Last week, the Retired Mare Series took a look at Broodmare Sire stats. It looked at which sires of retired mares had a good 2008, and which did not live up to their standards. In a continuation of that trend, this week\u2019s article will look at the Sire position of the line, to see which line up well when using mares, rather than scratch breeding.<\/p>\n

These statistics may not be as compelling as last week\u2019s results. It may very well turn out that the best sires on this list are also the best sires of 2008. One of the most glaring omissions of this week\u2019s article is the lack of a base line of data. Sires are compared to each other, but the retired mare statistics are not compared to sim-wide statistics for each individual sire. Therefore this may turn out to be merely a look at the 2008 years of sires in the sim, rather than a look at which sires perform better when breeding to mares and which sires perform better when scratch breeding.<\/p>\n

With that said, there may very well be a difference when sires are used with retired mares versus being used for scratch breeding. And in the event that they are, this article will tell you which ones were the best with mares in 2008, which ones didn\u2019t live up to expectations, and which ones you should try out on your newly retired horse.<\/p>\n

Using only 2008 data, and based off of a list of active sim horses on January 9, 2009, there were 3,584 sires used on retired mare breedings (heretofore known as either \u201cExisting Horse Sires\u201d or simply just \u201cSires\u201d). These 3,584 sires became the fathers of 54,625 sim horses. This means that on average, every sire had 15.25 children running in 2008.<\/p>\n

Much like the Broodmare Sire Study last week, the Existing Horse Sire Study this week will be broken up into 5 different methods, in order to obtain the best possible results. One difference to note between this week\u2019s study and last week\u2019s study, though, is that the \u201cMinimum\u201d and \u201cMaximum\u201d qualifications have changed. Below are the 5 analyses performed.<\/p>\n

Pure numerical analysis (Raw data, rather than percentage data. A sire with more runners will likely have more winners, which will affect this data)<\/li>\n

Overall percentage analysis (Percentage data for all 3,920 broodmare sires. A sire with less runners will likely be in the extremes, closer to either 100% or 0%; Example: A sire with 1 race will have a 100% win percentage if the horse won, and a 0% win percentage if the horse lost)<\/li>\n

Minimum Qualification Percentage Analysis (Percentage data for 601 sires that had at least 15 active horses in 2008 and had at least 75 races run in 2008. A sire with less runners, which is below the average number of runners for 2008, will likely be in the extremes, closer to either 100% or 0%)<\/li>\n

Maximum Qualification Percentage Analysis (Percentage data for 352 sires that had at least 200 races run in 2008, regardless of the number of runners. This limits the impact of a small number of races, but restricts the overall data to the most popular sires)<\/li>\n

Combined Data (Will include various combinations of the previous 4 data; Methodology will be provided within the analysis)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

——-<\/p>\n

Pure Numerical Analysis<\/u><\/p>\n

Methodology: Existing Horse sires were ranked from 1 to 50 in 6 categories. These 6 were Wins, ITM, Graded Wins, Graded ITM, Stakes Wins, and Stakes ITM. Ties were given the ranking of the highest tie (for example, if horses ranked 27^{th<\/sup>, 28^{th<\/sup>, and 29^{th<\/sup> all had 7 wins, they were all given a 27^{th<\/sup> ranking. 6 wins would then be ranked 30^{th<\/sup>). Each horse was then given 50 points for every 1^{st<\/sup> place ranking, 49 points for every 2^{nd<\/sup> place ranking, and so on, down to 1 point for a 50^{th<\/sup> place ranking. The points from each of the six categories were added up, and the horses were ranked based on this total.<\/p>\n}}}}}}}}

<\/a><\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Raw Data Rank<\/b><\/td>\n

