Posted on 06/09/2018 3:56:09 PM PDT by Catmom
Just won the Belmont. 13th Triple Crown winner, first undefeated winner since Seattle Slew in 1977.
Really? Well I learned something today.
I don’t know...these trainers will swear they’re competitive.
I would imagine with all of the traveling they have to do they have to think what the heck the big deal is. Or do they assume it’s something all horses do?
Bringing up Secretariat in comparison to other horses is like bringing up Ruth comparisons to other baseball players.
I wonder. I owned a show horse several years ago (his grand-father was the Secretariat of Arabian horses...I’ve always been very proud of that, and he was a beauty). He was injured at an early age and became my little riding horse, but while we were doing shows, he seemed to take it all in stride, didn’t seem bothered by any of it. Funny, ‘cause he developed a dread terror of horse trailers later in life.
I got to Spectacular Bid race at the Meadowlands, I was at the rail at the head of the stretch....he was like a machine
Unlike most Triple Crown winners, Seattle Slew has left a legacy on the breed as well.
His name is seen in a good portion of the pedigrees of horses running today.
“And thoroughbreds must do it the old-fashioned way.”
Actually, the business of siring is being done more and more with collected semen due to the danger to the horses, especially the stud as the mares tend to kick if they are not ready or are satisfied they are done. Either way, it could injure or ruin the stud for further contracts.
And the act of collection of semen is very dangerous for the humans doing that work.
http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/hbooks/pathphys/reprod/semeneval/stallion.html
rwood
That was cool - thanks. Magnificent animal!
True.
my wife says the same thing
WinStar Farm, one of North America’s leading thoroughbred racing and breeding operations, owns 60 percent of Justify’s breeding rights. China Horse Club owns 25 percent. A third group, a secretive entity that holds the remaining 15 percent, will remain out of the spotlight because it vigorously avoids any public attention. It is a company controlled by top employees of the billionaire investor George Soros.
Great horse, jockey and trainer.
I still get “goose bumps” watching that race..*smiles*
I don’t blame the connections but for race fans I hate to see justify and American Pharaoh retired after their three year old campaigns. It was great when Curlin came back for a third year of racing. Remember Cigar’s glorious run? Only because he was a gelding.
Well, he still hasn’t won the Grand Slam. See how he does at the Breeder’s Cup, and see if he’ll equal American Pharaoh.
Gorgeous animal. Now he can relax.
Smarty Jones still breaks my heart running in that slop track and other a-hole Jockeys locking him in.
Redwood, did you notice your article featured an Arabian? It is still, and likely always will be, prohibited to use AI with Thoroughbreds.
Straight from Bloodhorse:
Live Cover vs. Artificial Insemination in Thoroughbred Breeding — Why The Jockey Club Has It Right
06 May, 2009 4:02
I often disagree with the way that The Jockey Club is administered. And I know I’m not the only one who alternates between “annoyed” and “baffled” and “exasperated” about some of the organization’s policies. But one area where I applaud The Jockey Club is its firm adherence to the rule of live cover (The Jockey Club Rule Book, rule 1.D)
I recently had an email come in asking me about TJC’s policies that prohibit artificial insemination, and I thought it was a topic that others might like to weigh in on. Here’s a recap of the exchange:
What do you think is the reasoning behind The Jockey Club prohibiting registration of foals conceived by artificial insemination?
Tradition: The Jockey Club is a conservative organization that is wary of change. In this, it reflects the attitude of most Thoroughbred industry professionals who see the sport as one of tradition and heritage that should not be changed without compelling proof that change would bring improvement.
Genetic diversity: The likely result of allowing AI is that only the most popular stallions would be allowed to reproduce. Over time, the already genetically-limited Thoroughbred breed would suffer the loss of its extant diversifying bloodlines. The Jockey Club is entrusted with the task of safeguarding the breed and will not risk introducing practices that are not only theoretically harmful, but in fact have proven to be deleterious to other breeds (specifically, the American Quarter Horse and the Standardbred breeds).
Economics: Allowing AI (and assuming larger books of mares covered for a reduced number of stallions) would contribute to the loss of value of an individual stud cover. A live cover is subject to market economics because it is a limited commodity whose price depends, at least in part, on demand. Conversely, AI makes the product nearly limitless, logically reducing its value. Similarly, resulting foals would be devalued because of abundance - a situation that Thoroughbred sales companies wish to avoid.
Further, allowing AI would alter the infrastructure of Thoroughbred breeding by reducing the need for transport services, off-site boarding of mares, small stallion farms, and myriad other segments of the Thoroughbred breeding industry.
Legality: Once the train is in motion, there’s no bringing it back to the station. There is no realistic way to “test” the practice without opening up The Jockey Club’s rules to lawsuits and infighting. This is the “slippery slope” argument: if a test by The Jockey Club were to allow AI for intercontinental matings, for example, breeders on the opposite coasts of the U.S. would argue that the test is discriminatory and arbitrary, and The Jockey Club would be forced to defend its case legally, with a likely outcome that by creating an exception to its rules, it would be required by the courts to drop any limitations and open the system entirely. If The Jockey Club opened AI to the industry, breeders would argue that the practice was stallion-centric and would fight for the ability to increase foal production from mares as well (by embryo transfer, for example), and the next lawsuit would argue for legalized cloning. Finally, The (American) Jockey Club’s registration policies follow the standards of other Thoroughbred stud books internationally. It does not have sole discretion to alter registration rules; doing so would create the equivalent of a constitutional crisis for the breed internationally.
Do you think they will ever accept such breeding technologies?
No. The Jockey Club is unlikely to alter its rules unless a sea change occurs in the industry. (An example would be opening The Jockey Club general stud book to a breed that already allows genetic and breeding manipulations.)
TagsFiled under: Thoroughbred Industry
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.