Corinthian or Bernardini

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Did I miss something? When did Cunningham forget how to quote people, and when did his caps lock button get stuck?

Thats the ole ateam I remember. Ready to correct.

Cunningham ole chap. You bet first time starters based on pedigree? Do you ever watch them work. I take work and movement much more serioulsy than genetic dice, which is what it is if you really know genetics.

I will mention three terms since I know you help with picking horses and love pedigree stuff. I cannot see how anyone in the business could not be humbled by these three terms.

1. Sexual reproduction (takes two to tango)
2. Indepedent assortment of chromosomes
3. Crossing over

Dont these send chills down your spine?

And one question that no one on the other board answered. Why, from a biological point of view, is it more likely that a mare has more influence on stamina in offspring that the male?

Originally Posted by pgardn

Thats the ole ateam I remember. Ready to correct.

Cunningham ole chap. You bet first time starters based on pedigree? Do you ever watch them work. I take work and movement much more serioulsy than genetic dice, which is what it is if you really know genetics.

I will mention three terms since I know you help with picking horses and love pedigree stuff. I cannot see how anyone in the business could not be humbled by these three terms.

1. Sexual reproduction (takes two to tango)
2. Indepedent assortment of chromosomes
3. Crossing over

Dont these send chills down your spine?

And one question that no one on the other board answered. Why, from a biological point of view, is it more likely that a mare has more influence on stamina in offspring that the male?

This makes no sense....OF COURSE I INCORPORATE PEDIGREES HEAVILY INTO MY HANDICAPPING, especially in baby races or turf races or first-timr route races, etc.....there are a MILLION angles where it is appropriate to incorporate pedigree and if you don't believe that then I am glad to be wagering against players like you because you are the ones I must be making money off of ...Thanks!

As for the foal being more reliant on the quality of the mare, well of course!...The mare has one foal a year and the stallion has up to 200 foals a year, especially if he shuttles......If there are 200 A.P. Indy foals running around from his '05 crop, it is easy to assume that one by Azeri as the dam would be better than the one by a cheaper mare, right?...Of course....the sire has substantial influence, but you can only do so much if you are the sire because the mare also has to be good....to BE a stallion you have to have been pretty damn good....not the same to be a broodmare.....Believe me, you'll never trump me on pedigrees nor influence me on your opinion that they are unimportant...won't happen...

[paisjpq]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

This makes no sense....OF COURSE I INCORPORATE PEDIGREES HEAVILY INTO MY HANDICAPPING, especially in baby races or turf races or first-timr route races, etc.....there are a MILLION angles where it is appropriate to incorporate pedigree and if you don't believe that then I am glad to be wagering against players like you because you are the ones I must be making money off of ...Thanks!

As for the foal being more reliant on the quality of the mare, well of course!...The mare has one foal a year and the stallion has up to 200 foals a year, especially if he shuttles......If there are 200 A.P. Indy foals running around from his '05 crop, it is easy to assume that one by Azeri as the dam would be better than the one by a cheaper mare, right?...Of course....the sire has substantial influence, but you can only do so much if you are the sire because the mare also has to be good....to BE a stallion you have to have been pretty damn good....not the same to be a broodmare.....Believe me, you'll never trump me on pedigrees nor influence me on your opinion that they are unimportant...won't happen...

question for you Joel...why do you think that the BEST racemares are often/usually a disappointment as broodmares while average racemares become blue hens?

Originally Posted by paisjpq

question for you Joel...why do you think that the BEST racemares are often/usually a disappointment as broodmares while average racemares become blue hens?

It is situational, but I will give you my opinion in general:

Law of numbers...great racemares had the luck of staying healthy to become great while there are many other well-bred blue hen race mares that had lite racing careers or never raced period....Who's to say that an unraced mare could not have been the next Azeri had she run?...Plus, the great racemares are so few of the breeding population that it is strictly a law of numbers thing...Additionally, many great racemares were "freaks" and there is nothing you can do to predict a freak..What I mean by freak is a filly like Xtra Heat who had no business being as fast or as good as she was with her pedigree...if you don't have a good family and you turn out to be a great racemare - it is no guaratee that you'll be a great broodmare.....Pedigree means a lot and there is such thing as a strong female breeding line...some pedigrees are "Racing" type pedigrees and some are "Breeding" type pedigrees - if that makes any sense to you.....there are many factors to this great phenomina...