Sire<\/b><\/td>\n

Raw Data Score<\/b><\/td>\n

2008 Races<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

AWESOME AGAIN<\/td>\n

UNBRIDLED’S SONG<\/td>\n

GIANT’S CAUSEWAY (IRE)<\/td>\n

255<\/td>\n

1529<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

7<\/td>\n

RAINBOW QUEST<\/td>\n

243<\/td>\n

1301<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

8<\/td>\n

SEEKING THE GOLD<\/td>\n

237<\/td>\n

1458<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

9<\/td>\n

PLEASANTLY PERFECT<\/td>\n

ROCK OF GIBRALTAR (IRE)<\/td>\n

MONTJEU (IRE)<\/td>\n

EL PRADO(IRE)<\/td>\n

THEATRICAL(IRE)<\/td>\n

SADLER’S WELLS<\/td>\n

119<\/td>\n

1355<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

30<\/td>\n

DISTORTED HUMOR<\/td>\n

115<\/td>\n

1105<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

31<\/td>\n

FUSAICHI PEGASUS<\/td>\n

110<\/td>\n

1144<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

32<\/td>\n

HIGH CHAPARRAL (IRE)<\/td>\n

CRAFTY PROSPECTOR<\/td>\n

104<\/td>\n

883<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

35<\/td>\n

FANTASTIC LIGHT<\/td>\n

99<\/td>\n

1259<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

36<\/td>\n

ROCK HARD TEN<\/td>\n

90<\/td>\n

1009<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

36<\/td>\n

DIXIELAND BAND<\/td>\n

90<\/td>\n

1336<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

38<\/td>\n

ELUSIVE QUALITY<\/td>\n

84<\/td>\n

1328<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

39<\/td>\n

NORTH LIGHT (IRE)<\/td>\n

GALILEO (IRE)<\/td>\n

BLUEGRASS CAT<\/td>\n

63<\/td>\n

737<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

44<\/td>\n

ENCOSTA DE LAGO (AUS)<\/td>\n

CASTLEDALE (IRE)<\/td>\n

53<\/td>\n

704<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

47<\/td>\n

FOREST WILDCAT<\/td>\n

STREET CRY (IRE)<\/td>\n

51<\/td>\n

1305<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

Results:<\/u> The first thing that caught my eye in these results is that Storm Cat<\/b>, who I assumed would have the most races run, is actually 7^{th<\/sup> in that ranking, trailing equally surprising leader Rahy<\/b> by 140 races. That stat, in turn, shows that Rahy <\/b>has put together a poor performance in 2008. The raw data should be skewed by number of races, as the more races run, the more wins that will occur. Ranking 18^{th<\/sup> in this, as Rahy is, is not a good sign for his children.<\/p>\n}}

But instead of starting with the negatives, let\u2019s look at the positives. And what better way to start than at the top, with A.P. Indy<\/b>. It should come as no surprise that the son of Seattle Slew is on top of this leaderboard; Nor should it come as a surprise that he ranks no worse than 4^{th<\/sup> (ITM) in any of the 6 categories scored. His first place rankings come on the back of his stakes ability, as he ranks first in Stakes Wins, Stakes ITM, and Graded ITM. His best two children each have 3 Graded Stakes wins each for the year. The first is Eclipse Award nominee Non Negative(KY)<\/b>, a son of Opcon Only<\/b>. Keely\u2019s now-5yo horse scored victories in the G1 Bob Woodward Memorial<\/u> and New Hampshire Handicap<\/u>, while also capturing a G2 and 2 other stakes victories. The other 3-time Graded Stakes winner is squirrel\u2019s A P Precedent<\/b>, out of La Precedenta<\/b>. A P Precedent won the G2 Mansur LeRoys Handicap<\/u>, as well as another G2 and a G3 during the year. <\/p>\n}

Gone West<\/b> and Unbridled\u2019s Song<\/b>, 3^{rd<\/sup> and 4^{th<\/sup> on the list, both surprised slightly by showing up this high, as they ranked 13^{th<\/sup> and 19^{th<\/sup> in total number of races in 2008, respectively. Gone West earns his ranking thanks to his stakes winners, in which he ties for first with 45. Ghost Whispers(KY)<\/b>, out of Sadie\u2019s Ransom<\/b>, a mare owned by Coker, is his biggest Graded Stakes winner, with three for owner trij. Ghost Whispers(KY) earned 2 G1 wins in the Devil\u2019s Slide Handicap<\/u> and the What A Sham<\/u>, as well as 1 other Graded stakes win. His biggest stakes winners are West of the Red<\/b>, out of lilbitfarm\u2019s Girl Scout Cookie<\/b>, and Lady By Day<\/b>, out of Witch By Night<\/b> and bred by michaelo. Unbridled\u2019s Song<\/b>\u2019s ranking comes from the same categories as Gone West, as he earned 36 stakes wins to be ranked 4^{th<\/sup> in the category. His big stakes winners are Stormcreeper(KY)<\/b>, out of Snowchief\u2019s Storm Mouse <\/b>(and Granddaughter of Sim Legend Storm Dog<\/b>), and kingab\u2019s Thor\u2019s Odyssey(KY)<\/b>, son of Around The World<\/b>. Each of these two have 4 stakes wins on the year, although none are Graded Stakes.<\/p>\n}}}}}

