Breeding Myths #1

Breed the best to the best and hope for the best

I would absolutely subscribe to this theory if we were breeding purebreds, but we are not, we are breeding hybrids! If we were breeding purebreds, full siblings would look exactly the same, like a line of peas in a pod, but they don't. Foals come in different shapes, sizes, colors, with different confirmation every time!

Here are some examples:

• Tapit has four full siblings, none came close to his success
• Quality Road has three, again none came close to his success
• Curlin has a full sibling that has earned 0.004 percent of what he earned in only 4 less starts.

I just finished reading two studies that showed only 6% of the horses bred pay for themselves at the track, and just as alarming about 6% of those horses win a graded stakes.

This is a tough business for sure, this is why it is one of the few businesses I have been associated with that is full of such passion and absolute love for the sport and the horses. It really is not about the money. Years ago I was offered a pile of money for a two year old Uncle Mo colt who was lighting up the training track, I approached my lovely wife and she said "Baby, when has it ever been about the money, it is about the dream, that walk on the first Saturday in May".

Well we did not sell and that horse went on to win a grand total of $248.00. Today, we are blessed with better science and technology than 50 years ago when breed the best to the best and hope for the best was the mantra of breeders, unfortunately so many still follow that theory today, some out of a refusal to embrace next technology and others because they never intend to campaign the horse, they are commercial breeders and rich buyers who have several million to spend at Keeneland want a Tapit, an Uncle Mo, regardless of whether or not the genetics match (honestly, that makes up the biggest percentage of horses that don't pay for themselves.

Don't believe me, look at the yearlings that sold for over a million between 2019 and 2023 and see how many made it to the stakes level, you will be shocked.

The new technology and science available today can help a tremendous amount if we choose to embrace it. I utilize what I believe is two of the the best mating software programs on the planet, one is based on inbreeding (G1 Godlmine) and the other linebreeding (Pedigrees 360). The latter boasts a 74% success rate in predicting the performance of the resulting foal and based on my validations studies that is a pretty accurate number. 74% prediction of success or failure, not 74% winning percentage!

I was contacted yesterday and asked to look at a couple fillies set to go through the mid-Atlantic sale after the Preakness. I ran the numerous reports and unfortunately had to tell the owner he should pass on them. However, let me be really clear on this - we should never look at mating reports in isolation, we must also consider confirmation, overall physical, historical data regarding soundness, temperament, etc... but it starts with the genetics and if the report says there is a 74% chance you are breeding one of the 94 percenters that will not pay for themselves at the track, the other factors must be really strong to convince me I may be looking at a mating that falls in the 26% of the reports that are incorrect.

Breeding the best to the best is very expensive but those that do it, clearly have more money than me so go for it. My financial situation requires me to do my research beyond speed figures and big names. If you are interested in breeding to one of the stallions standing at Caines Stallion Station in Oklahoma, send me your mare(s) name and I will run the reports at no cost to you, if it is a no, I will find you the best yes at no cost to you.

If you just need me to look at a potential purchase or a mating that does not involve a stallion at Caines, I charge 25.00 per mating which is a huge savings over the thousands of dollars you may spend to breed and train a horse that falls in the 94% group that does not pay for itself at the track.