**NEW** for 2024 - Bloodstock Briefing - Asking pinhookers if the shift in the 2yo sales season (to later dates) has influenced the type of horses they consign for sale

Article by Jordin Rosser

Even though term pinhooking came from the tobacco industry in Kentucky, it is widely used in the Thoroughbred racing industry as a concept where horses are bought at one stage of life and sold at another stage of development in the hopes of a profit based on the breaking, training and maturing process of these animals. 

We have gathered a panel of pinhook sellers of both yearling to two-year-olds, weanling to yearlings, and breeders to discuss their thoughts on selection at sales and their view of the business. Our panelists include: Richard Budge, the general manager of Margaux Farm who oversees the breeding and training of yearlings and two-year-olds; Eddie Woods, a well-established two-year-old consignor and yearling pinhooker; Marshall Taylor, a thoroughbred advisor at Taylor Made – known for yearling consignments; Niall Brennan, a respected two-year-old consignor and yearling pinhooker. 

Q: When selecting yearlings for pinhooking to the two-year-old sales or weanlings for the yearling sales, which qualities do you look for? 

Many of the panelists concur on the primary qualities necessary for a prospective successful pinhook being conformation, pedigree, and clean vetting – but generally, wanting “quality”. Such traits include an early maturing body, muscle, good conformation, and pedigree for yearling pinhooks to two-year-olds. Some consignors weigh some of the main qualities with different weights, for example, Eddie Woods looks at the conformation of the prospect before the pedigree but will analyze sire lines and sire statistics to assist him in his selections. In contrast, Richard Budge starts with the pedigree then evaluates the conformation and analyzes the whole picture. For weanling to yearling pinhooks, the primary attributes to consider are pedigree, conformation, good movement, and early foaling dates. Marshall Taylor further discussed wanting to find a good-sized body, longer neck, laid back shoulders and good strides when walking. At the end of the day, “quality is a perception” as stated by Niall Brennan – these qualities are statistically likely to sell well in both the yearling sales and the two-year-old sales from the seller’s perspective.  

Q: Given the two-year-old sales have decreased in number and have moved to later months, do you believe it has incentivized yearling selection and/or breeders to favor later maturing horses?  

A resounding “no” came from the panelists. Looking back into the history of two-year-old sales gave a clearer picture as to why the sentiment has not changed. The main two-year-old sales currently are the OBS March, April and June sales in Ocala, Florida as well as the Fasig Tipton May and June sales in Timonium, Maryland. However, there used to be OBS February, Calder and Adena Springs sales, Fasig Tipton’s Gulfstream sale, and Barretts’ (a company whose final auction was in 2018) March and May sales in Pomona, California. 

Niall Brennan commented that when the earlier sales were going on, the horses would “breeze within themselves easily” instead of breezing for the clock as is evident in today’s sales. Due to this emphasis, pinhookers noticed some horses needed more time to mature to run quicker times and with the horsemanship shown throughout the industry – all the panelists indicated that “the horse will tell you which sale it belongs in”. With the two-year-olds’ sales model having changed many variables, one variable that stayed the same is the horse attributes needed to be successful in these sales. Which leads to the conclusion being the same and sentiment remaining steady despite changes in the industry.

Q:  Hypothetically, if the two-year-old sales changed from breezing to galloping with technological devices to provide metrics to analyze, do you think the market or breeders would change their strategies? 

Most of the panelists believed this hypothetical would not work well for the two-year-old sales model. Some of the panelists discussed the Barretts sales model having horses gallop untimed instead of breezing or breezing with times in the 100ths. Niall Brennan commented that the granularization of the breeze times “caused more speculation from the buyers” and changed their perspective on the individual horses based on fractions of a second. The juxtaposition of sales with only untimed gallops and sales with timed breezes caused many buyers to “compare apples to oranges” – leading to a perceived dismissal of the idea. 

In the current market and with the technology available today, this may not be possible, but Marshall Taylor believes “any information you have is good information” and “moving forward with technology is a positive”. In the future and with significant technological advancements, this hypothetical could be real. In the words of Niall Brennan, “the time will come when we aren’t worried about time [during breezing]”. 

