Sea The Stars_Zarkava_Zenyatta

[Gorgeous George]

3 modern greats :ThmbUp:

[horses4courses]

3 modern greats :ThmbUp:

Zarkava?.....gimme a break :ThmbDown:

[horses4courses]

Zarkava?.....gimme a break :ThmbDown:

My bad....I'm losing it....getting my Zar mares mixed up....thinking Zardana :blush:

[Cardus]

GG, you have this backwards. The thread title should have been "3 Modern Greats," and the initial post to have contained your selections.

Therefore, people could have posted the following:

Zenyatta, Curlin, and Smarty Jones.

[Spalding No!]

Zenyatta is no better (and perhaps worse) than Deep Impact on an international scale.

[Wickel]

One modern great

ZENYATTA ... period!

[tzipi]

One modern great

ZENYATTA ... period!

Just one modern great? I love this ha.

[WinterTriangle]

Zarkava?.....gimme a break :ThmbDown:

She murdered Goldikova twice at a mile, as if Goldi was standing still, beat countless numbers of multiple G1 winning males of europe, won the Arc, and retired 7 for 7 and you have a thumbs down?

[Gorgeous George]

She murdered Goldikova twice at a mile, as if Goldi was standing still, beat countless numbers of multiple G1 winning males of europe, won the Arc, and retired 7 for 7 and you have a thumbs down?

let him watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8h62nadtuw&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8h62nadtuw&feature=related)

truly remarkable

[gm10]

She murdered Goldikova twice at a mile, as if Goldi was standing still, beat countless numbers of multiple G1 winning males of europe, won the Arc, and retired 7 for 7 and you have a thumbs down?

I think Goldikova has got a lot better as she matured. I love that horse, her win at Deauville last year was one of the highlights of the year.

She's beaten the best milers in the world twice in a row now, and she's aiming for a third BC Mile!

[Gorgeous George]

I cannot say who was the best of the three as they did not race each other but my selections in order of who i think would have won;
1.Sea The Stars
2.Zenyatta
3.Zarkava

Sea The Stars could win from the back or front it didn’t matter. He always played with his rivals making sure that he beat them in the second or last furlong. If you watch his jockey in all his races he's never asked the horse a serious question. Look at the trouble in running in his Arc and you will realise only a special horse could win. An Equine God sent from heaven itself.

Zenyatta and Zarkava are hard to split, both liked coming from the back and both did it with perfect timing. Zarkava's win in the Prix Vermeille was the most outstanding victory I’ve seen in my life. Loosing 6 lengths in the box and still winning is truly remarkable. An undefeated career with 7 from 7 culminating with a victory in the Arc was sensational. The longevity of Zenyatta’s career with 16 from 16 including 10 grade 1's is an accomplishment that will be nearly impossible to surpass. The fact that it has been done by a filly and a filly who wins from the back makes Zenayatta a modern great. Back to back Breeders Cup victories beating both male and female's give her the edge over Zarkava in my selections.

[Spalding No!]

The longevity of Zenyatta’s career with 16 from 16 including 10 grade 1's is an accomplishment that will be nearly impossible to surpass. The fact that it has been done by a filly and a filly who wins from the back makes Zenayatta a modern great.

The fact that it was a filly means that most of those 10 Grade 1's were not open company, hardly a measure of greatness.

As if this thread couldn't get any worse you put the one that would have dusted the other two as third best.

[Gorgeous George]

Zarkava dust Sea The Stars :eek: i'll be taking any comment from yourself with a pinch of salt from now on. Your obviously a bitter Rachel Alexandra fan. Go write more anti-Zenyatta drivel elsewhere its boring :sleeping:

[NTamm1215]

I find it amazing that a European would rate Zenyatta better than Zarkava. There's just no way Zenyatta's BC Classic win comes close to Zarkava's Arc win.

NT

[Dahoss9698]

She murdered Goldikova twice at a mile, as if Goldi was standing still, beat countless numbers of multiple G1 winning males of europe, won the Arc, and retired 7 for 7 and you have a thumbs down?

He/she made a mistake and then admitted it in the next post. Quite refreshing actually to see someone admit a mistake.

[Cadillakin]

She murdered Goldikova twice at a mile, as if Goldi was standing still, beat countless numbers of multiple G1 winning males of europe, won the Arc, and retired 7 for 7 and you have a thumbs down?
True enough that she beat her two times, but "murdered" is probably going a bit far..

There are a couple of extenuating circumstances to note..

One of the races in which Zarkava beat Goldikova was at Chantilly, in the French Oaks, which is run at a distance of 1 mile and 5/16ths, not at the mile distance you reference. I think it's generally agreed that Goldikova is best at or near a mile.. Her trainer, Freddie Head has said exactly that. To her credit, Goldikova hit the lead near the mile marker in the Oaks and held onto that lead for another 3/16ths before giving way to Zarkava in the final furlong..

In other words, in that particular race, Goldikova was truly disadvantaged by the conditions, which were more than a quarter of a mile past her best distance..

Zarkava raced and trained nearly her entire career at her home base at Longchamp in Paris.. Indeed, 6 of her 7 career victories were accomplished on her home track. Where Zenyatta gets criticism for only racing on 4 different tracks thus far, three of them in the West, Zarkava raced on just two tracks in her career. Six races at her home in Longchamp and the other - and the only time she ever shipped to race - referenced above at Chantilly..

Their first matchup was at one mile in the Poule d'Essai des Pouliches, at Longchamp. As stated, Zarkava beat Goldikova well in that race, by 2 lengths.. Further, and perhaps with some bearing on the issue ... the top Euro handicapper, Nick Mordin, states that trainer Head generally prepares his horses for their peak later in the season. Goldikova's record does seem to reflect that suggestion.. The Poule d'Essai des Pouliches is in fact an early season race for 3 year old fillies in France.

Years ago, the great Allez France defeated her archrival Dahlia employing the same tactics. Allez France, like Zarkava stayed home at Longchamp, getting 12 of her 13 victories on her home track. It was well known that Allez France was a filly who needed "give in the ground" to be at her best, while Dahlia, who employed a brilliant move, wanted to hear her feet rattle.. So, Allez France simply avoided facing Dahlia in conditions that might benefit her rival. Whereas Dahlia won in 5 countries.. Allez France won in just France. But the record, without interpretation, clearly suggests Allez France being the better mare..

Here is a great article by Haskin on Dahlia and the rivalry..
http://cs.bloodhorse.com/blogs/horse-racing-steve-haskin/archive/2009/07/28/dahlia-changed-the-face-of-international-racing.aspx

No doubt, both Goldikova and Zarkava are great fillies.. But they excel in different races, in different conditions...

Sometimes a simple quoting of the stats doesn't tell much of the story.. and I think that's the case with Goldikova vs Zarkova. Until I saw Goldikova, I held Miesque to be the best turf miler in my lifetime.. But now, I'm not so sure. No doubt that Zarkava was better early in their 3 year old year at her home track at Longchamp, but to beat Goldikova now in fast, firm, American-like conditions, she would have to run a mile in 1:33.1 or better..

And for my money, there is not a horse well-suited to the distance and conditions of the Arc who can sprint a mile on firm ground like Goldikova can.. Maybe Secretariat could have done it.. but as for the other mortals.. no way..

[JPinMaryland]

Dahlia's Man OWar stakes race:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-yxOcS0VYI

[Spalding No!]

The criticism of Zarkava and Allez France for "staying at home" is a bit different from the situation with Zenyatta.

Those French fillies were 3yos. There are traditional campaigns that classic 3yos are expected to follow throughout the horse racing world. To say they are being strategically placed or ducking certain horses is a bit misleading. If the majority of classic races in France happen to be at Longchamp, then so be it.

As for Zenyatta, an older horse, certainly no one can fault her 2008 campaign, as she started the year unheralded. She followed the standard CA-based distaff program and cemented her status as top mare by beating a superb field (we can ignore here that several were out of their element on synthetics) in the Breeder's Cup Distaff. Her 2009 and so far 2010 campaigns, however, are certainly open to criticism. While her BC Classic run is certainly one for the record books, the fact that it took place at Santa Anita on a familiar, advantageous surface leaves the lingering feeling for some that she is a "regional" phenomenon (at least on paper) at this point.

[Fager Fan]

Who did Sea The Stars beat? Two of the best this colt beat came over here for our BC and proceeded to lose pretty badly. I'm not sure this horse beat anyone of consequence, and considering how he bowed out from proving his excellence over multiple years, I'm non-plussed.

The same goes for Zarkava and her whopping 7 starts.

Both were very nice. Both failed to prove greatness.

[Spalding No!]

