2020 Keeneland September Sale

[Falinadin]

Although I’ve been disappointed in Honor Code, relative to my expectations, to be fair he has had a big horse in his first crop and another really cool horse in Max. So, I have not given up on him as far as being a big success at stud. My question is - have there been examples of highly regarded sires whose first offspring sold very well, the market/breeders abandoned them (in terms of getting good books/sales prices) and who then rebounded after performances on track warranted it?

"Abandoned" is kind of hard to quantify, but I think Ghostzapper would be the posterchild of this. He stood for $200k his first season, but within 4 years his yearling averages dropped to less than a tenth of what his first crop sold for, and his stud fee also dropped to 10% of its original price ($200k to 20k). He rebounded, and 2017-2019 saw yearling averages over $200k and his stud fee was $85k this year.
Average yearling prices:
2008: $283k;
2009: $74k,
2010: $68k,
2011: $44k,
2012: $21k,
2013: $95k,
2014: $77k,
2015: $136k,
2016: $100k,
2017: $211k,
2018: $245k,
2019: $232k,
2020 so far $169k

Curlin (2nd crop average was almost half the first crop average).
2011: $136k,
2012: $69k,
2013: $87k,
2014: $137k,
2020: $342k

Speightstown (4th crop was almost half the average of the first crop)
2007: $185k
2008: $141k
2009: $120k
2010: $87k
2011: $107k
2012: $144k
2013: $176k
2020 so far $217k

City Zip: probably the second most dramatic I could find behind his brother Ghostzapper. His 6th crop average was almost a quarter of his first crop average, but he rebounded strongly at the end of his career.
2004: $43k
2005: $55k
2006: $33k
2007: $25k
2008: $32k
2009: $12k
2010: $24k
2011: $38k
2012: $43k
2013: $61k
2014: $68k
2017: $144k

[Slewfan2]

Falinadin, those are great examples - thank you!!! That gives me hope that that, if Honor Code succeeds, he could experience a real turn around....

[Flanders]

In Honor Code's case, I think it might just be because its his 3rd crop. Its hard to get good mares for a stallions 3rd and 4th crops because breeders are afraid to send good mares those years. They know the judgement will be out already on the stallion at the point those foals go to the sales, so they are usually a stallion's worst crops in terms of mare quality. Most of the one's who sold for really low, under 10k, had pretty light pages under the 1st and 2nd dams, none had bad pedigrees. The one's dam had produced 5 foals of racing age and no winners, that isn't going to inspire bidding. I think his stud fee will go down but I think he will attract mares next year. It would have greatly helped him if Honor AP wasn't retired though.

That explains this year, though only if others in his crop didn’t experience the same kind of dip...excluding Constitution (too hot for that to happen) and American Pharaoh (he’s Teflon). What about last year? Does his lack of big winners before last September completely explain away his huge drop in sales prices?

Although I’ve been disappointed in Honor Code, relative to my expectations, to be fair he has had a big horse in his first crop and another really cool horse in Max. So, I have not given up on him as far as being a big success at stud. My question is - have there been examples of highly regarded sires whose first offspring sold very well, the market/breeders abandoned them (in terms of getting good books/sales prices) and who then rebounded after performances on track warranted it?

I’ve been discussing this with my friend, another HC fan. He thinks it’s possible that HC needs to be bred to different kinds of mares, possibly speedier mares. Possibly his first books included primarily stamina oriented mares because breeders initially weren’t sure if he’d throw Classic type horses. I think this makes sense...

My worry, as a fan, is that if HC’s fee is reduced again, that his chances of getting any decent mares will be gone since his reputation will essentially be in the toilet (unfair - he hasn’t been bad, just inconsistent). Lane’s End reduced his fee last year, and doing so again would reek of desperation, especially since they don’t have the reputation of being reactionary.

Nearly every stallion in his stallion crop has experienced drops in sales price every year. The only exception is Constitution. Even American Pharoah's sales average dropped around 200k from his first crop to this, his 3rd crop. A stallion's best book of mares is always going to be his first year until he proves he deserves another good book of mares. He can still get nice mares his 2nd year but it wont be as great as year 1. Then year 3 and 4 are hard to get good mares.

