Karl

[Miguel_Sanchez]

While I only have one broodmare, and I used to have more, I do "invest" in stallion shares. When I look at a stallion, primarily I look at what he does and how he did it on the track. I am looking for, not just a horse, but a special horse. One who is truly great. Of course I look at pedigree as well. However, when I look at the horse and what he did, how he did it, etc.----I look at the entire body of work. His entire career.

While Alan Leavitt has been credited many times for saying 2 year old speed is the single most important factor to a sire, Alan was in fact a walking and living contradiction, LOL. Alan also said, many times, and I personally heard him say it, that, stamina comes from the sire, and speed comes from the dam. Regardless, in looking at Karl as a stallion, you must look at his 2yo year. This is where the debate begins, LOL. Obviously Karl was "the" horse at 2. By "the" horse, I mean he was heads and shoulders ahead of the rest of the class. He was more than dominant. He was the best colt in the class. JMHO.

However, was he the most talented? Not accomplished, but talented? Dig deeper, did he show the most potential? For me, this was a case of Mike Tyson. He was so much better than everything else that it made him look "greater" than he was. It was a visual deception that caused many people to think he was great----and could perhaps be one of the GOAT. Now, that said, not one expert or qualified opinion that I spoke with, not one, ever thought Karl would be one of the GOAT. Not one. I didn't think he was a great colt. I thought he was dominant, best in class, would win everything not nailed down. But he was racing against a bunch of horses who just were well behind in---developmental-wise, maturity-wise, speed-wise, and more. Fast-forward to the 3yo campaign. Argue all you want about Karl regressing, not being sound, etc. However, that aside, the rest of the class caught up to him. They got better, matured, turned the corner, and caught up to him.....and as time went on, whether he was unsound, bled, whatever.....a few of the top horses in the class caught up to him.....and surpassed him. Sure, he wasn't himself, he may have been unsound, not 100%, bled (at some point), etc. But the rest of the 3yo crop, the contenders, they got better, progressed, etc., and he didn't. No offense, and taking nothing away from what the history books will say----he got lucky winning the Hambo. He was not the best horse that day, in that race.

Anyway, Crawford co-owned this horse and had dreams of winning the Hambo since before Karl started his 3yo campaign. He co-owned 2 previous Hambo winners----both fillies! But, now a colt, that's different. I think they are going to be forced into setting his stud fee high---$12,500, or even $15,000---but Sig Sauer at $8,000 does set a mark in the marketplace. If they set Karl at $10,000, or lower, he will attract lower quality mares, mares he would not get at $12.5 or $15k.

Let's see what they do.

very well said!

[Grandstand Handicapper]

IMO, the stud fee could determine whether more little people get involved or more big-name commercial breeders. 
Even the best stallion prospects have been 'total "duds"' in the breeding shed even with high quality mares. 

Good luck to one and all on those individuals that go on this venture.

Agreed. Interestingly, upon further reflection, looking at the current landscape of today's breeding market, ironically, an overwhelming majority of the breed are outcrosses. That may change and there may be some shift or movement in the scale so to speak. However, this does lead to a benefit. It avoids inbreeding, which displays itself in a loss of fertility in stallions. We've seen this happen. Think back to the early 90's when many, very many of the then current trotting stallions were having fertility issues. However, inbreeding can work, when you are talking about the right horses. You have to be a very disciplined breeder, and not look to be too aggressive so to speak. Nothing stronger than 3 x 3.

That said, I am very curious to see the mares that will be bred to Karl, more the second crop than the first. Crawford will support him as best he can, but he can't put all his eggs (eligible mares) in that basket.

[JIDGE]

Agreed. Interestingly, upon further reflection, looking at the current landscape of today's breeding market, ironically, an overwhelming majority of the breed are outcrosses. That may change and there may be some shift or movement in the scale so to speak. However, this does lead to a benefit. It avoids inbreeding, which displays itself in a loss of fertility in stallions. We've seen this happen. Think back to the early 90's when many, very many of the then current trotting stallions were having fertility issues. However, inbreeding can work, when you are talking about the right horses. You have to be a very disciplined breeder, and not look to be too aggressive so to speak. Nothing stronger than 3 x 3.

That said, I am very curious to see the mares that will be bred to Karl, more the second crop than the first. Crawford will support him as best he can, but he can't put all his eggs (eligible mares) in that basket.

He is standing at Diamond Creek and this year Diamond Creek has gotten very aggressive in their inbreeding.
No More Losses the dam of Cannibal is in foal to Confederate and Geothermal the dam of Confederate is in foal to Cannibal. Both these crosses represent a 3x2 cross to A Rocknroll Dance.