[paisjpq]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

It is situational, but I will give you my opinion in general:

Law of numbers...great racemares had the luck of staying healthy to become great while there are many other well-bred blue hen race mares that had lite racing careers or never raced period....Who's to say that an unraced mare could not have been the next Azeri had she run?...Plus, the great racemares are so few of the breeding population that it is strictly a law of numbers thing...Additionally, many great racemares were "freaks" and there is nothing you can do to predict a freak..What I mean by freak is a filly like Xtra Heat who had no business being as fast or as good as she was with her pedigree...if you don't have a good family and you turn out to be a great racemare - it is no guaratee that you'll be a great broodmare.....Pedigree means a lot and there is such thing as a strong female breeding line...some pedigrees are "Racing" type pedigrees and some are "Breeding" type pedigrees - if that makes any sense to you.....there are many factors to this great phenomina...

I feel pretty much the same way. I was just curious what your opinion was....

[Damascus '67]

Hello, Captain Obvious...You are officially not only in the building, but also now in the 21st century..Congratulations!...Give that man a prize, folks!

Tell me something we didn't already know...

Now that you have revealed the challenges that this game has LONG had (nothing new here and these are all well documented challenges), now you come up with the operational plan and marketing strategy to satisfy the resolution of these challenges...

..Oh, and when you do that, let me know, because I could probably get you a job as the COO at any major racing company in the world


I am a new poster here, but why do some folks insist on talking down to others. I've been around this game for 40 years and it's amazing how much I've learned just reading this forum for the past month or so. It's a shame and I'm sure it inhibits others from posting. I'm not showing any malice towards anyone, simply making an observation.

Originally Posted by Damascus '67

Hello, Captain Obvious...You are officially not only in the building, but also now in the 21st century..Congratulations!...Give that man a prize, folks!

Tell me something we didn't already know...

Now that you have revealed the challenges that this game has LONG had (nothing new here and these are all well documented challenges), now you come up with the operational plan and marketing strategy to satisfy the resolution of these challenges...

..Oh, and when you do that, let me know, because I could probably get you a job as the COO at any major racing company in the world


I am a new poster here, but why do some folks insist on talking down to others. I've been around this game for 40 years and it's amazing how much I've learned just reading this forum for the past month or so. It's a shame and I'm sure it inhibits others from posting. I'm not showing any malice towards anyone, simply making an observation.

It was lite-hearted, Damascus...You also have to be able to take a few zingers to be in this industry..a thick sense of humor.....that wasn't a personal attack on SendToStud, but merely a harsh attemp at joking with him more than anything....this forum is not that bad....most of the posters are good peopel and understand the commentary that they here and tone of it without taking real offense...

[Damascus '67]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

It was lite-hearted, Damascus...You also have to be able to take a few zingers to be in this industry..a thick sense of humor.....that wasn't a personal attack on SendToStud, but merely a harsh attemp at joking with him more than anything....this forum is not that bad....most of the posters are good peopel and understand the commentary that they here and tone of it without taking real offense...

Thanks Joel..

Racing has tons of problems in attracting new people that bet. But they have got to shorten up the card a little more. I would rather see fewer races with more horses and shorter times inbetween races, than more races with short fields with a long time between races. Racing has to go market itself as a form of entertainment. Instead of a couple spending $60 for dinner and a movie, spend $60 for dinner and some racing. But people do not want to stay at the track from noon to 6pm. That is stupid. Have 8 races on a card and have 10 minutes inbetween races. That is 70 minutes of non-racing. Then you have 5 minutes for a race to be run and the results back. That is another 40 minutes. That is a total of 110 minutes. That is a reasonable time to spend at the track.

Also you cant compare racing to football or any other sport. Racing is the only sport that is year round. People only get 16-20 chances to watch a game. A person can turn on their tv almost 24 hours a day 7 days a week to see racing. You have to make racing seem like it is the place to be, or do. Saratoga, Keeneland, Oaklawn and Del Mar are popular because it is the place to be for 4-6 weeks. You only have a limited time to go to the track. This is why it is special. There is just TOO MUCH RACING today. I would love to see racing take a break. Shut it down after the Breeders Cup and then open it back up the the Saturday after the Super Bowl.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by paisjpq

question for you Joel...why do you think that the BEST racemares are often/usually a disappointment as broodmares while average racemares become blue hens?

Good question!

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

As for the foal being more reliant on the quality of the mare, well of course!...The mare has one foal a year and the stallion has up to 200 foals a year, especially if he shuttles......If there are 200 A.P. Indy foals running around from his '05 crop, it is easy to assume that one by Azeri as the dam would be better than the one by a cheaper mare, right?...Of course....the sire has substantial influence, but you can only do so much if you are the sire because the mare also has to be good....to BE a stallion you have to have been pretty damn good....not the same to be a broodmare.....Believe me, you'll never trump me on pedigrees nor influence me on your opinion that they are unimportant...won't happen...

