Oh, and back to the OP: the syndicate can get more money from stud fees with a Belmont win than if the horse doesn’t race.
After the Belmont, it would make more sense, but even then they might want to win other races to make Big Brown that more attractive. And though breaking down is a possibility, it’s not all that common. There risk, but there’s also a payoff, so it’s a matter of balancing the two.
[QUOTE=Spavined Gelding]
As a matter of fact the stallion is at a lot more risk than the mare. The risk to the mare is pretty minimal. She might be kicked and scraped along the ribs or bitten on the neck but that’s about it. The size and weight of the horse is not a real problem. They are both horses, after all.
A stallion in full sexual excitement is an impressive sight and his extended and erect member is a big target. A mare in heat tends to be a bit flighty. If she is not fully willing her natural reaction to an unwelcome violation is to kick. A stallion with a raptured penis is a dead stallion. A breeder with any sense will gate squeeze and hobble the mare and tease her with some second string horse. The stud gets his shot only when the mare is fully ready, even eager, and pretty well hogtied and confined.
You just don’t let valuable horse flesh engage in unsupervised pasture breeding.
[/QUOTE]
While you just look on wistfully?
(Excellent post/poster name combination)
I’ve also been told that the “live cover requirement” keeps the economy going around the racing centers - the stallions mostly standing in Kentucky with the mares brought in from all over to be bred. Vets, breeding barns, horse haulers, etc all benefit.
[QUOTE=RealityChuck]
Oh, and back to the OP: the syndicate can get more money from stud fees with a Belmont win than if the horse doesn’t race.
After the Belmont, it would make more sense, but even then they might want to win other races to make Big Brown that more attractive. And though breaking down is a possibility, it’s not all that common. There risk, but there’s also a payoff, so it’s a matter of balancing the two.
[/QUOTE]
Does this mean that whoever paid the $60 million for the breeding rights could basically be betting that he wins the Belmont? If he wins, could they “flip” the horse for substantially more than the $60 million? Is the $60 million basically the present value of all future stud fees? What would happen to this value if he loses the Belmont?
Why would his owners race him again? Because they’re greedy, ignorant fuckers. Anyone who knows even the smallest thing about horses knows “no hoof, no horse.” That poor thing’s hooves are held together with spit and duct tape, and if he doesn’t break down I’ll be surprised.
As for the AI vs live cover, I can see the pros and cons in both of them. And yes, I’ve seen both done. After you see a stallion in full…erm…yeah…nothing a human male whips out will faze you.
[QUOTE=Kalypso]
surrey …
[/QUOTE]
Look! There’s fringe on top!
I just heard a report on the radio that there was no sign of blood from Big Brown’s cracked hoof following his last workout. Can someone give some insight into what could happen with this hoof during the race? I would presume that they’d let that completely heal before racing him again after the Belmont.
Spavined Gelding, I usually don’t point out typos. But this >> raptured penis<< is a thing not to be missed. It brings up two different mental images, and the idea of penises ascending to heaven just cracks me up. Talk about Left Behind.
[QUOTE=Lynn Bodoni]
Limiting the number of females impregnated by a single male is really quite a good reason, no matter what the species. In dogs and cats, at least, there is some concern among responsible breeders about “popular sire syndrome”. Of course cats and dogs usually have litters, while horses usually have just the one foal a year, but still, it’s something to think about. If a popular sire turns out to have some sort of genetic defect, it might be very difficult to breed that trait out of that breed once it’s become widespread.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, this is exactly the problem in American thoroughbreds today, and is why Big Brown has such bad feet. There was a recent article discussing the fact that 71% of thoroughbreds are descended from Northern Dancer, sometimes multiple times (as with Big Brown). I can’t find the article just now, although I read it online.
American Quarterhorses have the same problem, although I don’t remember the stud’s name at the moment. Hugely popular stud with bad feet/legs = large percentage of the horse population with really bad feet/legs.