Q: In terms of breeding, what trends do you currently see and what trends do you want to see benefiting the pinhooking market? 

The consensus from the panelists indicated breeding speed and quick maturing horses is the current trend in the pinhooking market. Richard Budge stated “precociousness is valued highly into the making of a stallion” in America. Marshall Taylor mentioned technology is used in making breeding decisions, particularly Nick reports. These use the daily updating percentage of stakes winner indexes to determine if sire and dam lines are compatible for the desired outcome culminating in a high performing racehorse. 

Based on many of the responses in what type of weanlings or yearlings are selected at the beginning of the pinhooking process, the need for precocious and well-bred horses is no surprise. Richard Budge, believes that turf racing has become more popular and believes the growth of this segment in thoroughbred racing should encourage pinhooks to look for turf in their prospect’s pedigrees. However, the bloodlines will need to support this idea and the American breeders will need to include more English, French and South American bloodlines to adjust for these factors. 

Q:  Where do you see the pinhooking market right now? 

The panelists all agree on this point: the buyer market is focused on quality over quantity and concentration of the buyer market. These trends encourage pinhookers to purchase weanlings or yearlings that tick all their boxes to produce quality prospects leading to increased prices as a function of competition. According to many panelists, the market is focused on what is perceived to be the “top end” – by pedigree, conformation, vetting, and/or under tack time. Based on the rising costs of ownership, Marshall Taylor mentioned “partnerships are becoming more popular” amongst the buyers, allowing owners to offset these increased costs. 

———-

Throughout these interviews, it is apparent pinhookers have a keen ability to read the horses and determine how to bring their best on “NFL combine” day in the case of the two-year-olds. Niall Brennan and Richard Budge gave credit and appreciation to all the pinhookers who actively prepare these athletes and show their horsemanship through breaking, training, consigning, and breeding of these animals. 

We see all the hard work that goes into preparing these athletes for race day through their accomplishments. To produce this feat on demand and to make money in the process is what pinhooking thoroughbreds is all about. 

Factors for racing ability and sustainability

By Judy Wardrope

Everyone wants to be able to pick a future star on the track, ideally, one that can compete at the stakes level for several seasons. In order to increase the probability of finding such a gem, many buyers and agents look at the pedigree of a horse and the abilities displayed by its relatives, but that is not always an accurate predictor of future success. When looking at a potential racehorse, the mechanical aspects of its conformation usually override the lineage, unless of course, the conformation actually matches the pedigree.

For our purposes, we will examine three horses at the end of their three-year-old campaigns and one at the end of her fourth year. In order to provide the best educational value, these four horses were chosen because they offer a reasonable measure of success or failure on the track, have attractive pedigrees and were all offered for sale as racing prospects in a November mixed sale. The fillies were also offered as broodmare prospects.

Is it possible to tell which ones were the better racehorses and predict the best distances for those who were successful? Do their race records match their pedigrees? Let’s see.

Horse #1

This gelding (photographed as a three-year-old) is by Horse of the Year Mineshaft and out of a daughter of Giants Causeway, a pedigree that would suggest ability at classic distances. He brought a final bid of $275k as a yearling and $45k as a maiden racing-prospect at the end of his three-year-old year after earning $19,150. His story did not end there, however. He went back to racing, changed trainers a few times, was claimed and then won a minor stakes at a mile while adding over $77k to his total earnings. All but one of his 18 races (3-3-3) were on the dirt, and he was still in training at the time of writing.

Structurally, he has some good points, but he is not built to be a superior athlete nor a consistent racehorse. His LS gap (just in front of the high point of croup) is considerably rearward from a line drawn from the top point of one hip to the top of the other. In other words, he was not particularly strong in the transmission and would likely show inconsistency because his back would likely spasm from his best efforts.

Horse #1

His stifle placement, based on the visible protrusion, is just below sheath level, which is in keeping with a horse preferring distances around eight or nine furlongs. However, his femur side (from point of buttock to stifle protrusion) of the rear triangle is shorter than the ilium side (point of hip to point of buttock), which not only adds stress to the hind legs, but it changes the ellipse of the rear stride and shortens the distance preference indicated by stifle placement. Horses with a shorter femur travel with their hocks behind them do not reach as far under their torsos as horses that are even on the ilium and femur sides. While the difference is not pronounced on this horse, it is discernable and would have an effect.