Who did Sea The Stars beat? Two of the best this colt beat came over here for our BC and proceeded to lose pretty badly. I'm not sure this horse beat anyone of consequence, and considering how he bowed out from proving his excellence over multiple years, I'm non-plussed.

The same goes for Zarkava and her whopping 7 starts.

Both were very nice. Both failed to prove greatness.

Rip Van Winkle and Mastercrafstmen's failures on Pro-Ride can't possibly take away from Sea The Star's 2009 campaign.

How about Arc 4th Conduit and his back-to-back scores in the BC Turf?

[Fager Fan]

Rip Van Winkle and Mastercrafstmen's failures on Pro-Ride can't possibly take away from Sea The Star's 2009 campaign.

How about Arc 4th Conduit and his back-to-back scores in the BC Turf?

What kind of weight break do 3yos get over their elders in the Arc? I know it's a complaint by Europeans that 3yos get such a great benefit in that race.

I've no idea why you think that Rip's and Master's races can't take away from STS. I have absolutely no reason to think that STS would've beaten Zenyatta had he run in the Classic, and I'm further aided in that thought when the owner didn't run STS in the race given he was so lightly raced and could've certainly run once more or run another year. It smacks of getting out while the getting's good.

[horses4courses]

She murdered Goldikova twice at a mile, as if Goldi was standing still, beat countless numbers of multiple G1 winning males of europe, won the Arc, and retired 7 for 7 and you have a thumbs down?

You missed my next post....I had a brain fart....Zardana on the brain!

Certainly, Zarkava was pretty special.

[Spalding No!]

I've no idea why you think that Rip's and Master's races can't take away from STS.

The BC races were run on Pro-Ride.

While Sea The Stars was under no obligation to run in the BC, I certainly can see where one wouldn't be brimming with confidence over his chances of beating Zenyatta on her home ground.

To be fair, how do you feel about the lightly-raced Zenyatta's chances had she run in last year's Arc De Triomphe?

[FenceBored]

What kind of weight break do 3yos get over their elders in the Arc? I know it's a complaint by Europeans that 3yos get such a great benefit in that race.


Roughly 8 lbs, the same as a 3yo f against older males in the US. Fillies get 3, so a 3yo f in the Arc is carrying 11 lbs less than the older males.

Youmzain 131
Conduit 131
Dar Re Mi 128
Sea the Stars 123
Stacelita (3yo f) 120

[BluegrassProf]

Not to venture too terribly far OT, but this is a salient issue...
Zarkava dust Sea The Stars :eek: i'll be taking any comment from yourself with a pinch of salt from now on. Your obviously a bitter Rachel Alexandra fan. Go write more anti-Zenyatta drivel elsewhere its boring :sleeping: Really? That's it? Just another day, another stoopid Z-hater?

Seems to me your pinch of salt is being sprinkled over a family-size helping of "ignorance is bliss."

See, thing is w/ the exemplary stuff above, this guy posts not a single thing about Rachel Alexandra, but if he's critical of Zenyatta or your superstar rankings, he's schoolyard girl-fight marginalized, derided as a Rachel fan with the virtual equivalent of sticking fingers in ears and going, "LALALALAYOULUVRACHELYOUSMELLLIKEPOO."

That needs to absolutely stop. As if the two have anything to do with each other outside the construction of their dichotomy, a dichotomy that has hit saturation.

Besides, if your superstars are just that, perhaps they can either a.) stand up to comparisons amongst themselves, or b.) take the heat of critique. If they can't, perhaps the labeling is premature.

[gm10]

I find it amazing that a European would rate Zenyatta better than Zarkava. There's just no way Zenyatta's BC Classic win comes close to Zarkava's Arc win.

NT

Why? Because Zenyatta's was on the pro-ride?

[Fager Fan]

The BC races were run on Pro-Ride.

While Sea The Stars was under no obligation to run in the BC, I certainly can see where one wouldn't be brimming with confidence over his chances of beating Zenyatta on her home ground.

To be fair, how do you feel about the lightly-raced Zenyatta's chances had she run in last year's Arc De Triomphe?

Lightly-raced Zenyatta had almost double the number of starts as STS, and put in 2 years of campaigning.

Zenyatta may take to turf. Based on her synth form, I think that she would. But she's not tried on turf, and has proven she runs well on dirt. Given what she's done, I'd have to call her a dirt horse who I have reason to suspect could run well on turf but we wouldn't know until she tries it. IF she would take to turf, I would put my wager on Zen beating STS as I've been more impressed by her than I was him given the wide trips and pace that have never stopped her and against which STS never proved he could equally overcome.

[Fager Fan]

Roughly 8 lbs, the same as a 3yo f against older males in the US. Fillies get 3, so a 3yo f in the Arc is carrying 11 lbs less than the older males.

Youmzain 131
Conduit 131
Dar Re Mi 128
Sea the Stars 123
Stacelita (3yo f) 120

This is a significant difference, particularly when you're looking at the older horses crossing the 130 threshold, one that seems to make a decided difference for weight carriers.

[Gorgeous George]

Not to venture too terribly far OT, but this is a salient issue...
Really? That's it? Just another day, another stoopid Z-hater?

Seems to me your pinch of salt is being sprinkled over a family-size helping of "ignorance is bliss."

See, thing is w/ the exemplary stuff above, this guy posts not a single thing about Rachel Alexandra, but if he's critical of Zenyatta or your superstar rankings, he's schoolyard girl-fight marginalized, derided as a Rachel fan with the virtual equivalent of sticking fingers in ears and going, "LALALALAYOULUVRACHELYOUSMELLLIKEPOO."

That needs to absolutely stop. As if the two have anything to do with each other outside the construction of their dichotomy, a dichotomy that has hit saturation.

Besides, if your superstars are just that, perhaps they can either a.) stand up to comparisons amongst themselves, or b.) take the heat of critique. If they can't, perhaps the labeling is premature.

Look at me i can say BIG words and use the bold, italics and underlining buttons which always makes me right.

[PaceAdvantage]

Look at me i can say BIG words and use the bold, italics and underlining buttons which always makes me right.Continue contributing nothing and see what happens.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I cannot say who was the best of the three as they did not race each other but my selections in order of who i think would have won;
1.Sea The Stars
2.Zenyatta
3.Zarkava

Sea The Stars could win from the back or front it didn’t matter. He always played with his rivals making sure that he beat them in the second or last furlong. If you watch his jockey in all his races he's never asked the horse a serious question. Look at the trouble in running in his Arc and you will realise only a special horse could win. An Equine God sent from heaven itself.

Zenyatta and Zarkava are hard to split, both liked coming from the back and both did it with perfect timing. Zarkava's win in the Prix Vermeille was the most outstanding victory I’ve seen in my life. Loosing 6 lengths in the box and still winning is truly remarkable. An undefeated career with 7 from 7 culminating with a victory in the Arc was sensational. The longevity of Zenyatta’s career with 16 from 16 including 10 grade 1's is an accomplishment that will be nearly impossible to surpass. The fact that it has been done by a filly and a filly who wins from the back makes Zenayatta a modern great. Back to back Breeders Cup victories beating both male and female's give her the edge over Zarkava in my selections.

GG,after starting to semi pay attention to the goings on in Europe in racing after the 2002 Breeders Cup,Zarkava was the one that caught my attention to a great horse over there.I was dying to see here over here on any surface.

But Sea The Stars was the first one I got up to watch at 8 oclock in the morning!!!!And he really was a bad MF'er that day.For all the apparent reasons:)

[tucker6]

Sea The Stars could win from the back or front it didn’t matter. He always played with his rivals making sure that he beat them in the second or last furlong. If you watch his jockey in all his races he's never asked the horse a serious question. Look at the trouble in running in his Arc and you will realise only a special horse could win. An Equine God sent from heaven itself.

How can you be this bold given that STS only raced 9 times in his "career" before his handlers cashed in their chips?? It's difficult to make any determination off nine races. I like STS, but you make him out to be more than he really is. He was a very nice colt that was not given the opportunity to be a "great". Could he have been? Maybe, but you aren't great in nine starts. That's a career achievement award.

[Gorgeous George]

I've no idea why you think that Rip's and Master's races can't take away from STS. I have absolutely no reason to think that STS would've beaten Zenyatta had he run in the Classic, and I'm further aided in that thought when the owner didn't run STS in the race given he was so lightly raced and could've certainly run once more or run another year. It smacks of getting out while the getting's good.

1. Sea The Stars beat Twice Over by 17 lengths in the Group 1 Coral Eclipse. After that Twice Over went on to win 3 in a row culminating with a win in the Group1 Champion Stakes then finishing less than 3 lengths behind Zenyatta.


2. Conduit who won back to back Breeders Cup Turf races was beat 4.5 and 2.5 lengths by Sea The Stars.

3. Dar Re Mi who STS beat by 3 lengths in the Arc went on to be beat by Conduit in the Breeders Cup Turf then win the Dubai Sheema Classic.