I was surprised at the amount (seems very low these days for a TC winner, if he makes that), but the article I just read said they sold the rights before he even won the Preakness. The owners sold the risk of him getting hurt for sure money, in exchange they’ll lose money on the actual stud fees. The purchaser bought that risk in exchange for the likelihood of lotsa moola in stud fees over the years.
[QUOTE=redtail23]
American Quarterhorses have the same problem, although I don’t remember the stud’s name at the moment. Hugely popular stud with bad feet/legs = large percentage of the horse population with really bad feet/legs.
[/QUOTE]
Are you thinking of Impressive? That’s the only name I can come up with either right at the moment.
[QUOTE=redtail23]
American Quarterhorses have the same problem, although I don’t remember the stud’s name at the moment. Hugely popular stud with bad feet/legs = large percentage of the horse population with really bad feet/legs.
[/QUOTE]
You might be thinking of Impressive, a QH stallion who was popular for his remarkable musculature…
As it turned out, he had a genetic mutation(now called HYPP), and when 2 Impressive-bred horses were bred to each other and the result was HYPP ++ , that horse had a tendency to spontaneously become paralyzed and/or die. Since he was such a popular stallion, one of the leading sires of champions, his bloodline spread throughout the Quarter Horse market.
Wierdly enough, Impressive was actually so-called “Appendix Quarter Horse” - meaning he was registered as a QH but his sire was a Thoroughbred - a system intended to improve the genetic diveristy of the breed - he was actually distantly descended from Man O’War. Go figure.
[QUOTE=Yllaria]
Spavined Gelding, I usually don’t point out typos. But this >> raptured penis<< is a thing not to be missed. It brings up two different mental images, and the idea of penises ascending to heaven just cracks me up. Talk about Left Behind.
[/QUOTE]
I am embarrassed. RUPTURED, damn it, RUPTURED. Next thing we’ll be talking about pubic parks and public hair.
According to wiki, the coupling must be witnessed.
“What do you do for a living?”
“Oh, I watch thoroughbred horses mate.”
i read an article today about a stallion that was very “choosy” about mating. he won 2 of the 3 crowns and is a very in demand stallion.
it seems that he was intimidated by the older stallions. so yeah, even though a 3 year old horse may be interested in mares and mating, it doesn’t always go well.
the stallion in the article has under gone sexual therapy and will be shown mares away from those older stallions.
good grief, first panda porn, now stallion sex therapy. what on earth next?
FWIW, this is the injury Big Brown has – a quarter crack.
[QUOTE=Jackknifed Juggernaut]
Does this mean that whoever paid the $60 million for the breeding rights could basically be betting that he wins the Belmont? If he wins, could they “flip” the horse for substantially more than the $60 million? Is the $60 million basically the present value of all future stud fees? What would happen to this value if he loses the Belmont?
[/QUOTE]
No. What I meant is that they can charge more for stud fees if he wins the triple crown.
The syndicate expects to make money on its investment, and will do it by charging other horse owners to breed their mares. The higher the fee they can charge, the more money they make.
If Big Brown loses, they will still make back their syndication money, but it will just take longer.
Shergar. What a loss- pity no samples from him.
In Australia- very uncommon these days- you also used to have breeding from an “Unknown sire” - also- “either Slow Truck or Big Brown”. I haven’t seen it for many years though.
What I can’t follow is why the headlines here are saying “Big Brown To Make History” or such. It has been done before. And lets face it, a lot depends on the strength of the opposition (I have no idea this year). An above avergae horse could trump mediocre opposition.
Moved from IMHO to TGR.
[QUOTE=redtail23]
Actually, this is exactly the problem in American thoroughbreds today, and is why Big Brown has such bad feet. There was a recent article discussing the fact that 71% of thoroughbreds are descended from Northern Dancer, sometimes multiple times (as with Big Brown). I can’t find the article just now, although I read it online.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, it’s Native Dancer (Northern Dancer’s grandfather). Here’s the article published by the WSJ just prior to the Kentucky Derby. And here’s the follow-up article.
And I’ve just got to add that this idea of a raptured penis seems highly intriguing.
It ceased to be alive for a while and now has been “raptured”. Wonder what that’s got to be like for the partner.
