To pedigreeann

[Danzig]

enjoy reading P annes posts. i enjoy pedigree research, but haven't got the time that ann evidently has put into her hobby (for lack of a better word). it isn't an answer in itself for handicapping, but any knowledge is a good thing. knowing a horses pedigree could be helpful--esp for a 2 yo (does his pedigree say precocity?) or a first timer on turf, or on dirt for that matter. not the only tool to have, but still useful.

Originally Posted by eurobounce

Oh pedigree plays an important role in handicapping for me in certain races. Comes in handy the most when you are capping 1st time starters. Also comes into play when handicapping off tracks. That is why you will see the off spring of Unbridled get hammered when the dirt track is off. Now, just a normal 1 mile dirt race worth $15k then it doesnt help. But combine the handicapping side and the pedigree side could form a very powerful combination.

What you say is correct ... but it doesn't contradict the validity of what PointG said.

Once a horse establishes his form ... pedigree doesn't mean squat as far as handicapping goes.

Pedigree knowledge is helpful for first-time starters, first-time route, first-time turf, and first-time slop ... but not much more ... when it comes to picking the winner of a race.

[PSH]

Ann:

My sincere apologies for calling a broodmare a sire instead of a producer....
Definitely my mistake, probably a combination of getting older and trying to multi-task at work...

Hope you did not rip too many hairs out and there is still some left.

Anyway, i stand corrected.

Pedigrees are of course very important as an additional source of information to other factors in handicapping.

As far as racing, we have decided to go the route of racing initially only fillies.
As previoulsy stated, at least at the end of their career or if they do not get to the track we can breed them and sell of the colts and retain the fillies to race and add to our broodmare stable..... Only NY Breds given the strength of their program..

Paul

Originally Posted by Danzig188

enjoy reading P annes posts. i enjoy pedigree research, but haven't got the time that ann evidently has put into her hobby (for lack of a better word). it isn't an answer in itself for handicapping, but any knowledge is a good thing. knowing a horses pedigree could be helpful--esp for a 2 yo (does his pedigree say precocity?) or a first timer on turf, or on dirt for that matter. not the only tool to have, but still useful.

Studying and understanding pedigrees is an enjoyable hobby ... and a worthwhile supplement to conformation analysis when evaluating unraced auction horses.

I grew up reading the brilliant and intricately-complex "Bloodlines" column of Leon Rasmussen in the Daily Racing Form ... and the more erudite and scholarly works of Abram Hewitt in The Blood-Horse.

Lots of fun learning about "three-quarter brothers" and "line breeding" and "tail male descent" ... but not to be taken too seriously.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

What you say is correct ... but it doesn't contradict the validity of what PointG said.

Once a horse establishes his form ... pedigree doesn't mean squat as far as handicapping goes.

Pedigree knowledge is helpful for first-time starters, first-time route, first-time turf, and first-time slop ... but not much more ... when it comes to picking the winner of a race.

I agree with you in general, but I think pedigree can also be a useful tool for the TC races, especially the Belmont. It is usually my favorite race to handicap each year because of the insanely long (by today's standards) distance of 12f.
I just know a little about pedigree analysis, but I still love to use what I do know to cap the Belmont and it usually helps (except for this year....freakin' Steppenwolfer). I imagine that people like BB and Ann - who know a lot about pedigree analysis - love handicapping the Belmont.

Originally Posted by miraja2

I agree with you in general, but I think pedigree can also be a useful tool for the TC races, especially the Belmont. It is usually my favorite race to handicap each year because of the insanely long (by today's standards) distance of 12f.
I just know a little about pedigree analysis, but I still love to use what I do know to cap the Belmont and it usually helps (except for this year....freakin' Steppenwolfer). I imagine that people like BB and Ann - who know a lot about pedigree analysis - love handicapping the Belmont.

The Jockey Club Gold Cup was more fun ... when it was 16f.

[Pointg5]

I was thinking, maybe it's a little bit too simplistic to decide what a 1st time starter will do based on pedigree, sure there's precocious sires, that's true, but I would say the single most important factor when handicapping 1st time starters is the Trainer. Even if a horse is considered to be by a "precocious sire", it doesn't matter, unless the trainer is capable or has it in their "training style" to have them ready. I guess you could use Mandella and Baffert as two opposite ends of the spectrum in this regard. Also, if a horse is really talented and considered to be at the top of his age group, he should have the "talent" to beat some of the lesser of his age group that might show up in a msw even though it may be a shorter distance and he is bred to run longer, so pedigree really wouldn't help you in that situation.

I would say genetics, not family tree(ripped off of Pgardn) would have more of a say so if a horse can handle the slop or turf in a first time starter.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

I was thinking, maybe it's a little bit too simplistic to decide what a 1st time starter will do based on pedigree, sure there's precocious sires, that's true, but I would say the single most important factor when handicapping 1st time starters is the Trainer. Even if a horse is considered to be by a "precocious sire", it doesn't matter, unless the trainer is capable or has it in their "training style" to have them ready. I guess you could use Mandella and Baffert as two opposite ends of the spectrum in this regard. Also, if a horse is really talented and considered to be at the top of his age group, he should have the "talent" to beat some of the lesser of his age group that might show up in a msw even though it may be a shorter distance and he is bred to run longer, so pedigree really wouldn't help you in that situation.

I would say genetics, not family tree(ripped off of Pgardn) would have more of a say so if a horse can handle the slop or turf in a first time starter.

like i said, it's one tool. to go purely on precocity while ignoring a trainers lack of luck with a 2 yo would be folly. also, just because a horse is by a 'turf' sire doesn't mean he'll like it....just like a horse with the fastest time at that distance might not be the winner. no one thing will guarantee you pick the winner. all things can/should be considered...

[sumitas]

i remember, was it 2001, when Mayakovsky made his first start as a 2 yr old at Saratoga at 5.5 F. He was the HEAVY fav...he had very fast work outs, Biancone as trainer, and he shipped in from Cali...

so he won in a track record time ahead of Thunderello.