4. STS beat 17 Group 1 winners which between them won 34 Group 1 races and that doesn’t include the Group 1 Dar Re Mi was wrongly disqualified from in France.

5.STS won 6 Group 1 races in six months taking on all challengers, taking him over to America was too much at the end of a long season and John Oxx had the sense to realise that.

[Fager Fan]

1. Sea The Stars beat Twice Over by 17 lengths in the Group 1 Coral Eclipse. After that Twice Over went on to win 3 in a row culminating with a win in the Group1 Champion Stakes then finishing less than 3 lengths behind Zenyatta.


2. Conduit who won back to back Breeders Cup Turf races was beat 4.5 and 2.5 lengths by Sea The Stars.

3. Dar Re Mi who STS beat by 3 lengths in the Arc went on to be beat by Conduit in the Breeders Cup Turf then win the Dubai Sheema Classic.

4. STS beat 17 Group 1 winners which between them won 34 Group 1 races and that doesn’t include the Group 1 Dar Re Mi was wrongly disqualified from in France.

5.STS won 6 Group 1 races in six months taking on all challengers, taking him over to America was too much at the end of a long season and John Oxx had the sense to realise that.

It wasn't too much. He had a light campaign of 6 races, and should've added a seventh. Given that he was retiring afterwards, it didn't even matter if he came out of that 7th race tired.

STS got a significant weight break against the elders mentioned above that he beat. The filly Dar Re Mi hasn't proven to be a world beater. Two of the best horses he beat came over here and got their butts handed to them.

STS was a nice horse, but he went to stud too soon to prove himself great.

[thorobasePA]

I'm not too interested in wondering which horse was better because there is no answer.

However, what Sea The Stars achieved was remarkable.

He won six Group 1s in a row - one at 8f, two at 12f, and three at 10f. The only other horses in Europe to do that in the last 25 years was Rock Of Gibraltar.

And not just any series of races, but the championship 3yo mile race, the championship 3yo classic mile and a half race, the championship 3yo versus elders ten furlong early-season race, the championship 3yo versus elders ten furlong mid-season race, the Irish championship ten furlong 3yo+ race, and the European championship race itself, the Arc over a mile and a half.

Straight mile, left-handed, right-handed, flat, and undulating tracks - he won on the them all, and almost all in a very easy manner (the Derby and Arc especially).

He broke all-time track records in the Eclipse and the International.

He is half-brother to the great champion and super-sire Galileo. His father was a champion miler and sired Ouija Board. His mother won the Arc. His siblings have won G1s all over the world. He had a flawless conformation, a perfect constitution and an unflappable disposition.

Did he ever beat a true superstar? I can't say. But there's a reason no horse in the long history of European racing achieved what he did in 2009. There is enough evidence for me to consider him a reference point.

In more ways than either Zenyatta or Zarkara, he was the perfect racing machine.

"He is the point to which thoroughbred breeding, after 300 years, has arrived."

[tucker6]

"He is the point to which thoroughbred breeding, after 300 years, has arrived."
I hope you were just patronizing George with that dandy, or is it someone else's quote. If not, then after nine races in his life, you saw enough in STS to claim him the pinnacle of the breed?? That's just stunning unless you're 18 years old. Please tell me I'm reading your post incorrectly.

For your information, the breed reached its equine zenith back in 1970, and has been in a ditch for the most part ever since.

[thorobasePA]

It was a quote from Jim Bolger, STS' trainer.

All else described is, like your views on racing in 1970, just an opinion.

[Gorgeous George]

Two of the best horses he beat came over here and got their butts handed to them.

You keep referring to RVW and Mastercraftsman, well then explain the Twice Over and Conduit form i mentioned above?

[Gorgeous George]

It was a quote from Jim Bolger, STS' trainer.

All else described is, like your views on racing in 1970, just an opinion.

It was quote from John Oxx. Great Post above by the way :ThmbUp:

[gm10]

1. Sea The Stars beat Twice Over by 17 lengths in the Group 1 Coral Eclipse. After that Twice Over went on to win 3 in a row culminating with a win in the Group1 Champion Stakes then finishing less than 3 lengths behind Zenyatta.


2. Conduit who won back to back Breeders Cup Turf races was beat 4.5 and 2.5 lengths by Sea The Stars.

3. Dar Re Mi who STS beat by 3 lengths in the Arc went on to be beat by Conduit in the Breeders Cup Turf then win the Dubai Sheema Classic.

4. STS beat 17 Group 1 winners which between them won 34 Group 1 races and that doesn’t include the Group 1 Dar Re Mi was wrongly disqualified from in France.

5.STS won 6 Group 1 races in six months taking on all challengers, taking him over to America was too much at the end of a long season and John Oxx had the sense to realise that.


It's all relative.

Rip Van Winkle came close to STS but was destroyed by Zenyatta.
Presious Passion made life very difficult for Conduit, but was annihilated by Gio Ponti (Arlington Million) who was brushed aside by Zenyatta.
Zenyatta has never been beaten, as a 3yo, 4yo, 5yo and 6yo and has won more group 1 races than STS.

In my opinion, no horse in the world would have beaten Zenyatta at Santa Anita last November.

[tucker6]

It was a quote from Jim Bolger, STS' trainer.

All else described is, like your views on racing in 1970, just an opinion.
Thank you for the attribution of the quote.

[WinterTriangle]

It smacks of getting out while the getting's good.

Silly statement.

You speak of Aga Khan as if he were a commercial breeder, or commercial stud operator interested in quick returns and increasing the value of a horse for stud.

He hardly needs the $$. While others promote their own stallions for use by other breeders, he is hardly a commercial breeder, is very much into developing his own bloodstock. Patience is his hallmark, he is staggeringly rich, so your "getting while it's good" doesn't much apply here. :rolleyes:


IMHO, he "gets" it:

While the market becomes more and more polarized toward big commercial operations, first-season sires and a handful of 'top' stallions, the breeder with long-term goals, other than commercial gain, will have to defy this trend. Breeding decisions, which may seem to many unwise or unconventional, may in fact represent the key to our survival."
---The H. H. Aga Khan

I can't explain his breeding philosophy better than he did in his own words. Brilliant, IMHO, and thank goodness somebody is thinking outside the box, thinking about the longevity of the breed, while commercial breeders are mortgaging the collective future for $$, and classic stayers are seen as afflictions.


Of course, a commercial product cannot be raised in such a way, so thank goodness for these rich, older breeding families who can afford to do it....private breeders who are interested in a quest.


Because, breeding for speed, drug and surgical intervention is not going to produce anything truly sound in the long term.


Which brings us back to why we don't have a Triple Crown winner in 30 years. Perhaps nobody here is interested in breeding one? It requires inborn strength and soundness, not big brown's with bad feet.

[Dahoss9698]

If Stewart Elliot and Kent Desormeaux don't panic and move too early, we would have had triple crown winners in 1998 and 2004. Breeding didn't cost them the triple crown, human stupidity did.

[Cardus]

Since 1978, the following dual classic winners did not fail to win the Triple Crown because of breeding:

Afleet Alex: premature move into a hot pace in the Derby.
Point Given: overly confident ride in the Derby.
Silver Charm: close enough in the Belmont to conclude that he lost to a better horse on that day.
Thunder Gulch: better stablemate in the Preakness.
Sunday Silence: sore feet before the Belmont and the fantastic Easy Goer on his home course.
Risen Star: horrendous Derby trip.
Pleasant Colony: perhaps not good enough, but breeding was not the problem.
Spectacular Bid: we've gone round and round on this one.

With the possible exception of Pleasant Colony -- about whom John Campo said, "didn't want to go that far" (and PC was considered a stamina source) -- there is no evidence that breeding prevented these horses from winning the Triple Crown.

[Steve R]

I hope you were just patronizing George with that dandy, or is it someone else's quote. If not, then after nine races in his life, you saw enough in STS to claim him the pinnacle of the breed?? That's just stunning unless you're 18 years old. Please tell me I'm reading your post incorrectly.

For your information, the breed reached its equine zenith back in 1970, and has been in a ditch for the most part ever since.
"For your information", your our opinion is simply that...yours. A panel of well-known and respected racing experts (and far more knowledgeable than you I would guess), including among them Tommy Trotter, Lenny Hale, Jay Hovdey and others, believes that 5 of the top 23 North American Thoroughbreds of the 20th century were born AFTER 1970. Then, of course, there are the European horses, and experts in that part of the world believe that 9 of the top 20 in the last 70 years were born AFTER 1970.

