Good Lord another pletcher freak

lol pedigrees are not the answer, lol. ability is

[Exceller]

Originally Posted by oracle80

lol pedigrees are not the answer, lol. ability is

Pedigrees mean everything. Why do you think people pay more for good pedigrees. 99% percent of the time the horses that are the best have the best pedigree. Case closed.

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by Exceller

Pedigrees mean everything. Why do you think people pay more for good pedigrees. 99% percent of the time the horses that are the best have the best pedigree. Case closed.

The Pedigree Experts are in full effect today, why don't you ask the people who bought Checkov(ofcourse they have more money than they know what to do with, but they aren't stupid), if they thought they bought a good pedigree?

[Pointg5]

I can't wait to the Green Monkey runs, you guys will have a National Holiday....

[Exceller]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

I can't wait to the Green Monkey runs, you guys will have a National Holiday....

I think the peformance people like him better than the pedigree people. His pedigree is nice but not that nice. He was bought off his performance in some work. Still don't get the price on that horse.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Exceller

I think the peformance people like him better than the pedigree people. His pedigree is nice but not that nice. He was bought off his performance in some work. Still don't get the price on that horse.

Now, this I don't begin to follow. Are there really "pedigree people" and "performance people?" Do people really pay big $$ for a yearling that ran one of those 10 second eights with a lousy pedigree or, conversely, pay high paper for a well bred yearling that looks poor on the track and visually? If so, I gotta get me in the yearling business.

To me, pedigree is like the rich father who gets you a high paying sales gig. After you're hired, if you don't hit your numbers, you're still gone. Same goes for the well bred colt or filly. I cannot imagine a fancy pedigree for horse that runs lousy once it hits the track is any greater consolation than still having the rich father the day security walks you out the door when you've been canned.

Sell or starve. Perform or perish. That's how the big kids play.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

I can't wait to the Green Monkey runs, you guys will have a National Holiday....

I think you are still missing the point. A nice pedigree DOES NOT ensure good on-track performance. I don't think anybody would be foolish enough to argue that, because there are tons of brilliantly bred horses who haven't done squat. Green Monkey may be another. I am one of those that DOES think pedigree matters, but I won't be taking part in any Green Monkey Day parades. The point remains that pedigree can be an important factor in determining a horse's ability, especially his or her ability to stretch out to longer distances. Is it the only factor? Of course not. But it is A factor, which (getting back to the original point) makes this Thunder Gulch colt's debut all the more interesting.

Originally Posted by Exceller

Pedigrees mean everything. Why do you think people pay more for good pedigrees. 99% percent of the time the horses that are the best have the best pedigree. Case closed.

Yeah only idiots accept that at face value though. Ability kicks the **** out of pedigree everytime. Oh, and you mark up pedigree and resell it easily to suckers.

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by oracle80

lol pedigrees are not the answer, lol. ability is

The point I was trying to make is that, IMO, it's too early to make judgments like this - babies have just started to run and no matter how talented CQ is, there could be more talented babies (or not) waiting in the wings. I have zero problem with anyone who wants to declare CQ the best, but by the same token, I would hope that people who disagree are accorded the same consideration.

Originally Posted by Betsy

The point I was trying to make is that, IMO, it's too early to make judgments like this - babies have just started to run and no matter how talented CQ is, there could be more talented babies (or not) waiting in the wings. I have zero problem with anyone who wants to declare CQ the best, but by the same token, I would hope that people who disagree are accorded the same consideration.

The only smart thing I read on this entire thread.

Originally Posted by boldruler

The only smart thing I read on this entire thread.

Wasn't smart, it was dumb!!!