Bloodstock & Breeding
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
07 Oct 26
15:11
Joined:
Date Joined:
11 Mar 02
Reading the news she is going to be entered in the Sceptre Sessions.
From a very shrewd ownership group what do people think was behind their decision to cash in on her now? Ive never seen her live but is there something from a conformational point of view that puts them off perhaps?
What would people do themselves in their position and could it ultimately be a decision they come to regret in the future?
From a very shrewd ownership group what do people think was behind their decision to cash in on her now? Ive never seen her live but is there something from a conformational point of view that puts them off perhaps?
What would people do themselves in their position and could it ultimately be a decision they come to regret in the future?
Show More
The best horse is a sold horse.
My guess is the new owners will use her for breeding.
If she sells for 2,000,000 this is the calculation.
Produce ten foals and sell them for 800; 600; 600; 300; 200; 200; 100; 100; 100; 100 = 3,100,000
Then sell the mare for 100k = 3,200,000.
If they are lucky they might sell the first foal for 1,000.000+
If they are lottery winning lucky the mare might produce a black type winner in her first three foals.
Then each foal sells for 1,000,000 until the duds appear, as they will.
The present owners avoid the risk that she will be sub-fertile and only produce a few in her life.
The owners of Venetian Sun would make an error in refusing the high bid (if she does not make her reserve).
She is rated 115.
Her foals will rate 115 - (115-68)*.75 = 80
Do you want to be the yearling buyer who pays 1,000,000 for a horse that runs to a rating of 80?
It happened many times at Tattersalls UK over the last few days, people paying millions for yearlings that will run to 80 against a breed average of 70.
It is not their money, bidding with other people's money.
My guess is the new owners will use her for breeding.
If she sells for 2,000,000 this is the calculation.
Produce ten foals and sell them for 800; 600; 600; 300; 200; 200; 100; 100; 100; 100 = 3,100,000
Then sell the mare for 100k = 3,200,000.
If they are lucky they might sell the first foal for 1,000.000+
If they are lottery winning lucky the mare might produce a black type winner in her first three foals.
Then each foal sells for 1,000,000 until the duds appear, as they will.
The present owners avoid the risk that she will be sub-fertile and only produce a few in her life.
The owners of Venetian Sun would make an error in refusing the high bid (if she does not make her reserve).
She is rated 115.
Her foals will rate 115 - (115-68)*.75 = 80
Do you want to be the yearling buyer who pays 1,000,000 for a horse that runs to a rating of 80?
It happened many times at Tattersalls UK over the last few days, people paying millions for yearlings that will run to 80 against a breed average of 70.
It is not their money, bidding with other people's money.
I think she'll sell for more than 2m personally (probably nearer 3-3.5m) and she'd be more likely to produce a black type winner than most in her first three foals I would have said.
Lottery winning lucky of doing so would be a filly or mare running at Ayr today.
Lottery winning lucky of doing so would be a filly or mare running at Ayr today.
Oct 11, 2026 -- 1:14PM, truehoncho wrote:
At least that Sam and if not they won't sell her.
Yeah I think you're spot on.
Is there willingness to sell an indication of the current breeding landscape? If they think its more financially prudent to sell now that for me tells its own story.
Are we all just wasting our respective time and money?
Shrewd guys like this dont get it wrong very often. A nice position for them to be in right enough.
I think it's just a punt. £4/5/6m and she sells.
Kinscem's post is the rational course of action (one most of us would take) but for those with huge amounts of money (which they probably inherited or stole) the prospect of getting such a speedy G1 winning mare they can go to Frankel/Dubawi etc and fantasize over breeding top class winners and a future dynasty £6m is a p**iss in the ocean.
Where ever she ends up, I for one look forward to seeing her offspring.
Kinscem's post is the rational course of action (one most of us would take) but for those with huge amounts of money (which they probably inherited or stole) the prospect of getting such a speedy G1 winning mare they can go to Frankel/Dubawi etc and fantasize over breeding top class winners and a future dynasty £6m is a p**iss in the ocean.
Where ever she ends up, I for one look forward to seeing her offspring.
If you want to read my musings on pedigree go to foalmare.com and click Download the PDF on the left of the front page.
I would sell Venetian Sun for a seven figure sum.
There is a difference between a runner and a breeder.
From tiny books in the 1950s by New Zealander Harold Hampton and a book in 1997 by New Zealander Clive Harper I learned how to read pedigrees.
The first time I analysed pedigrees using Clive Harper's book I backed the Oaks winner at 25/1 and the Derby second at 11/1, beaten a head.
The next time I analysed races I backed 16/1 winners in consecutive Group races (only two bets that day).
You need the six-generation pedigree (or more) of a horse, and you need to identify the duplicated ancestors, sires or dams.
In the 126 six-generation ancestors of Venetian Sun there is one duplication (call it inbreeding if you like) that suits a female runner.
It is El Gran Senor (1981) (m) twice 6x5, in each case producing a female (Corrazona (f); Zawaahy (f)).
Corrazona is the 4th dam of her sire Starman (2017) (m), and Zawaahy is the 3rd dam of her dam Johara (2011) (f).
This puts El Gran Senor (1981) (m) on the dam line of her sire and on the dam line of her dam - interesting placing.
What I would consider a negative in Venetian Sun is eight sons of Northern Dancer (1961) (m) and no daughters.
Venetian Sun also has two sons of Mr Prospector (1970) (m) and no daughters.