As for Sea The Stars, only 7 European horses in the last 70 years have been rated higher. And despite their notable accomplishments, neither Zenyatta nor Zarkava appear among the top 100 in the history of Timeform. You can dismiss the assessment of experts as you like, but doing so does not enhance your own credibility.

[thorobasePA]

It was quote from John Oxx. Great Post above by the way :ThmbUp:

Ah, a silly mistake. I knew it was John Oxx but I'd just read an article involving Mr Bolger. It's funny how one never notices it when that happens.

The point about the quote was that, for some, the bloodlines enhance a champions story. For years, they have been breeding the best to the best and then hoping for the best. As a stallion prospect, Sea The Stars is priceless.

[thorobasePA]

I should also mention that STS was not the Aga Khan's horse, although he has retired under his patronage. STS was owned by the Tsui family, who owned his mother, the Arc winner and prodigious broodmare of champions, Urban Sea.

She died in 2009, as her son was midway through his unprecedented exploits. Her exercise rider was killed years ago, and I understand a member of the family witnessed it, though I'm not certain of that. They don't own many horses and from what I hear it is the matriarch Mrs Tsui who was by far the most intimate with the breeding decisions made.

As soon as Urban Sea died, it was practically certain Sea The Stars would be retired to ensure the amazing bloodline they had worked so hard to design was to continue.

[Cardus]

I should also mention that STS was not the Aga Khan's horse, although he has retired under his patronage. STS was owned by the Tsui family, who owned his mother, the Arc winner and prodigious broodmare of champions, Urban Sea.

She died in 2009, as her son was midway through his unprecedented exploits. Her exercise rider was killed years ago, and I understand a member of the family witnessed it, though I'm not certain of that. They don't own many horses and from what I hear it is the matriarch Mrs Tsui who was by far the most intimate with the breeding decisions made.

As soon as Urban Sea died, it was practically certain Sea The Stars would be retired to ensure the amazing bloodline they had worked so hard to design was to continue.

Winter Triangle was testing us.

You passed.

[Fager Fan]

Silly statement.

You speak of Aga Khan as if he were a commercial breeder, or commercial stud operator interested in quick returns and increasing the value of a horse for stud.

He hardly needs the $$. While others promote their own stallions for use by other breeders, he is hardly a commercial breeder, is very much into developing his own bloodstock. Patience is his hallmark, he is staggeringly rich, so your "getting while it's good" doesn't much apply here. :rolleyes:


IMHO, he "gets" it:

While the market becomes more and more polarized toward big commercial operations, first-season sires and a handful of 'top' stallions, the breeder with long-term goals, other than commercial gain, will have to defy this trend. Breeding decisions, which may seem to many unwise or unconventional, may in fact represent the key to our survival."
---The H. H. Aga Khan

I can't explain his breeding philosophy better than he did in his own words. Brilliant, IMHO, and thank goodness somebody is thinking outside the box, thinking about the longevity of the breed, while commercial breeders are mortgaging the collective future for $$, and classic stayers are seen as afflictions.


Of course, a commercial product cannot be raised in such a way, so thank goodness for these rich, older breeding families who can afford to do it....private breeders who are interested in a quest.


Because, breeding for speed, drug and surgical intervention is not going to produce anything truly sound in the long term.


Which brings us back to why we don't have a Triple Crown winner in 30 years. Perhaps nobody here is interested in breeding one? It requires inborn strength and soundness, not big brown's with bad feet.

Good grief. At least know what you're talking about before talking. STS was owned by a 24yo named Tsui, not the Aga Khan.

[Fager Fan]

"For your information", your our opinion is simply that...yours. A panel of well-known and respected racing experts (and far more knowledgeable than you I would guess), including among them Tommy Trotter, Lenny Hale, Jay Hovdey and others, believes that 5 of the top 23 North American Thoroughbreds of the 20th century were born AFTER 1970. Then, of course, there are the European horses, and experts in that part of the world believe that 9 of the top 20 in the last 70 years were born AFTER 1970.

As for Sea The Stars, only 7 European horses in the last 70 years have been rated higher. And despite their notable accomplishments, neither Zenyatta nor Zarkava appear among the top 100 in the history of Timeform. You can dismiss the assessment of experts as you like, but doing so does not enhance your own credibility.

Those "experts" are no more expert than hundreds or thousands of people who own, train, study, handicap, or are otherwise astute observers of horse racing.

That STS is ranked so high by Europeans is a simple matter of their bar being dreadfully low.

[Fager Fan]

Ah, a silly mistake. I knew it was John Oxx but I'd just read an article involving Mr Bolger. It's funny how one never notices it when that happens.

The point about the quote was that, for some, the bloodlines enhance a champions story. For years, they have been breeding the best to the best and then hoping for the best. As a stallion prospect, Sea The Stars is priceless.

Yet just like every other stallion, he has to prove his way there, and there's no guarantee that he'll be a success. He was worth a handsome sum (certainly not priceless) when he retired, and now his value will decrease every year until/unless he proves himself a success at stud.

[bisket]

If Stewart Elliot and Kent Desormeaux don't panic and move too early, we would have had triple crown winners in 1998 and 2004. Breeding didn't cost them the triple crown, human stupidity did.
neither one of those horses were much more of a stayer than rule. its incredible to me they actually won a race further than 1 1/8 mile

[Cardus]

neither one of those horses were much more of a stayer than rule. its incredible to me they actually won a race further than 1 1/8 mile

It's incredible to me that you posted this: another nose and an inch, and Real Quiet "stays" to win the Belmont Stakes.

And Smarty Jones won the Derby -- if you want to discount that win a little because of the monsoon, so be it -- the Preakness by a city block, and ran the 1 1/4 of the Belmont Stakes in less than 2:01. Another non-stayer.

[WinterTriangle]

Good grief. At least know what you're talking about before talking. STS was owned by a 24yo named Tsui, not the Aga Khan.

I might suggest you do the same.

Tsui also had no interest in "getting out while the gettin was good".

They don't need the money, aren't even motivated by it. They were approached by a number of buyers....who would pay whatever was asked.

Your post still made no sense, regardless of the error in mine.


As for the great breeding, this board is sometimes schizophrenic. One day you're all lamenting how crummy our Derby and Preakness field is (I've heard that for 3 years now), but the next, when it suits you, they're *the best* in the world.

JMHO, but there were no Zarkava's or STS's out on the CDX field on May 2nd this year.

[Gorgeous George]

Those "experts" are no more expert than hundreds or thousands of people who own, train, study, handicap, or are otherwise astute observers of horse racing.

That STS is ranked so high by Europeans is a simple matter of their bar being dreadfully low.

You simply know nothing about European racing your comments are laughable :lol: Sea The Stars raised the bar that little bit higher when everyone thought that it could never be raised again since Mill Reef or Dancing Brave. STS was the first horse in history to win the Guineas, Derby and Arc treble in history but you already knew that.
He was a horse worthy of all the superlatives: an amazing temperament; solid constitution; wonderful pace and acceleration; able to act throughout a busy campaign at the highest level and over a variety of distances; brilliantly handled by jockey, trainer, staff and all the connections.

[Dahoss9698]

As for the great breeding, this board is sometimes schizophrenic. One day you're all lamenting how crummy our Derby and Preakness field is (I've heard that for 3 years now), but the next, when it suits you, they're *the best* in the world.

JMHO, but there were no Zarkava's or STS's out on the CDX field on May 2nd this year.

I don't believe anyone said anything about great breeding in this country. But you want to denigrade the breeding because we haven't had a triple crown winner in 30 years. I offered up two examples of "distance challenged" horses based on their breeding that were good enough to win the triple crown. They deserved to, but the humans on their back prevented it from happening. Cardus also presented examples of other horses who were probably good enough to win it also, but due to trips, racing luck, etc were unable to.

There is a lot more to it than breeding. Breeding only gets you so far. Yes, we have a problem in this country with breeding unsound horses. Horses are retiring too early before they have really done much on the track because a lot of the times owners want to get out while their horse is at what they percieve to be their highest value. Somewhere in the last few years avoiding races or just retiring has become better than running well while not winning.

Yes, there were probably no Zarkava's or STS out in CDX field on May 2nd. It was Sunday and the Derby had been run the day before. All errors aside (and they are plentiful) there are probably no Zarkava's or STS in this years European Classics either. Must be the breeding.

[Fager Fan]

You simply know nothing about European racing your comments are laughable :lol: Sea The Stars raised the bar that little bit higher when everyone thought that it could never be raised again since Mill Reef or Dancing Brave. STS was the first horse in history to win the Guineas, Derby and Arc treble in history but you already knew that.
He was a horse worthy of all the superlatives: an amazing temperament; solid constitution; wonderful pace and acceleration; able to act throughout a busy campaign at the highest level and over a variety of distances; brilliantly handled by jockey, trainer, staff and all the connections.