He exhibits three factors for lightness of the forehand: a distinct rise to the humerus (from elbow to point of shoulder), a high base of neck and a pillar of support (as indicated by a line extended through the naturally occurring groove in the forearm) that emerges well in front of the withers. The bottom of his pillar also emerges just into the rear quarter of his hoof, which, along with his lightness of the forehand, would aid with soundness for his forequarters.

The muscling at the top of his forearm extends over the elbow, which is a good indication that he is tight in the elbow on that side. He developed that muscle in that particular fashion because he has been using it as a brake to prevent the elbow from contacting the ribcage. (Note that the tightness of the elbow can vary from side to side on any horse.)

He ran according to his build, not his pedigree, and may well continue to run in that manner. He is more likely to have hind leg and back issues than foreleg issues.

Horse #2

This filly (photographed as a three-year-old) is by champion sprinter Speightstown and out of a graded-stakes-placed daughter of Hard Spun that was best at about a mile. The filly raced at two and three years of age, earning $26,075 with a lifetime record of 6 starts, one win, one second and one third—all at sprinting distances on the dirt. She did not meet her reserve price at the sale when she was three.

Horse #2

Unlike Horse #1, her LS gap is much nearer the line from hip to hip and well within athletic limits. But, like Horse #1, she is shorter on the femur side of her rear triangle, which means that although her stifle protrusion is well below sheath level, the resultant rear stride would be restricted, and she would be at risk for injury to the hind legs, particularly from hock down.

She only has two of three factors for lightness of the forehand: the top of the pillar emerges well in front of the withers, and she has a high point of neck. Unlike the rest of the horses, she does not have much rise from elbow to point of shoulder, which equates with more horse in front of the pillar as well as a slower, lower stride on the forehand. In addition, the muscling at the top of her forearm is placed directly over her elbow… even more so than on Horse #1. She would not want to use her full range of motion of the foreleg and would apply the brake/muscle she developed in order to lift the foreleg off the ground before the body had fully rotated over it to avoid the elbow/rib collision. This often results in a choppy stride. However, it should be noted that the bottom of her pillar emerges into the rear quarter of her hoof, which is a factor for soundness of the forelegs.

Her lower point of shoulder combined with her tight elbow would not make for an efficient stride of the forehand, and her shorter femur would not make for an efficient stride of the hindquarters.

Her construction explains why she performed better as a two-year-old than she did as a three-year-old. It is likely that the more she trained and ran, the more uncomfortable she became, and that she would favor either the hindquarters or the forequarters, or alternate between them.

She did not race nearly as well as her lineage would suggest.

Horse #3

This filly (photographed as a three-year-old) is by champion two-year-old, Midshipman, and out of a multiple stakes-producing daughter of Unbridled’s Song. She raced at two and three years of age and became a stakes-winner (Gr3) as a three-year-old, tallying over $425k in lifetime earnings from 12 starts. Although she did win one of her two starts on turf, she was best at 8 to 8.5 furlongs on the main track. She brought a bid of $775k at the sale and was headed to life as a broodmare.

Horse #3

Her LS gap is just slightly rearward of a line drawn from hip to hip and is therefore well within the athletic range. Her rear triangle is of equal distance on the ilium and femur sides, plus her stifle protrusion would be just below sheath level if she were male. She has the engine of an 8- to 9-furlong horse and the transmission to utilize that engine.

Aside from all three factors for lightness of the forehand (pillar emerging well in front of the withers, good rise of the humerus from elbow to point of shoulder and a high base of neck), the bottom of her pillar emerges into the rear quarter of her hoof to aid in soundness.

Although she shows muscle development at the top of her forearm, the muscling does not extend over her elbow the way it does on the previous two horses. Her near side does not exhibit the tell-tale muscle of a horse with a tight elbow, and thus, she would be comfortable using a full range of motion of the forehand.

