I'm holding out for a Square Eddie-type deal. At the tail-end of the next breeding season, when all this drama is rehashed during next year's Triple Crown, temptation will rear it's ugly head. Especially if I'll Have Another proves to be as unpopular a sire as people are predicting.

I don't blame the owner at all for opting for retirement. I don't know what I'd do, but consider that we don't know if IHA will ever be capable of winning at a high level again. For every Tiznow or Silver Charm that came back, we have a Monarchos or Funny Cide that just never made it back to the top. Bottom line for Reddam is that he can now sell the rights for many millions, and he is one who has shown he will put it back in the game. To keep a champion running at 4 or 5, you almost need a situation like Jess Jackson or Robert Lewis where the guy knew he wasn't going to be around to see the sons and daughters run, so why not keep on. At 40, I'd probably retire my horse and buy more. At 80, maybe you roll the dice and see what happens.

I did think of that. Given that he, unlike Square Eddie, is a Derby/Preakness winner makes it much less likely, but hey, stranger things have happened. Always liked Square Eddie.

i don't even know how much they can make off stud with him-it's been quite a speculative subject lately.
the sport has become a breeding game instead of a racing one, with 'wins' earned in the sales ring. it's funny that square eddie was mentioned, he crossed my mind earlier..
also, when people talk about breeding woes, soundness comes up. this horse has had issues since taking to the track, and made a seven run career-is breeding him in the best interests of racings future?? what happened with breeders improving the breed? now it's all about improving the bottom line.

That only makes sense if making money is the only thing that matters, no matter how much money you already have. The owner is a rich man. He can afford to buy more horses whether or not he sends IHA to stud. The chance of him getting another horse as good as IHA is small no matter how many horses he buys or breeds. I'd give 10-1 right now that the owner will never see a son or daughter of IHA win 2/3 of the TC. I'd give 10-1 that no son or daughter will ever win HOY.

When something unusually lucky, in this case having a horse that is the best horse in the country, actually happens, the recipient of the good luck thinks it was easy and will happen again. Whether the owner is 40 or 80, he/she probably won't be racing a horse as good as IHA again.

--Dunbar

You assume IHA himself will be as good as IHA has been this spring. If someone was to dig through the archives on this board they could find me touting his sire Flower Alley as a BC Classic winner. I thought he'd be a monster at 4 after the way he finished up his 3yo season. He was one of the rare ones that came back when a Travers win and fine showing in the BC put enough black type on his resume to make him an intriguing stud prospect, yet he did nothing of note that season.

Owners are required to show a profit 2 of 7 years in order to avoid being called a "hobby" by the IRS where writeoffs are limited. For owners with a large operation like Reddam a stud deal can surely allow him to show a profit for that year.

There was a prominent owner who was selling a bunch of really nice yearlings one year and I inquired with the consignor as to why they were selling when they had always been buyers or raced their homebreds. He said it was a tax strategy where they thought they were going to get a really good return on the sale yearlings and the accountants could make them out to be profitable that year.

Interesting, I wasn't aware of that!

I'll Have Another's short retirement ceremony in the Belmont Winner's Circle..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Avw8NDW75Cg