet YOU DO??? oddI never ever stated that I KNOW in this case...I would never presume to act with such arrogance. I leave that up to you...

[fmolf]

I never ever stated that I KNOW in this case...I would never presume to act with such arrogance. I leave that up to you...
it is a known fact that lighter larger hooved horses do better on turf ... mudders have the same attributes...seems simple to me....plenty of books have mentioned this and other handicappers here as well

[falconridge]

Falconridge,

Who was the three-legged No-Cal claimer that moved WAY up on off tracks-- you know, "Just add water ?"The one I mentioned when we spoke the other day was Getaway Terresto. A few of my contemporaries claimed that all Terresto offspring made like Pegasus in the slop, but I don't recall any that moved up as much as GT. Grey Moon Runner was another mudlark--strictly a one-turn horse over dry loam, he could carry his speed a mile or more over off going at old Bill Kyne's track. Yet another wet-track genius was Mr. Redoy, a colt that defeated J. O. Tobin in at least one of the Strub series races (maybe it was the Strub itself?) during that extraordinarily wet SoCal winter of 1978, and, in that year's Big Cap, resisted as far as possible the ultimately irresistible force that was Vigors, the White Tornado.

Mr. Redoy, a 1974 foal by Grey Dawn II out of the Pocket Ruler mare Near Gold, pocketed upwards of a third of a million simoleons for owner Felty Yoder. Grey Moon Runner, a Grey Eagle gelding out of a Nearco Blue mare, fetched nearly a quarter mil for his connections (notably, and most memorably, trainer Bill Mastrangelo), despite falling to super appy Undercover Willie in a celebrated match race). MR and GMR were "useful," if unremarkable, runners under dry conditions. Getaway Terresto, on the other hoof, rarely led past the half-mile pole--even against $4K selling platers, though he was a terrific gate horse--in any of his fast-track heats. The recipe for this runner's successes was as simple as the instructions on a box of instant cake mix: just add water. :D :ThmbUp:

[pandy]

Cinteelo was the best I ever heard of --- a legitimate classified allowance/overnight runner on dry land, but a graded type monster on wet tracks. I thought Waquoit was that good, but he could only get third place in the 1988 BCC. :( .

Falconridge,

Who was the three-legged No-Cal claimer that moved WAY up on off tracks --- you know, "Just add water ?"

Good call, I totally forgot about Cinteelo, he was definitely one of the best mudders of all time. I recall cashing some bets on Master Derby.

[toetoe]

Progeny of Wetok, among them Willie Pleasant, were mudlovers.

Windsor's Jimmy was a nice one when it rained.

[toetoe]

correlates

Correlatives, maybe ? Good start to the word --- it just needed a shot in the arm. You know --- an I-V. Hooboy.



Nice call on Riva Ridge. His aversion to slop/mud kept him from baing an all-timer.