Several horses on this list are significantly higher ranked than their race total would imply. The highest ranked of sires at least 40 spots higher than their race ranking is Ghostzapper<\/b>. Ranked 63rd in race total with 1,098 races during the year, he comes in at a stellar 13^{th<\/sup> here. He is ranked no worse than 29^{th<\/sup> in any of the 6 categories, with his best ranking of 7^{th<\/sup> coming in the Stakes ITM total, with 80 ITM finishes. 8 of those, and 5 wins, come on the running ability of Mach Pelican(KY)<\/b>, out of Salubrious<\/b> and owned by Adrian. His year also included 2 G3 places, en route to 6 wins in 12 races. Other sires that moved up at least 40 spots from their total race ranking include Montjeu(IRE) <\/b>(58^{th<\/sup> to 14^{th<\/sup>), Crafty Prospector <\/b>(91^{st<\/sup> to 34^{th<\/sup>), Roman Ruler <\/b>(83^{rd<\/sup> to 42^{nd<\/sup>), Bluegrass Cat<\/b> (116^{th<\/sup> to 43^{rd<\/sup>), Encosta De Lago(AUS) <\/b>(99^{th<\/sup> to 44^{th<\/sup>), Tapit <\/b>(96^{th<\/sup> to 46^{th<\/sup>), <\/b>and Castledale(IRE) <\/b>(129^{th<\/sup> to 47^{th<\/sup>).<\/p>\n}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

For all the horses that have shown a surprising rise in the ranks, there are several who have also shown disappointing declines. The largest drop of the top 50 is Forest Wildcat<\/b>, who fell from 17^{th<\/sup> in 2008 races to 47^{th<\/sup> on the raw data analysis. This is due mostly to his lack of Graded Stakes ITM finishes, as he has a mere 2 Graded Stakes wins and no places or shows in 1,427 races. His one saving grace is Jockeymax\u2019s Mambo Wildcat(KY)<\/b>, out of Crimson Pirate<\/b>, who earned his 2 graded stakes wins, one in the G1 Turf Invaders Stakes<\/u>, at the tail end of the year. Others who dropped at least 10 spots from their race rank include Rahy<\/b> (1^{st<\/sup> to 18^{th<\/sup>) Forestry<\/b> (6^{th<\/sup> to 22^{nd<\/sup>), War Chant <\/b>(10^{th<\/sup> to 24^{th<\/sup>), Red Ransom <\/b>(3^{rd<\/sup> to 26^{th<\/sup>), Belong To Me <\/b>(14^{th<\/sup> to 32^{nd<\/sup>), Sakhee<\/b> (24^{th<\/sup> to 49^{th<\/sup>), and Street Cry(IRE) <\/b>(33^{rd<\/sup> to 50^{th<\/sup>).<\/p>\n}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

———-<\/p>\n

Overall Percentage Analysis (also known as No Qualification Analysis)<\/u><\/p>\n

Methodology:<\/u> Sires were ranked from 1 to 100 in 6 categories. These 6 were Win Percentage (wins\/races), ITM Percentage (ITM\/races), Graded Win Percentage (GW\/races), Graded ITM Percentage (G ITM\/races), Stakes Win Percentage (SW\/races), and Stakes ITM Percentage (S ITM\/races). Ties were given the ranking of the highest tie (for example, if horses ranked 27^{th<\/sup>, 28^{th<\/sup>, and 29^{th<\/sup> all had 70% wins, they were all given a 27^{th<\/sup> ranking. 60% wins would then be ranked 30^{th<\/sup>). Each horse was then given 100 points for every 1^{st<\/sup> place ranking, 99 points for every 2^{nd<\/sup> place ranking, and so on, down to 1 point for a 100^{th<\/sup> place ranking. The points from each of the six categories were added up, and the horses were ranked based on this total.<\/p>\n}}}}}}}}

<\/a><\/p>\n