Do you think racing is a Mr. Congeniality contest? His "amazing temperament and solid constitution" are irrelevant (and hardly unique). His handling is also irrelevant to what he did on the track. That leaves among your argument th following: "able to act throughout a busy campaign at the highest level and over a variety of distances." His campaign and career weren't that busy, as he retired at the end of his 3yo season with only 9 starts. He did race at the highest level, though, and at a variety of distances.

His best race may've been the arc, where he received a weight allowance that is absurd, with his real competition carrying over 130 pounds while he carried a light 123. The horse who finished 2nd in that race hasn't won a race in 2 years.

STS was a very nice horse. He needed to do more than have a single year's campaign of note and more than 9 starts. The more you race, the harder it is to keep winning, and that's why you have to demand more than 9 starts. If you keep heaping the high praise on horses like STS, Zarkava, Sea Bird, and others for campaigns of only 7 or 9 starts, then that's all people will give to you because it's enough to be a great in your eyes. That is what I mean about the bar being too low. You need to demand more.

[Fager Fan]

I might suggest you do the same.

Tsui also had no interest in "getting out while the gettin was good".

They don't need the money, aren't even motivated by it. They were approached by a number of buyers....who would pay whatever was asked.

Your post still made no sense, regardless of the error in mine.

Considering he got out while the getting was good, what evidence do you have that to the contrary? None. The horse was healthy and could've run in the BC in 2009 and could've come back for a 4yo year. He didn't. He got out while the getting was good.

As for the great breeding, this board is sometimes schizophrenic. One day you're all lamenting how crummy our Derby and Preakness field is (I've heard that for 3 years now), but the next, when it suits you, they're *the best* in the world.

JMHO, but there were no Zarkava's or STS's out on the CDX field on May 2nd this year.

What has that to do with breeding? You argue about the great philosophy of the Aga Khan, who is supporting a very lightly-raced horse. Where is your argument for soundness and longevity in a horse with his record?

[Gorgeous George]

Do you think racing is a Mr. Congeniality contest? His "amazing temperament and solid constitution" are irrelevant (and hardly unique). His handling is also irrelevant to what he did on the track. That leaves among your argument th following: "able to act throughout a busy campaign at the highest level and over a variety of distances." His campaign and career weren't that busy, as he retired at the end of his 3yo season with only 9 starts. He did race at the highest level, though, and at a variety of distances.

His best race may've been the arc, where he received a weight allowance that is absurd, with his real competition carrying over 130 pounds while he carried a light 123. The horse who finished 2nd in that race hasn't won a race in 2 years.

STS was a very nice horse. He needed to do more than have a single year's campaign of note and more than 9 starts. The more you race, the harder it is to keep winning, and that's why you have to demand more than 9 starts. If you keep heaping the high praise on horses like STS, Zarkava, Sea Bird, and others for campaigns of only 7 or 9 starts, then that's all people will give to you because it's enough to be a great in your eyes. That is what I mean about the bar being too low. You need to demand more.

How many Group 1's do you have to win in a campaign for it to be considered a busy campaign? Your dismissing Youmzains credentials because he hasnt won a race in two years but you forget he has been runner up in 3 Arc's to STS, Zarkava and Dylan Thomas quite a remarkable achievement. The first 9 in STS's Arc were all Group 1 winners it wouldnt have mattered if STS had two jockeys on board he still would have won.
I understand your affections for the longevity of a career but in European racing its your achievements in your 3 YO campaign that dictate your place in history. STS was only retired because the his dam Urban Sea had died in March 2009 and the Tsui family wanted to keep the pure thoroughbred gene that they had worked so hard for alive. What STS showed in his 3 YO campaign was enough for eveyone to know that he was special.

[Gorgeous George]

Considering he got out while the getting was good, what evidence do you have that to the contrary? None. The horse was healthy and could've run in the BC in 2009 and could've come back for a 4yo year. He didn't. He got out while the getting was good.

His coat was already on before the Arc and he was sweating. Mick Kinane voiced his concerns after the Arc was over. And as i quoted above the only reason he was retired was because Urban Sea died in March 2009 her owners wanted her leagcy to continue through STS as a stallion.



What has that to do with breeding? You argue about the great philosophy of the Aga Khan, who is supporting a very lightly-raced horse. Where is your argument for soundness and longevity in a horse with his record?
See above.

[Dahoss9698]

I understand your affections for the longevity of a career but in European racing its your achievements in your 3 YO campaign that dictate your place in history.

What STS showed in his 3 YO campaign was enough for eveyone to know that he was special.

I find these two comments very interesting.

[Grits]

I understand your affections for the longevity of a career but in European racing its your achievements in your 3 YO campaign that dictate your place in history.

I don't mean to add on to anyone's statement, ie, DaHoss or others.

You could've saved yourself a great deal of time and typing. You just defined your thread, and summed up all your previous posts with this one sentence.

You're having a great deal of a problem and the reason being you're attempting to state facts while comparing apples to oranges.

European and American racing are not gauged in the same manner, nor is greatness.

As my friend Marty would've said . . . .

NEXT

[Gorgeous George]

You could've saved yourself a great deal of time and typing. You just defined your thread, and summed up all your previous posts with this one sentence.

No i simply started the thread with something quite obvious;
Sea The Stars_Zarkava_Zenyatta


3 modern greats

Maybe not obvious for some who have shown quite abit of ignorance towards European racing.

European and American racing are not gauged in the same manner, nor is greatness.
Who said it was?:confused:

[nearco]

I don't mean to add on to anyone's statement, ie, DaHoss or others.

You could've saved yourself a great deal of time and typing. You just defined your thread, and summed up all your previous posts with this one sentence.

You're having a great deal of a problem and the reason being you're attempting to state facts while comparing apples to oranges.

European and American racing are not gauged in the same manner, nor is greatness.


NEXT


Exactly.
Dr Fager, Secretariat, Kelso, Slew, Bid, Cigar et al never won going right handed. None of them ever won on a true galloping course with an uphill finish. As far as I know they never raced over a straight mile. They were pretty good horses... but great? I guess we'll never know.
;)

[WinterTriangle]

You argue about the great philosophy of the Aga Khan

I think it would be somewhat humorous to argue the greatness of aga khans' breeding philosophy and/or bloodlines without generating laughter thru much of the world, esp. when combining it with the phrase "low bar" instead of "exceptional".

No point in continuing with you on this.

[Fager Fan]

I think it would be somewhat humorous to argue the greatness of aga khans' breeding philosophy and/or bloodlines without generating laughter thru much of the world, esp. when combining it with the phrase "low bar" instead of "exceptional".

No point in continuing with you on this.




Great way to not answer the question.

How did the great Aga Khan establish the longevity and durability and ability to race and win at the top level through multiple campaigns with the Almighty Zarkava?

[Spalding No!]

Great way to not answer the question.

How did the great Aga Khan establish the longevity and durability and ability to race and win at the top level through multiple campaigns with the Almighty Zarkava?

I'm not sure longevity enters into the equation.

The Aga Khan seems to maneuver based on the age old justification for racing Thoroughbred horses, specifically: "To improve the breed".

From this purist standpoint, the Classics (which are for intact male and female 3yos only--can you guess why they don't allow geldings?) and perhaps the Arc, are traditionally the races that identify the superior horses that are worthy of being bred.

That's not to say that the Aga Khan hasn't bred any horses that proved to be top class beyond their 3yo year (Daylami, Azamour, etc.)

[Fager Fan]

I'm not sure longevity enters into the equation.

The Aga Khan seems to maneuver based on the age old justification for racing Thoroughbred horses, specifically: "To improve the breed".

From this purist standpoint, the Classics (which are for intact male and female 3yos only--can you guess why they don't allow geldings?) and perhaps the Arc, are traditionally the races that identify the superior horses that are worthy of being bred.

That's not to say that the Aga Khan hasn't bred any horses that proved to be top class beyond their 3yo year (Daylami, Azamour, etc.)

But the Aga Khan is supposedly thinking "outside of the box" and not doing things that the dreaded commercial breeders are doing.

Yes, retiring healthy 3yos after successful seasons, particularly those with good bloodlines, now that's something we've never heard of before! Amazingly out of the box, that is.

The Thoroughbred was in no danger of extinction if STS didn't get to stud right now or if Zarkava didn't have her first foal in 2010 instead of 2011. And there is no great purpose for the breeding animal if the results are exemplary horses who are whisked off the track quicker than you can shake a stick.

There is nothing grandiose about the Aga Khan's breeding philosophies, only the bloodstock his money has enabled him to purchase.

[Gorgeous George]

But the Aga Khan is supposedly thinking "outside of the box" and not doing things that the dreaded commercial breeders are doing.