Proportionately, she has the shortest neck of the sample horses, which may be one of the reasons she has developed the muscle at the top of her forearm. Since horses use their necks to aid in lifting the forehand and extending the stride, she may compensate by using the muscle over her humerus to assist in those purposes.

Of the sample horses, she is the closest to matching heritage and ability.

BUY THIS ISSUE IN PRINT OR DOWNLOAD

ISSUE 55 (PRINT)

$6.95

ISSUE 55 (DIGITAL)

$3.99

WHY NOT SUBSCRIBE?

DON'T MISS OUT AND SUBSCRIBE TO RECEIVE THE NEXT FOUR ISSUES!

Four issue subscription - PRINT & ONLINE - ONLY $24.95

Pedigree vs Conformation

By Judy Wardrope

What are the factors people consider when assessing a potential racehorse? In part, it depends on their intentions. Different choices may be made if the horse or offspring is intended for their own use or how the horse or offspring might sell.

And when a horse gets to the track, what factors help a trainer decide on a particular distance or surface to try? Most of the trainers I interviewed say that they usually look at who the sire is when trying to determine distance and/or surface preferences.

Trainer Mark Frostad said, “I look at the pedigree more than the individual regarding distance and surface.” 

Richard Mandella says that his determining factors are “conformation, style of action, pedigree and the old standby, trial and error.”

Roger Attfield says, “It is extremely hard to tell turf versus dirt. I’ve watched horses all my life and I’ve tried to figure it out. I can tell when I start breezing them. I had a half-sister [to Perfect Soul], who was stakes-placed, and she couldn’t handle the turf one iota. I had the full brother…also turf. Approval could win on the dirt, but as soon as he stepped on the turf, he was dynamite.”

What about when planning a potential breeding for a mare or a stallion? Is conformation more important than pedigree? Or does pedigree have more influence than conformation? How much of a role does marketing play in the selections?  

Although ancestry and conformation do go together, the correlation is complicated. For example, top basketball players tend not to come from families of short people, but most NBA stars do not have siblings who are star players. The rule holds for other athletes, including gymnasts. But what would you get if you crossed a basketball player with a gymnast? 

Pedigree is not an absolute despite what marketing campaigns may lead you to believe. Look at human families—maybe even your own. Are you built like all of your siblings, do you all have the same talents? And what about your cousins? Are you all built alike and of equal talent? 

When it comes to Thoroughbred horses, you will find that only the very top sires boast a percentage of stakes winners nearing 15%. If one assumes that a stakes winner is the goal of most breeders, then that would indicate at least an 85% failure rate.

When breeding horses or selecting potential racehorses, the cross might look good on paper or in our imaginations, but what are the odds that the offspring would be able to perform to expectations if it was not built to be a success at the track? Looking at the big picture, one has to wonder what we are doing to the gene pool if we only breed for marketability.

To get a better understanding, let’s look at four horses. Three of our sample horses have strong catalog pages, but did they run according to their pedigrees or according to the mechanics of their construction? Furthermore, did the horse with the humdrum catalog page have a humdrum racing career?

Ocean Colors

PEDIGREE 

She is by Orientate, a campion sprinter of $1,716,950 (including a win in the Breeders' Cup Sprint [Gr1], who sired numerous stakes horses and was the broodmare sire of champions. 

Her dam, Winning Colors, earned $1,526,837, was the champion three-year-old filly and beat the boys in the Kentucky Derby [Gr1] and the Santa Anita Derby [Gr1]. She was a proven classic-distance racehorse. 

Winning Colors was the dam of 10 registered foals, 9 to race, 6 winners, including Ocean Colors and Golden Colors (a stakes-placed winner in Japan, who produced Cheerful Smile, a stakes winner of $1,878,158 in North America), and she is ancestor to other black-type runners.

CONFORMATION

Her lumbosacral gap (LS), which is just in front of the high point of croup and functions like the horse's transmission, is considerably rearward of ideal. This constitutes a significant difference when compared to either of her athletic parents. 