Being inconsistent is the reason a stallion's fee is dropped. Breeders want consistency. Honor Code isn't doing good at stud at this point and that's a fact. Its almost October of his first crop's 3yo year, he has 2 SWs. One of which won 1 stakes, the other is retired, but they both made it into the starting gate of the Kentucky Derby and that is pretty amazing for a first crop stallion and just might be enough to pique some breeders interest. Tonalist also has 2 SWs both GSWs, but Tonalist's sales average went from 101k to 48k to 18k. Honor Code's sales numbers are better than that at least. Either way he needs his foals to start winning stakes races. Maybe they'll get better at 4. I hope so because I really liked him when he was racing. His stud fee will be reduced but I imagine most stallions fees will be reduced, except maybe the very very top, I can see The Factor getting a stud fee increase. Constitution is the only one I could see getting a fee increase from his stallion crop.

[Katewerk]

Being inconsistent is the reason a stallion's fee is dropped. Breeders want consistency. Honor Code isn't doing good at stud at this point and that's a fact. Its almost October of his first crop's 3yo year, he has 2 SWs. One of which won 1 stakes, the other is retired, but they both made it into the starting gate of the Kentucky Derby and that is pretty amazing for a first crop stallion and just might be enough to pique some breeders interest. Tonalist also has 2 SWs both GSWs, but Tonalist's sales average went from 101k to 48k to 18k. Honor Code's sales numbers are better than that at least. Either way he needs his foals to start winning stakes races. Maybe they'll get better at 4. I hope so because I really liked him when he was racing. His stud fee will be reduced but I imagine most stallions fees will be reduced, except maybe the very very top, I can see The Factor getting a stud fee increase. Constitution is the only one I could see getting a fee increase from his stallion crop.

I can understand breeders not liking a stallion's first crop due to issues of physical traits, such as correctness, size, rate of maturity, etc.

But to measure the worth of a first or second year crop on the basis of winning/not winning stakes races? Is there enough data to rule out statistical noise?

[Slewfan2]

In Honor Code's case, I think it might just be because its his 3rd crop. Its hard to get good mares for a stallions 3rd and 4th crops because breeders are afraid to send good mares those years. They know the judgement will be out already on the stallion at the point those foals go to the sales, so they are usually a stallion's worst crops in terms of mare quality. Most of the one's who sold for really low, under 10k, had pretty light pages under the 1st and 2nd dams, none had bad pedigrees. The one's dam had produced 5 foals of racing age and no winners, that isn't going to inspire bidding. I think his stud fee will go down but I think he will attract mares next year. It would have greatly helped him if Honor AP wasn't retired though.

That explains this year, though only if others in his crop didn’t experience the same kind of dip...excluding Constitution (too hot for that to happen) and American Pharaoh (he’s Teflon). What about last year? Does his lack of big winners before last September completely explain away his huge drop in sales prices?

Although I’ve been disappointed in Honor Code, relative to my expectations, to be fair he has had a big horse in his first crop and another really cool horse in Max. So, I have not given up on him as far as being a big success at stud. My question is - have there been examples of highly regarded sires whose first offspring sold very well, the market/breeders abandoned them (in terms of getting good books/sales prices) and who then rebounded after performances on track warranted it?

I’ve been discussing this with my friend, another HC fan. He thinks it’s possible that HC needs to be bred to different kinds of mares, possibly speedier mares. Possibly his first books included primarily stamina oriented mares because breeders initially weren’t sure if he’d throw Classic type horses. I think this makes sense...

My worry, as a fan, is that if HC’s fee is reduced again, that his chances of getting any decent mares will be gone since his reputation will essentially be in the toilet (unfair - he hasn’t been bad, just inconsistent). Lane’s End reduced his fee last year, and doing so again would reek of desperation, especially since they don’t have the reputation of being reactionary.

Nearly every stallion in his stallion crop has experienced drops in sales price every year. The only exception is Constitution. Even American Pharoah's sales average dropped around 200k from his first crop to this, his 3rd crop. A stallion's best book of mares is always going to be his first year until he proves he deserves another good book of mares. He can still get nice mares his 2nd year but it wont be as great as year 1. Then year 3 and 4 are hard to get good mares.

Being inconsistent is the reason a stallion's fee is dropped. Breeders want consistency. Honor Code isn't doing good at stud at this point and that's a fact. Its almost October of his first crop's 3yo year, he has 2 SWs. One of which won 1 stakes, the other is retired, but they both made it into the starting gate of the Kentucky Derby and that is pretty amazing for a first crop stallion and just might be enough to pique some breeders interest. Tonalist also has 2 SWs both GSWs, but Tonalist's sales average went from 101k to 48k to 18k. Honor Code's sales numbers are better than that at least. Either way he needs his foals to start winning stakes races. Maybe they'll get better at 4. I hope so because I really liked him when he was racing. His stud fee will be reduced but I imagine most stallions fees will be reduced, except maybe the very very top, I can see The Factor getting a stud fee increase. Constitution is the only one I could see getting a fee increase from his stallion crop.

