|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
10-14-2006, 12:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
First timers... Once I see em, I got em, along with useful RUNNING numbers.
This pedigree stuff is a British Colony vestigial silliness. They are very into lineage. While agree with the idea with breed the best with the best and hope for the best... the hope for the best clearly indicates its a genetic crap shoot. 
|
|
#2
10-14-2006, 01:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Just a little. More for turf.
|
|
#3
10-14-2006, 01:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
And another thing that is not looked at closely is a lot of these stallions may produce graded winners, but how many donkey's? If you got a horse that puts off a very high % of good runners (not necessarily graded winners) v. donkeys (and a large number of total offspring), with many diff. mares including mares that are not highly reguarded... Then I am more apt to say there is clearly many genetic components that this sire has to put out good runners.
All I can say is I am glad people put so much emphasis on pedigree.
|
|
#4
10-14-2006, 01:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pedigree is more important than any handicapping factor other than current form. I cannot imagine not taking it into account. BBB
|
|
#5
10-14-2006, 01:54 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Pedigree is the most overrated thing in racing if u ask me. Like, there are some that say that Smarty Jones got beat in the Belmont because of his pedigree. I think that's crazy. Pedigree is good as a HINT of something a horse might be able to do before they try it. But once they step on the track and show their abilities, the pedigree is useless. And it's especially silly, IMO, to not try certain horses at certain things simply because their pedigree suggests they may not like it. I say that u let the horses themselves show what they can and can't do before deciding. Pedigree is extremely overrated, IMO, and is NEVER a factor in my handicapping a race.
__________________
The real horses of the year (1986-2020) Manila, Java Gold, Alysheba, Sunday Silence, Go for Wand, In Excess, Paseana, Kotashaan, Holy Bull, Cigar, Alphabet Soup, Formal Gold, Skip Away, Artax, Tiznow, Point Given, Azeri, Candy Ride, Smarty Jones, Ghostzapper, Invasor, Curlin, Zenyatta, Zenyatta, Goldikova, Havre de Grace, Wise Dan, Wise Dan, California Chrome, American Pharoah, Arrogate, Gun Runner, Accelerate, Maximum Security, Gamine
|
|
#6
10-14-2006, 01:56 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I agree with paisjpg-
It should be taken into account for first turf, and somewhat for maiden races. But even in Maiden races, look at trainer stats with maidens, first-time starters, 2nd starts, etc etc more than the pedigree.
__________________
Facebook- Peter May Jr. Twitter- @pmayjr You wouldn't be ballin' if your name was Spauldin' If y'all fresh to death, then I'm deceased...
|
|
#7
10-14-2006, 06:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pedigree rules for first timers. For 3 year olds it says a lot about whether they can get a distance. Especially the Belmont.
Instead of just breeding the best with the best and getting a lot of crap, a serious mating produces a much higher rate of success. By serious I mean at least the first 5 gens and the linebreeding chart for 9 gens. A good student of pedigree can separate the wheat from the chaff in a lot of instances.
|
|
#8
10-14-2006, 06:13 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Pedigree figures in my handicapping prominently for lightly raced horses and surface/ distance changes. Other than those specific situations, I give it only a glance.
__________________
Do I think Charity can win? Well, I am walking around in yesterday's suit.
|
|
#9
10-15-2006, 11:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I obviously love all things Slew, so I pay attention to just that line in terms of pedigree. Beyond that, I look at what the horse has actually done. It just so happens that two of the top horses are Slews, so it is rewarding for me personally; it is not rewarding financially, however. What can I collect on Bernardini and Lava Man!
|
Hybrid Mode