It is possible that the many sons of Northern Dancer and Mr Prospector work together as they are related.
There are a few other positives in Venetian Sun e.g. Blushing Groom & Mill Reef; My Charmer & Sex Appeal.
As a breeding proposition I would not be a fan of Venetian Sun.
You would need to read my website carefully to read about the eight desirable factors in a pedigree - 4 colt factors and 4 filly factors.
About 1 in 60,000 horses has all eight factors.
Last week I was offered a mare for free.
Her sire's stud fee is six figures.
She is carrying a foal by a sire with a stud fee of about 25k.
When I looked at the mare's pedigree I found the usual - many, many sons of duplicated sires, but no daughters.
The pedigree of the foal she is carrying was the same, too many sons of duplicated sires.
Too many sons of duplicated sire equals slow, unless the good ingredients are also present.
I then prepared a list of 504 sires in IRE, GB, FR and prepared 504 pedigrees of foals that mare could produce with those 504 sires in the future.
None of the 504 "foal" pedigrees was acceptable.
A few years back I analysed the racing earnings, wins, placings, ratings of all yearling sold at Tattersalls October - 2,109 yearlings.
It was a fruitful exercise, well worth the weeks of looking up the names the yearlings were given, and their performances.
It told me bloodstock agents, breeders, buyers, know almost nothing about pedigrees.
I am coming across here as a know-it-all.
I am not. But I know that I do not know enough. I am learning.
This morning I am working on a program to investigate dam lines.
A person in Western Australia (we exchange e-mails on pedigree) mentioned Taiona (1972) (f) (NZ) bred three Group 1 winners.
Now 54 years later Taiona (1972) (f) (NZ) is cropping up on the dam line of good runners as their 3rd dam or 4th dam.
I found a few interesting things in Taiona's pedigree back in the 1870s that link to Northern Dancer (1961) (m).
My guess is Taiona (1972) (f) brings in another version of the ancestors of Northern Dancer (1961) (m) to counter his excessive presence in 21st century pedigrees.
I would sell Venetian Sun for a seven figure sum.
There is a difference between a runner and a breeder.
From tiny books in the 1950s by New Zealander Harold Hampton and a book in 1997 by New Zealander Clive Harper I learned how to read pedigrees.
The first time I analysed pedigrees using Clive Harper's book I backed the Oaks winner at 25/1 and the Derby second at 11/1, beaten a head.
The next time I analysed races I backed 16/1 winners in consecutive Group races (only two bets that day).
You need the six-generation pedigree (or more) of a horse, and you need to identify the duplicated ancestors, sires or dams.
In the 126 six-generation ancestors of Venetian Sun there is one duplication (call it inbreeding if you like) that suits a female runner.
It is El Gran Senor (1981) (m) twice 6x5, in each case producing a female (Corrazona (f); Zawaahy (f)).
Corrazona is the 4th dam of her sire Starman (2017) (m), and Zawaahy is the 3rd dam of her dam Johara (2011) (f).
This puts El Gran Senor (1981) (m) on the dam line of her sire and on the dam line of her dam - interesting placing.
What I would consider a negative in Venetian Sun is eight sons of Northern Dancer (1961) (m) and no daughters.
Venetian Sun also has two sons of Mr Prospector (1970) (m) and no daughters.
It is possible that the many sons of Northern Dancer and Mr Prospector work together as they are related.
There are a few other positives in Venetian Sun e.g. Blushing Groom & Mill Reef; My Charmer & Sex Appeal.
As a breeding proposition I would not be a fan of Venetian Sun.
You would need to read my website carefully to read about the eight desirable factors in a pedigree - 4 colt factors and 4 filly factors.
About 1 in 60,000 horses has all eight factors.
Last week I was offered a mare for free.
Her sire's stud fee is six figures.
She is carrying a foal by a sire with a stud fee of about 25k.
When I looked at the mare's pedigree I found the usual - many, many sons of duplicated sires, but no daughters.
The pedigree of the foal she is carrying was the same, too many sons of duplicated sires.
Too many sons of duplicated sire equals slow, unless the good ingredients are also present.
I then prepared a list of 504 sires in IRE, GB, FR and prepared 504 pedigrees of foals that mare could produce with those 504 sires in the future.
None of the 504 "foal" pedigrees was acceptable.
A few years back I analysed the racing earnings, wins, placings, ratings of all yearling sold at Tattersalls October - 2,109 yearlings.
It was a fruitful exercise, well worth the weeks of looking up the names the yearlings were given, and their performances.
It told me bloodstock agents, breeders, buyers, know almost nothing about pedigrees.
I am coming across here as a know-it-all.
I am not. But I know that I do not know enough. I am learning.
This morning I am working on a program to investigate dam lines.
A person in Western Australia (we exchange e-mails on pedigree) mentioned Taiona (1972) (f) (NZ) bred three Group 1 winners.
Now 54 years later Taiona (1972) (f) (NZ) is cropping up on the dam line of good runners as their 3rd dam or 4th dam.
I found a few interesting things in Taiona's pedigree back in the 1870s that link to Northern Dancer (1961) (m).
My guess is Taiona (1972) (f) brings in another version of the ancestors of Northern Dancer (1961) (m) to counter his excessive presence in 21st century pedigrees.
It shouldnt be too long until you breed the 1st (of many) Group 1 winners Kincsem.
I jest.
I jest.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539