Yes, retiring healthy 3yos after successful seasons, particularly those with good bloodlines, now that's something we've never heard of before! Amazingly out of the box, that is.

The Thoroughbred was in no danger of extinction if STS didn't get to stud right now or if Zarkava didn't have her first foal in 2010 instead of 2011. And there is no great purpose for the breeding animal if the results are exemplary horses who are whisked off the track quicker than you can shake a stick.

There is nothing grandiose about the Aga Khan's breeding philosophies, only the bloodstock his money has enabled him to purchase.

A snippet of Aga Khan's breeding philosphy;
''The role of the female lines is likely to be diluted beyond recognition through the sheer force of numbers.
'On average a mare will produce some 12 healthy foals in her stud career. When one stallion can engender up to 300 foals per year, around the world, it follows that the global inventory of pedigrees in, say, 15 years will present breeders with a totally new problem. In those 15 years a mare will have produced some 12 foals, whereas a globetrotting stallion will have sired 4,500 foals! Of these, half, or 2,250, will be fillies.
'In these circumstances it is likely that so many of the top female lines will have been bred to such a small stallion base that circumventing these stallions, rather than using them astutely, will become a breeder's goal or should I say nightmare. Is that not already occurring with Northern Dancer?
'The majority of traditional breeders, who I believe generally place more importance in their pedigrees on the female rather than the male lines, will thenceforth need to scour the globe for foundation mares, or families, that are revealing themselves, before they have been crossed with the top-of-the-line globe-trotting sires.''

The Aga Khan is breeding the best with the best, his breeding operation which is clear from above is based around mares. STS's dam Urban Sea a champion broadmare died in 2009 so to keep her legacy going STS will be breed to champion mares such as Zarkava. Keeping the bloodline pure and not diluting it which has/is happening in commercial breeding, for the sake of the thoroughbred and not money is THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX in a sport corrupted by monetary gain.

[Fager Fan]

A snippet of Aga Khan's breeding philosphy;
''The role of the female lines is likely to be diluted beyond recognition through the sheer force of numbers.
'On average a mare will produce some 12 healthy foals in her stud career. When one stallion can engender up to 300 foals per year, around the world, it follows that the global inventory of pedigrees in, say, 15 years will present breeders with a totally new problem. In those 15 years a mare will have produced some 12 foals, whereas a globetrotting stallion will have sired 4,500 foals! Of these, half, or 2,250, will be fillies.
'In these circumstances it is likely that so many of the top female lines will have been bred to such a small stallion base that circumventing these stallions, rather than using them astutely, will become a breeder's goal or should I say nightmare. Is that not already occurring with Northern Dancer?
'The majority of traditional breeders, who I believe generally place more importance in their pedigrees on the female rather than the male lines, will thenceforth need to scour the globe for foundation mares, or families, that are revealing themselves, before they have been crossed with the top-of-the-line globe-trotting sires.''

The Aga Khan is breeding the best with the best, his breeding operation which is clear from above is based around mares. STS's dam Urban Sea a champion broadmare died in 2009 so to keep her legacy going STS will be breed to champion mares such as Zarkava. Keeping the bloodline pure and not diluting it which has/is happening in commercial breeding, for the sake of the thoroughbred and not money is THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX in a sport corrupted by monetary gain.

I can't help but laugh. What about any of that is any different than other top breeders with the money to breed the best to the best?

What on earth do you even mean by "keeping the bloodline pure"? Is that supposed to mean sending expensive mares to expensive stallions? Boy, that's out of the box, never seen that done before. Over here in America, why, we send graded stakes winning mares and top producers to bottom-rung stallions standing in North Dakota.

And we do that for monetary gain.

lol.

[Gorgeous George]

I can't help but laugh. What about any of that is any different than other top breeders with the money to breed the best to the best?

What on earth do you even mean by "keeping the bloodline pure"? Is that supposed to mean sending expensive mares to expensive stallions? Boy, that's out of the box, never seen that done before. Over here in America, why, we send graded stakes winning mares and top producers to bottom-rung stallions standing in North Dakota.

And we do that for monetary gain.

lol.

You dont even warrant a response. Its like trying to educate a vegetable, pointless.

[Fager Fan]

You dont even warrant a response. Its like trying to educate a vegetable, pointless.

In other words, you have no intelligent argument.

[Gorgeous George]

In other words, you have no intelligent argument.

I have but i need someone intelligient to have it with.

[Fager Fan]

I have but i need someone intelligient to have it with.

Oooh, good one!

Now, why don't you try again and tell us what brilliant decisions the Aga Khan uses in his breeding that others don't share? He's the only one breeding "the best to the best"? He's the only one breeding to classic-winning stallions? What's he doing that is so different than everyone else who has the money to have similar bloodstock?

[Grits]

From Racehorseowner.com

The Aga Khan, or Shah Karim al-Hussayni, His Highness The Aga Khan IV, was born on December 13th 1936, and has become one of the most prolific racehorse owner and breeder in the world. One of the Aga Khan's main sources of income is his horseracing interests.

The Aga Kahn owns and operates the biggest horse racing and breeding operation in France. It is located in the Picardie region of the country at his vast and sprawling Aiglemont estate, which is barely four kilometers from Chantilly Racecourse.

He is passionate about horse racing and his investments in the sport have been large and highly publicized. In 1977 for instance, the Aga Kahn paid 1.3 million pounds for the bloodstock owned by Anna Dupre. A year later he paid 4.7 million pounds for the late Marcel Boussac's bloodstock.

Since then his horse racing interests have grown dramatically and he now also owns Gilltown Stud near Kilcullen in Ireland as well as Haras de Bonneval breeding farm at Le Mesnil-Mauger in France. In 2005 he acquired the Calvados stud farms, the Haras d'Ouilly in Pont-d'Ouilly as well as the Haras de Val-Henry in Livarot.

************************

George, this is a brief profile on your wonder breeder that you are so enamoured with, who as you'll note might be touting "Success Breeds Success" with extremely selective breedings--but somehow realizes a large portion of his income through his racing interests. But he's not in it for the money, as we understand quality over quanity and all like that.

I love detail, really love it, and when something does appeal, I enjoy reading and reading. Its been quite some time since I delved back into pedigree, as I don't find it as valuable as I used to, particularly in regard to distance limitations. Too many horses have outrun their's. Which leads me to believe, when handicapping horseraces, its a pretty quick way to the poor house........but I digress.

Still, let me recommend that you spend a real long while on detail at www.agakhanstuds.com (http://www.agakhanstuds.com/). so that you can become more well read on that which you speak of, as opposed to throwing out sound bites and snippets. Not on just Sea The Stars, who, of course, has been outstanding in these last couple of years, and begins his new career soon, but on all aspects of the operation.

While there, please note first, the "stud" header. There you'll find all of the farms in France and in Ireland. It would stand to reason, when you have farms that have been in your own family, and then you're able to acquire the vast farm properties of all of your competition, along with their bloodstock, ie broodmares, you have a pretty good chance of being able to produce some nice runners. Selectively, and successfully, buying up those around you.

Next, please move on to the "stallion" header where one learns through reading the current stallion roster, their race records, pedigree, etc.

Azamour raced 11 times through ages 2, 3, and 4.
Dalakhani raced 9 times through ages 2 and 3.
Linngari raced a whopping 22 times through ages 2,3,4,5,and 6.
Sinndar raced 8 times through ages 2 and 3.
Sea The Stars (beautiful rascal) raced 9 times through ages 2 and 3.

After you spend time with this section, please move on to the "history" header. Here one reads the family tradition, the timeline, and information regarding their bloodstock, particularly their winners. Please, pay close attention and study all winners, George. The Grade 1s, the Foundation Mares, and the Derby and Classic winners. Each are listed, click on each and their pedigree will appear. For more indepth pedigree go here: http://www.pedigreequery.com/ Key in each winner and you'll be able to see farther back into their background.

Originally Posted by Gorgeous George

A snippet of Aga Khan's breeding philosphy;
''The role of the female lines is likely to be diluted beyond recognition through the sheer force of numbers.

'On average a mare will produce some 12 healthy foals in her stud career. When one stallion can engender up to 300 foals per year, around the world, it follows that the global inventory of pedigrees in, say, 15 years will present breeders with a totally new problem. In those 15 years a mare will have produced some 12 foals, whereas a globetrotting stallion will have sired 4,500 foals! Of these, half, or 2,250, will be fillies.

'In these circumstances it is likely that so many of the top female lines will have been bred to such a small stallion base that circumventing these stallions, rather than using them astutely, will become a breeder's goal or should I say nightmare. Is that not already occurring with Northern Dancer?

'The majority of traditional breeders, who I believe generally place more importance in their pedigrees on the female rather than the male lines, will thenceforth need to scour the globe for foundation mares, or families, that are revealing themselves, before they have been crossed with the top-of-the-line globe-trotting sires.''