WRONG. Absolutely and utterly wrong from a biological perspective. You claim to know pedigrees and you dont know the basic biology of genetics. I have seen this rife throughout the industry and it is amazing. Thank God there are some people actually doing work on throughbred genetics that know something about basic heredity and understand the incredible randomness. In 10 years, with the horse genome finished and testing to find various combinations of genetic markers that really correlate with good runners, you will be left in the dust.

Mr. Cunningham:

What is the most important organelle in muscle cells (actually fibers, a combination of fused cells) from a running/physiological perspective?

What is unique about this organelle compared to others, that makes in GENETICALLY significant?

How is the organelle passed on from generation to generation?

Originally Posted by pgardn

Mr. Cunningham:

What is the most important organelle in muscle cells (actually fibers, a combination of fused cells) from a running/physiological perspective?

What is unique about this organelle compared to others, that makes in GENETICALLY significant?

How is the organelle passed on from generation to generation?

What the hell are you talking about? Lauren Stich doesn't even know that...come on man...we're freakin' talking about studying pedigrees and not biology....I'm no doctor or vet..I am a horse analyst....GEEZ!!

Originally Posted by pgardn

WRONG. Absolutely and utterly wrong from a biological perspective. You claim to know pedigrees and you dont know the basic biology of genetics. I have seen this rife throughout the industry and it is amazing. Thank God there are some people actually doing work on throughbred genetics that know something about basic heredity and understand the incredible randomness. In 10 years, with the horse genome finished and testing to find various combinations of genetic markers that really correlate with good runners, you will be left in the dust.

With all do respect, I probably forgot more about pedigrees than you'll ever know....this is a field that I study with high frequency....there are NO certains when it comes to pedigrees and it is hard for me to even put into words anything for certain, so maybe i shouldn't have tried, but I am still confident that trends and patterns of what I have seen work in pedigrees is as good as anybody else's opinions on this subject from what I've heard....

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

With all do respect, I probably forgot more about pedigrees than you'll ever know....this is a field that I study with high frequency....there are NO certains when it comes to pedigrees and it is hard for me to even put into words anything for certain, so maybe i shouldn't have tried, but I am still confident that trends and patterns of what I have seen work in pedigrees is as good as anybody else's opinions on this subject from what I've heard....

Oh god, Pgardn's smarter than most and I am sure he's alot smarter than you, if he wanted to fill his brain with worthless information and nonsense, he would be more than adequate. It's okay in a maiden race to look and see a sire known for precocious runners or based on the breeding a certain horse may stretch, but it's all a guess until they try it and to represent it otherwise is foolish...

Pedigrees have to be the most overrated facet of the sport. And Joel did you say that even "Lauren Stich" does not know that? As if that column of hers is anything but hysterical reading when you have the blues? She overstates the obvious to the point of absurdity. WIll write a column that basically says a horse by a sprinter shouldnt go long and a horse by a stamina sire should go long. I find it a scream and have a few friends who read her column and howl with laughter, they just can't believe anyone would overstate the obvious. When it comes to science I would make Pgrdn 1-9 against any of the industry blowhards in terms of understanding the way that genetic works.

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Pedigrees have to be the most overrated facet of the sport. And Joel did you say that even "Lauren Stich" does not know that? As if that column of hers is anything but hysterical reading when you have the blues? She overstates the obvious to the point of absurdity. WIll write a column that basically says a horse by a sprinter shouldnt go long and a horse by a stamina sire should go short. I find it a scream and have a few friends who read her column and howl with laughter, they just can't believe anyone would overstate the obvious. When it comes to science I would make Pgrdn 1-9 against any of the industry blowhards in terms of understanding the way that genetic works.

What I think would be a good idea is to have all of these people that go on and on about pedigrees to make a tape...I have a hard time getting to sleep sometimes and that would be a perfect cure for it, I would be out in about 5 minutes, maybe less...

Originally Posted by oracle80

Pedigrees have to be the most overrated facet of the sport. And Joel did you say that even "Lauren Stich" does not know that? As if that column of hers is anything but hysterical reading when you have the blues? She overstates the obvious to the point of absurdity. WIll write a column that basically says a horse by a sprinter shouldnt go long and a horse by a stamina sire should go long. I find it a scream and have a few friends who read her column and howl with laughter, they just can't believe anyone would overstate the obvious. When it comes to science I would make Pgrdn 1-9 against any of the industry blowhards in terms of understanding the way that genetic works.

Fine but first of all, we seem to be talking about apples and oranges here....genetics and how they scientifically work is different than understanding pedigrees and what pedigrees work and why....there is nothing scientific behind my study....my studies are all analytical and on paper...not in the physical sense...

As for Stich, I was only using her name to make a point because most people know her pretty widespread for her pedigree write-ups in the Form...I haven't read one for years either and I know that she is Captain Obvious...I was making a point more than anything....