I certainly understand why breeders want consistency - you don’t necessarily expect stars, but if you aren’t getting them (and IMO he had a potential star in HAP), then you want mostly (some busts are to be expected) nice runners that can win allowances or low level stakes. Some of HC’s most talented horses have had some bad luck - Creed, Market Analysis (who returns today), Corsi (a horse slammed into him while training - he’s lucky he wasn’t killed), Thunder Code- so that’s been frustrating. I think he might have had another SW or two in that bunch. You’re right, though - 2 SW isn’t good. Bama Breeze is stakes placed, and I do think eventually he’ll get a SW - they are taking their time with him, trying to see if he can get engaged earlier in races; I have hopes for him. I love Max - he’s talented and never runs a a bad race. He’ll have to improve to beat the best, but he’s a colt who should only improve, and he’s a horse anyone would love to own.

Thanks for the info on the stud fees.. at this point, I’m not going to focus on that. Maybe a reduction will actually help HC...and, while it’s not the same thing, we discussed Mineshaft somewhere in these threads. Now he got off to a really bad start - and he’s become an honest, dependable, good sire. It’s very early in Honor Code’s stud career, so there’s still time for him to add luster to his sire’s legacy.

[Ziggypop]

I tuned in every day of this sale. I am far from being an expert, but this sale was painful to watch.

[Flanders]

Being inconsistent is the reason a stallion's fee is dropped. Breeders want consistency. Honor Code isn't doing good at stud at this point and that's a fact. Its almost October of his first crop's 3yo year, he has 2 SWs. One of which won 1 stakes, the other is retired, but they both made it into the starting gate of the Kentucky Derby and that is pretty amazing for a first crop stallion and just might be enough to pique some breeders interest. Tonalist also has 2 SWs both GSWs, but Tonalist's sales average went from 101k to 48k to 18k. Honor Code's sales numbers are better than that at least. Either way he needs his foals to start winning stakes races. Maybe they'll get better at 4. I hope so because I really liked him when he was racing. His stud fee will be reduced but I imagine most stallions fees will be reduced, except maybe the very very top, I can see The Factor getting a stud fee increase. Constitution is the only one I could see getting a fee increase from his stallion crop.

I can understand breeders not liking a stallion's first crop due to issues of physical traits, such as correctness, size, rate of maturity, etc.

But to measure the worth of a first or second year crop on the basis of winning/not winning stakes races? Is there enough data to rule out statistical noise?

That is how it works, it happens every year. Breeders are fast to make judgements on stallions. Its why Winstar, Spendthrift, etc. sells their 2nd year stallions that aren't doing well, usually in the fall and after the Keeneland yearling sale. A stallion that isn't consistently getting SWs is not going to get mares. Its abnormal for a farm to keep a stallion that isn't getting at least 3% SWs and they are hoping that he does better. I would say most Kentucky stallions with 4 crops of racing age and standing at the big farms have at least 4% SWs to foals of racing age.

If a stallion isn't getting 2yo SWs his first year by the time his 2nd crop yearlings go to auction then his yearling average drops which causes his stud fee and mares bred to drop the following year. If a stallion can show his foals improve dramatically as 3yos then they will all eventually come back up. If he still isn't getting many SWs with his 3yos, its going to be a lot harder.

I know I wrote about Curlin at some point and how cold he went from 2012 to 2013. He went to stud in 2009 for $75,000, his first crop raced in 2012, he got no SWs, his fee dropped to $25,000 for 2013(his fee had been 40k from 2010-2012) and he bred 54 mares to produce 40 foals. He yearling averages thanks to Falinadin was:

Curlin (2nd crop average was almost half the first crop average).
2011: $136k,
2012: $69k,
2013: $87k,
2014: $137k,
2020: $342k

But once his first crop hit 3 and they improved dramatically so did his popularity. It took a couple years for everything to come back up but his first crop ended up being 9% SW, his 2nd crop was a little worse but he had proved at that point he could get Classic contenders and now he is one of the most expensive stallions with a very good yearling average price and a solid 7% SWs.

Into Mischief was on the other end of the spectrum. He wasn't well received by breeders, his yearling average was bad, his first four crops had 42, 27, 37 and 37 foals. He started stud at 12.5k, went down every year until it was 7.5k in 2012. But that was the year his 2yos hit the track, he got a lot of SWs and his fee was raised to 20k in 2013 and has went up almost every year since.
2011: 22k
2012: 21k
2013: 48k
2014: 51k
2015: 87k
2020: 406k
Breeders took notice though. After his first crop hit the racetrack and he got 3 SWs from 21 starters (42 foals), including Goldencents, his mares bred in 2013 went to 210.