The Aga Khan is breeding the best with the best, his breeding operation which is clear from above is based around mares. STS's dam Urban Sea a champion broadmare died in 2009 so to keep her legacy going STS will be breed to champion mares such as Zarkava. Keeping the bloodline pure and not diluting it which has/is happening in commercial breeding, for the sake of the thoroughbred and not money is THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX in a sport corrupted by monetary gain.

Now, based on all you've learned in your reading, George, and the philosophy you've posted here, particularly how The Aga Khan has decided Northern Dancer has become every breeder's nighmare, but somehow every horse he owns and is breeding has little ole' Dancer running threw his blood. Lord, George, go figure!

And too, if you will, note at the Pedigree Query site, in the lines of those great winners how many times you see U.S. stallions--Mr.Prospector, Danzig, Bold Reason, Polynesian, Secretariat, Gone West, Cozzene, Native Dancer, Spectacular Bid, Man O'War, Black Toney, and Nasrullah, (Nasrullah, who, well I'll be damn, George, was sold by His Highness AK to Bull Hancock, the patriarch of Claiborne Farm in Kentucky, (you may not be familiar with him) anyway, he and his farm stood many of these American based horses you're finding in the pedigrees of these winners.)

And your final stop, darlin'. Only one more, I promise!!!

http://www.amazon.com/Kingmaker-Northern-Dancer-Founded-Dynasty/dp/1581502036/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273697065&sr=1-1

Look inside, start turning pages, scroll all the way down on each, and read about what this little gutsy guy created, this Sire of Sires, which include some of the greatest sires in the world including Danehill, Sadler's Wells, etc, the list goes on and on and on.

Then, you'll know something about who bred what, and how good they were at it. The Aga Khan has a lot of money, and he doesn't have a corner on technique or success.

If one man could be said to have an edge, it would have to be Frederico Tesio (have his book here too). He was a master, and he sure bred one in Nearco.

Sea The Stars, Zarkava, and Zenyatta are fine racehorses. All three truly are. As far as GREAT--will know later. On and off the track go a long, long way.

Some of our breeders on this side of the pond have had a whole lot to do with YOUR FINE RUNNERS IN EUROPE.

George, don't ever do anything halfway. Snippets, sound bits, declarations without background, and bits and pieces only tell parts of a story.

[Fager Fan]

That's a mighty fine post there, Grits.

[WinterTriangle]

Some of our breeders on this side of the pond have had a whole lot to do with YOUR FINE RUNNERS IN EUROPE.

Grits, how did a topic about zarkava and sts morph into one of those "us versus them" topics?

I am used to discussing pedigree and bloodstock without regard to nation-states, as it is generally accepted in those groups that thoroughbreds don't have nationalities.

The topic started getting contentious, not comparing the horses that the original poster brought up, and which a few people gave their opinions on........but instead went to some insulting stuff about euros being "low bar", and I strongly objected to that premise. (still do).

I complimented the aga khan's operation..... and I stand by that. (the topic was originally about zarkava and STS, so it would have been odd not to bring him up. :) ) I doubt you'll find many bloodstock sites who would say he doesn't have an admirable operation.....his results in world-class Classic races are pretty nice. And certainly none that would make sweeping statements that euro horses were "low bar". ????

Complimenting a foreign breeder, trainer, horse or track shouldn't be an affront to US racing------ but it seems that most topics about this stuff turn out very contentious on here.

So I'm wondering why that is......:confused:

[Grits]

I am used to discussing pedigree and bloodstock without regard to nation-states, as it is generally accepted in those groups that thoroughbreds don't have nationalities.

Winter, I'm sorry if I spoke out of turn on the subject of breeding racehorses. I've never talked with or been involved in those groups. I'm not familiar with their protocol for discussion.

All I have is my books, many of them that I used to read, A LOT; along with the ability to read online, the pedigree of individual horses including those belonging to the Aga Khan.

I tried to explain why I felt the Aga Khan's statement about Northern Dancer unnecessary. I worked on the post and its content, yesterday, longer than any post I've ever written here at Pace Advantage. I had no intention or desire to offend George in any way, or to dismiss the Aga Khan as a fine breeder.

Maybe its simply me not getting across well--trying to lecture somebody again. Something I'm told these days.

My intention was to ask George to dig deeper. And to note breeding worldwide, and the fact that the Hancock family of Claiborne, Frederico Tesio and others have been stalwarts of it for 100 years. And that's a mighty long time.

I'm not a pedigree maven or analyst of pedigree. As I said, I've read. I've never talked about what I've read or learned, over the years, in pedigree discussions. And I won't ever do so again. I'm sorry you feel my post was contentious and not acceptable among those who study it.

Sometimes, try as hard, and as honestly, as one may, one still comes up short.

EOC

[Gorgeous George]

Winter, I'm sorry if I spoke out of turn on the subject of breeding racehorses. I've never talked with or been involved in those groups. I'm not familiar with their protocol for discussion.

All I have is my books, many of them that I used to read, A LOT; along with the ability to read online, the pedigree of individual horses including those belonging to the Aga Khan.

I tried to explain why I felt the Aga Khan's statement about Northern Dancer unnecessary. I worked on the post and its content, yesterday, longer than any post I've ever written here at Pace Advantage. I had no intention or desire to offend George in any way, or to dismiss the Aga Khan as a fine breeder.

Maybe its simply me not getting across well--trying to lecture somebody again. Something I'm told these days.

My intention was to ask George to dig deeper. And to note breeding worldwide, and the fact that the Hancock family of Claiborne, Frederico Tesio and others have been stalwarts of it for 100 years. And that's a mighty long time.

I'm not a pedigree maven or analyst of pedigree. As I said, I've read. I've never talked about what I've read or learned, over the years, in pedigree discussions. And I won't ever do so again. I'm sorry you feel my post was contentious and not acceptable among those who study it.

Sometimes, try as hard, and as honestly, as one may, one still comes up short.

EOC

Why do you want me to aknowledge breeders such as Claiborne, Frederico Tesio and others as great breeders when i never mentioned or denied that they were great breeders. They played a huge part in the development of breeding in North America in fact without Frederico Tesio and Aga Khan there would be no Northern Dancer bloodlines. Northern Dancers dam Natalma'a damsire was Mahmoud who was bred by the Aga Khan. If you read over the Aga Khans statement again he is trying to point out that Northern Dancer's bloodline is being diluted due to the fact that breeding is based around stallions rather than mares.

[Fager Fan]

Grits, how did a topic about zarkava and sts morph into one of those "us versus them" topics?

I am used to discussing pedigree and bloodstock without regard to nation-states, as it is generally accepted in those groups that thoroughbreds don't have nationalities.

The topic started getting contentious, not comparing the horses that the original poster brought up, and which a few people gave their opinions on........but instead went to some insulting stuff about euros being "low bar", and I strongly objected to that premise. (still do).

I complimented the aga khan's operation..... and I stand by that. (the topic was originally about zarkava and STS, so it would have been odd not to bring him up. :) ) I doubt you'll find many bloodstock sites who would say he doesn't have an admirable operation.....his results in world-class Classic races are pretty nice. And certainly none that would make sweeping statements that euro horses were "low bar". ????

Complimenting a foreign breeder, trainer, horse or track shouldn't be an affront to US racing------ but it seems that most topics about this stuff turn out very contentious on here.

So I'm wondering why that is......:confused:

Winter, wasn't it you who was drooling over STS's 9-race campaign and making such grandiose statements as him being priceless as a stallion and how his owner, who you mistakenly thought was the Aga Khan, has some magical breeding program that is "outside of the box" from other breeders and how he breeds for some greater, altruistic purpose, not money?

When someone challenges you on your over-the-top and inaccuate statements, you call that being "contentious."

And calling horses "great" after campaigns of 7 and 9 races IS setting the bar low, whether you recognize it or not. I have to assume that you're completely unfamiliar with horses like Affirmed, who had almost double the number of G1 wins as STS had starts, or Secretariat, who set world, stakes and track records while winning on both dirt and turf and the Triple Crown, and the many other horses in America who we've NOT set such a low bar for. Some Europeans say STS may be the best horse in Europe ever. Over here, we would be questioning whether such a horse even deserves the title of "great" with such a low number of starts. We'd laugh ourselves silly at the thought that a horse with such a record may be the best American racehorse ever. Secretariat, Affirmed, Man o' War, Fager, Citation, and many, many others well prove otherwise.

Thank God that we do demand more, else we'd have the same problem as they have in europe, where they retire sound horses after 7 and 9 starts to the title of "great."