The rear triangle is equal on the ilium side (point of hip to point of buttock) and femur side (point of buttock to stifle protrusion), and her stifle is well below where the bottom of the sheath would be if she were male. In essence these would contribute to the long, ground-covering stride seen in distance horses like her dam.

Her pillar of support (a line extending through the natural groove in her forearm) emerges well in front of her withers for some lightness to the forehand and into the rear quarter of the hoof for added soundness.

Her base of neck is neither high nor low when compared to her point of shoulder, meaning that placement neither added nor subtracted weight on the forehand.

Because her humerus (elbow to point of shoulder) is not as long as one would expect for a range of motion that would match that of her hindquarters, she likely resembles her sprinter lines in this area. Although I never saw her race, I strongly suspect that her gait was not smooth. In order to compensate for a shorter stride in the front than in the back, she probably wanted to suspend the forehand while her hindquarters went through the full range of motion. Unfortunately, she is not strong enough in the LS to effectively use that method of compensating.

RECORDS

Her race record shows her as a stakes-placed mare and winner of $127,093 but closer examination shows that the stakes race was not graded with a small purse and that her three wins, two seconds and three thirds were not in top company.

While valuable on paper as a broodmare, and despite being mated to some top stallions early in her breeding career, she failed to produce a quality racehorse. Naturally her value dropped significantly until she sold in November 2018 for $20,000 in foal to Anchor Down.

Sequoyah

PEDIGREE

His sire, A.P. Indy earned $2,979,815, won the Breeders’ Cup Classic and the Belmont Stakes plus was the Eclipse Champion three-year-old and Horse of the Year. He was also a top sire of stakes horses as well as a noted sire of sires.

 His dam, Chilukki, earned more than $1.2 million, was the Eclipse Champion two-year-old filly, was second in the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile Fillies, and set track records at Churchill Downs for both 4.5 furlongs and a mile. Her sire won the Breeders’ Cup Sprint and equaled a track record for 7 furlongs. 

CONFORMATION

His LS is 1.5” (by actual palpation) rearward of ideal and just at the outer limits of the athletic range.

His rear triangle is slightly shorter on the femur side (point of hip to stifle protrusion), which not only decreases the range of motion of the rear leg by changing the stride’s ellipse, but it adds stress to the hind leg from hock down.

The stifle placement (well below sheath level) would indicate a preference for distances around 10 furlongs (similar to his sire’s), except for the short femur.

His pillar of support does emerge in front of the withers, but the bottom of the line emerges behind the heel, making him susceptible to injury to the suspensory apparatus of the foreleg (tendons and ligaments).

His humerus is of medium length and is moderately angled and would represent a range of motion that would match the hindquarters. However, the tightness of his elbow (note the circled muscling over the elbow) would likely prevent him from using the full range of motion. He would stop the motion before the elbow contacted his ribs; thus, the development of that particular muscle as a brake and a reduction in stride length. His base of neck was well above point of shoulder, which adds some lightness to his forehand.

RECORDS

He was injured in his only start and had zero earnings. He did go to stud based on his pedigree, but was not a success. He sired one stakes winner of note, a gelding out of a stakes-winning Smart Strike daughter, who won at distances from 7 to 9 furlongs.

TO READ MORE —

BUY THIS ISSUE IN PRINT OR DOWNLOAD -

SUMMER SALES 2019, ISSUE 53 (PRINT)

$6.95

SUMMER SALES 2019, ISSUE 53 (DIGITAL)

$3.99

WHY NOT SUBSCRIBE?

DON'T MISS OUT AND SUBSCRIBE TO RECEIVE THE NEXT FOUR ISSUES!

PRINT & ONLINE SUBSCRIPTION

$24.95

Changing Surface - from dirt to turf

CLICK ON IMAGE TO READ

Keeping it in the family - can a horse's family traits be used to a trainer's advantage?

It’s the same story at every dinner party, writes Frances J. Karon. A stranger will invariably ask, “What do you do?”, as if the response will somehow explain the very essence of one’s being. Similarly, the first question we have for the owner or trainer who tells us he has a nice yearling on the farm is, “What’s it by?”

By Frances Karon

First Published (21 July 2010 - Issue Number: 17)