[Slinky_Malinky]

I certainly understand why breeders want consistency - you don’t necessarily expect stars, but if you aren’t getting them (and IMO he had a potential star in HAP), then you want mostly (some busts are to be expected) nice runners that can win allowances or low level stakes.

Another way of looking at this is, breeders want evidence that they will recoup their investments. One of the reasons California Chrome is in Japan is that even before his first crop began running, breeders were not getting a return on their investment and the ownership group did not see any evidence of that situation changing. It's also why horses like Lookin at Lucky or Macho Uno or English Channel or Midnight Lute or Midshipman don't sell well despite the fact that all of them improve their mares, some of them by quite a lot: their progeny median earnings is about $30,000, and that's about as much as anyone will ever pay for one. Half of their runners will make less than that amount. Why would you want to pay more for one?

Compare to Broken Vow, whose median earnings is about $37,000 and his sales figures are reliably in the $45k range.

Although it's early yet, the facts are that Honor Code has one horse who has earned 15% of Honor Code's combined progeny earnings and that he's got 16% winners from runners. His median progeny earnings is a paltry $8,500 and as he's had so few 2yo starters with his second crop, it's fair to say that 2yo starters are not dragging down his 3yo stats. Median progeny earnings of $8,500 means that his progeny thus far are not competitive in allowance or higher-level claiming company and certainly not in stakes company. By contrast, Tapiture's median earnings at the same point in his career is $15,000. Bayern has median progeny earnings of $21,000 and almost twice as many winners from runners as Honor Code does.

Honor Code is a poor investment at this point, both from the standpoint of buying one to race and from breeding a mare to him (regardless of whether it's to sell or to race the resulting foal). Even with a big fee drop to $7500, he's still dodgy as an investment.

[Slewfan2]

I certainly understand why breeders want consistency - you don’t necessarily expect stars, but if you aren’t getting them (and IMO he had a potential star in HAP), then you want mostly (some busts are to be expected) nice runners that can win allowances or low level stakes.

Another way of looking at this is, breeders want evidence that they will recoup their investments. One of the reasons California Chrome is in Japan is that even before his first crop began running, breeders were not getting a return on their investment and the ownership group did not see any evidence of that situation changing. It's also why horses like Lookin at Lucky or Macho Uno or English Channel or Midnight Lute or Midshipman don't sell well despite the fact that all of them improve their mares, some of them by quite a lot: their progeny median earnings is about $30,000, and that's about as much as anyone will ever pay for one. Half of their runners will make less than that amount. Why would you want to pay more for one?

Compare to Broken Vow, whose median earnings is about $37,000 and his sales figures are reliably in the $45k range.

Although it's early yet, the facts are that Honor Code has one horse who has earned 15% of Honor Code's combined progeny earnings and that he's got 16% winners from runners. His median progeny earnings is a paltry $8,500 and as he's had so few 2yo starters with his second crop, it's fair to say that 2yo starters are not dragging down his 3yo stats. Median progeny earnings of $8,500 means that his progeny thus far are not competitive in allowance or higher-level claiming company and certainly not in stakes company. By contrast, Tapiture's median earnings at the same point in his career is $15,000. Bayern has median progeny earnings of $21,000 and almost twice as many winners from runners as Honor Code does.

Honor Code is a poor investment at this point, both from the standpoint of buying one to race and from breeding a mare to him (regardless of whether it's to sell or to race the resulting foal). Even with a big fee drop to $7500, he's still dodgy as an investment.

Ouch, that hurts...although you can say that Bayern hasn’t aired a horse nearly as good as HAP...neither has Tapiture. Still, that’s me trying to find the positive. Well, Lane’s End will do what they can to help Honor Code, so hopefully he will start to live up to his record and pedigree.

Thank you for this info!

[Slinky_Malinky]

Ouch, that hurts...although you can say that Bayern hasn’t aired a horse nearly as good as HAP...neither has Tapiture. Still, that’s me trying to find the positive. Well, Lane’s End will do what they can to help Honor Code, so hopefully he will start to live up to his record and pedigree.

Thank you for this info!

You're welcome.