[Steve R]

Winter, wasn't it you who was drooling over STS's 9-race campaign and making such grandiose statements as him being priceless as a stallion and how his owner, who you mistakenly thought was the Aga Khan, has some magical breeding program that is "outside of the box" from other breeders and how he breeds for some greater, altruistic purpose, not money?

When someone challenges you on your over-the-top and inaccuate statements, you call that being "contentious."

And calling horses "great" after campaigns of 7 and 9 races IS setting the bar low, whether you recognize it or not. I have to assume that you're completely unfamiliar with horses like Affirmed, who had almost double the number of G1 wins as STS had starts, or Secretariat, who set world, stakes and track records while winning on both dirt and turf and the Triple Crown, and the many other horses in America who we've NOT set such a low bar for. Some Europeans say STS may be the best horse in Europe ever. Over here, we would be questioning whether such a horse even deserves the title of "great" with such a low number of starts. We'd laugh ourselves silly at the thought that a horse with such a record may be the best American racehorse ever. Secretariat, Affirmed, Man o' War, Fager, Citation, and many, many others well prove otherwise.

Thank God that we do demand more, else we'd have the same problem as they have in europe, where they retire sound horses after 7 and 9 starts to the title of "great."
The combination of ignorance and arrogance in your xenophobic posts is truly a thing to behold. Fortunately, those as uneducated as you about the history and tradition of Thoroughbred racing do not set the standards for so-called greatness. Of the top dozen highest rated horses in Europe over the last 70 years, no less than eight raced 10 or fewer times in their career and none raced as many as 20 times. Of course, we will never know how your American greats would have fared in direct competition with their foreign counterparts because of differences in surface and distance configurations. It is interesting, however, that in the evolving international racing environment, foreign-based runners coming to the US seem to do much better than US-based runners going abroad. The only "low bar" I see in this thread is your standard of intellectual rigor.

[Fager Fan]

The combination of ignorance and arrogance in your xenophobic posts is truly a thing to behold. Fortunately, those as uneducated as you about the history and tradition of Thoroughbred racing do not set the standards for so-called greatness. Of the top dozen highest rated horses in Europe over the last 70 years, no less than eight raced 10 or fewer times in their career and none raced as many as 20 times. Of course, we will never know how your American greats would have fared in direct competition with their foreign counterparts because of differences in surface and distance configurations. It is interesting, however, that in the evolving international racing environment, foreign-based runners coming to the US seem to do much better than US-based runners going abroad. The only "low bar" I see in this thread is your standard of intellectual rigor.

Thanks for reitterating what I said about the low bar set by Europeans. Eight out of top 12 running fewer than 10 times, and none more than 20, that illustrates my point beautifully.

How many of your Europeans have won top dirt races here? Not many, and certainly not a better show than we've put on against your top turfers in the BC turf events.

Leave the insults about intelligence and such in your pocket. Arguments are won and lost based on the facts, and you neither aid your case or make me quake in fear at such desperate attempts on your part.

[Grits]

Why do you want me to aknowledge breeders such as Claiborne, Frederico Tesio and others as great breeders when i never mentioned or denied that they were great breeders. They played a huge part in the development of breeding in North America in fact without Frederico Tesio and Aga Khan there would be no Northern Dancer bloodlines. Northern Dancers dam Natalma'a damsire was Mahmoud who was bred by the Aga Khan. If you read over the Aga Khans statement again he is trying to point out that Northern Dancer's bloodline is being diluted due to the fact that breeding is based around stallions rather than mares.

George, the horse that you set the bar with here, Mill Reef was bred and raced by none other than, American business tycoon, Paul Mellon, bred in the beautiful area of western Virginia on his Rokeby Farm estate. Of all the horses you could have chosen George, how outstanding this is!

Following up on that note. I'm sorry but the Aga Khan had absolutely nothing to do with the breeding of Northern Dancer. Well, not unless he shot sperm slam across the Atlantic . . . . .

The Aga Khan SOLD Mahmoud, George, to C.V.Whitney, where he stood in Kentucky at his farm. So, no, he had nothing to do with the mating/breeding of Northern Dancer.

The Aga Khan also SOLD Blenheim to Bull Hancock for a syndicate he put together with some of his tycoon friends. Blenheim stood in Kentucky too. At Claiborne. He sired our Triple Crown winner, Whirlaway. (Boy, Aga missed a good one there. That rascal could sure run, but like his sire, he was crazier than a damn rat in a coffee can.)

The Aga Khan also SOLD Nasrullah to Bull and Claiborne, George, where he stood until his death. And is buried in the Claiborne cemetary.

In the 30s, 40s, and 50s a lot of horseflesh left Europe, George, purchased by Hancock, Whitney, Vanderbilt, and a few other wealthy American buyers.

And by God, we're sure grateful for their deep pockets and the Aga Khan's penchant for loving that damn almighty dollar!!!!

Here is a snippet from Dynasties. Its in a chapter about Hyperion.

If one chooses to see Ellsworth as a maverick, it follows in a sense that it was appropriate for his foil to be the Aga Khan. His Highness was a bit of a maverick in a way, too. According to Abram Hewitt's, Sire Lines, many European breeders resented the pattern of the Aga Khan of the day (grandfather of the present Aga) selling off so much of his outstanding or potentially outstanding bloodstock. Lord Derby allegedly was so affronted by this traffic out of Europe, in fact, that he chose not to make his stallions available to the Aga Khan's mares.

Yesterday and this afternoon, I've come back to my books which have included:
--The History Of Thoroughbred Racing In America (This one goes from colonial days all the way up to the Kelso in the seventies.)
--Dynasties, Great Thoroughbred Stallions (Now get this, George, these were great.)
--Matriarchs, Great Mares Of The Twentieth Century
--Legacies Of The Turf (two volumes)

I don't know much, as I told Winter, about pedigree and bloodstock experts opinions and etiquette, so I'll continue to rely on my books.

I'm glad, George, that you do realize that finely bred horses are a worldwide thing, not exclusive to Europe. A collaboration. Zenyatta to Sea The Stars, now won't that be extraordinary!! Here's the pedigrees of your greats for other's quick reference. At least we've been global in this regard.

When viewing, be sure you see all these USAs.;)

http://www.pedigreequery.com/mill+reef

http://www.pedigreequery.com/sea+the+stars

http://www.pedigreequery.com/zarkava

http://www.pedigreequery.com/zenyatta


Bless his heart, all those Aga's sure know how to turn a selective and damn successful dollar! For ya'll sake, I hope this one stays in the Queen's good graces better than his grandfather did Lord Derby's.;)

Remember George, books can be one's best friend. Forget the 2 minutes at Google thing. I hope I've finished my work on this one. Hell, I'm tired of digging and hunting. This damn table's been covered with books for two days.:lol:

[Steve R]

Thanks for reitterating what I said about the low bar set by Europeans. Eight out of top 12 running fewer than 10 times, and none more than 20, that illustrates my point beautifully.

How many of your Europeans have won top dirt races here? Not many, and certainly not a better show than we've put on against your top turfers in the BC turf events.

Leave the insults about intelligence and such in your pocket. Arguments are won and lost based on the facts, and you neither aid your case or make me quake in fear at such desperate attempts on your part.
Unfortunately what you call "facts" are simply your opinions. If most of the Thoroughbred racing world has accepted for generations that greatness can be defined over 10 or fewer races and you don't, that puts you in a very small minority. The weight of evidence in this matter suggests you are using nationalistic emotion rather than a deep understanding of, as I mentioned previously, the history and tradition of racing. Since you are doing this consciously, I reiterate that it is an example of poor intellectual rigor because you refuse to accept as valid what countless others have learned through centuries of direct observation. If you watched the 1965 Epsom Derby and Arc or the 2000 DWC or the 2009 Tattersall Millions Champion Stakes and didn't recognize greatness, then perhaps racing is not really your game.

[Fager Fan]

Unfortunately what you call "facts" are simply your opinions. If most of the Thoroughbred racing world has accepted for generations that greatness can be defined over 10 or fewer races and you don't, that puts you in a very small minority. The weight of evidence in this matter suggests you are using nationalistic emotion rather than a deep understanding of, as I mentioned previously, the history and tradition of racing. Since you are doing this consciously, I reiterate that it is an example of poor intellectual rigor because you refuse to accept as valid what countless others have learned through centuries of direct observation. If you watched the 1965 Epsom Derby and Arc or the 2000 DWC or the 2009 Tattersall Millions Champion Stakes and didn't recognize greatness, then perhaps racing is not really your game.

America IS most of the Thoroughbred racing world. We have more starters per year than Japan, Australia, and Britain combined. And we don't put the title of great on many horses at all who had but 9 or 7 races, so that puts me not in a small minority but instead with the large majority.

Someone as intellectually astute as you, Steve, with your deep understanding of the sport, should've known this.