Tapiture has a little over 50% winners from starters and an astounding 85% runners from foals in his first crop (fall 3yos!). At least 11 of those are multiple winners. Even though his median earnings is still on the low end at $15,000, that's reasonable given that he has a lot of 2yo first time starters getting going. That's a good start for a young horse. His sales figures are what I would expect to see for a young horse who is in the lower-end Kentucky stud fee bracket: yearling prices aren't all that great, but his 2yo sales prices are quite respectable. People are waiting to see if one of his foals will be a runner, and if so they will pay a good price for them.

As for Bayern, his foals are running and winning in MSW and ALW races and competitive enough in listed stakes to get placings. Some are running at Churchill and Santa Anita, and he seems to have a lot in Louisiana and Oklahoma. Because he doesn't have many stakes horses, the average earnings per starter is not hugely distorted. An average earnings per starter for a 2nd crop sire of $36,000 is actually pretty decent, as is the average earnings per start of about $5,000. That's enough to be worth keeping them in training. It's not enough, though, to make him attractive at public yearling sales. TBH he reminds me a lot of Include...will probably be a source of sound, useful runners and good enough to stay in Kentucky, but barring a miracle will never be commercial.

[KatieK101]

Ghostzapper was an excellent comparison in this instance! And look at him now; the broodmare sire of Justify I love that Awesome Again line.

[CorridorZ75]

Speaking of California Chrome, I was not surprised that he was not a sales sire darling-he himself, though useful at 2, really grew into himself at 3 and continued to mature nicely, but was not the big hunk popular at the sales. However, Kentucky was so convinced Chrome wouldn’t make it, they abandoned him before his weanlings went to market. When his mares in foal from the second season went to market, there was barely one or two that were truly book 1 level. And some of his best mares are young and only started to show their worth after they were covered by him, or they likely would not have been sent to him at all. On the opposite end of the spectrum, AP gets really brawny, good looking yearlings and was sent historically incredible mare groups so even though I think he has underwhelmed as a sire, he still gets high dollar yearlings from stellar broodmares.

Take for instance Take Charge Lady. I thought from a pedigree POV and physically, she and California Chrome fit perfectly, but I also knew her owners would never send her to him because, even with his first crop, any resulting foal wouldn’t bring as high a dollar amount at the sale, and so she was sent back to AP unsurprisingly, although she didn’t produce a foal that time. Still it is a bit depressing when sales dictate so much of the breeding.

On a side note, I am really interested in seeing what happens with Chrome’s Chilean crops because I thought he fit really well from a pedigree POV with mares down there. For a similar reason, I am excited for his third crop in the US- there are just some intriguing crosses to me in them and I think the program to get more regional state bred foals for him will likely bare fruit.

[Katewerk]

Ouch, that hurts...although you can say that Bayern hasn’t aired a horse nearly as good as HAP...neither has Tapiture. Still, that’s me trying to find the positive. Well, Lane’s End will do what they can to help Honor Code, so hopefully he will start to live up to his record and pedigree.

Thank you for this info!

You're welcome.

Seconded. This is really interesting analysis.

As a competitive show dog breeder, I come at this from a different angle -- for me, traits are everything and I don't care where I get them. Win records are virtually meaningless in terms of predicting a dog's potential as a sire because winning in a subjective arena is a product of so many moving parts -- strategy, politics, frequency of showing, and most importantly the means of the owner to compete at the highest level.

But the "moving part" aspect also applies to racing -- there are so many factors that determine the outcome of a race that it's difficult to assess how large a role the stallion's genetics play in determining outcomes. And then there's a cultural element that really flies in the face of logic -- is a Triple Crown winner superior to the the horse that loses the Belmont by less than a length? How? From the perspective of breeding science, it's absurd to elevate the former over the latter, but it happens just the same.

That said, I do understand the commercial pressures of breeding and the economic forces that drive decisions. I just wonder that if this influence was lessened, that pedigrees might become more creative, and new crosses and nicks emerge.

[Gemini]

Speaking of sires who dropped in popularity... Were there any Daredevil yearlings at this sale?

[mariasmon]

Speaking of sires who dropped in popularity... Were there any Daredevil yearlings at this sale?

[Mylute]

From the Ramsey's consignment, I'll take:

c. Gun Runner x Awesome Flower

[Northport]

From the Ramsey's consignment, I'll take:

c. Gun Runner x Awesome Flower

Another walk down memory lane:

https://www.facebook.com/RamseyFarm/pos ... 2559386016

[bare it all]

From the Ramsey's consignment, I'll take:

c. Gun Runner x Awesome Flower

Another walk down memory lane:

https://www.facebook.com/RamseyFarm/pos ... 2559386016

Easy game, haha. (FYI that’s a baby Cyberknife)