Believe it or not, I am new to TVG. I'm something of a dinosaur generally. I'm not sure if I lived in places where I couldn't get it or I just didn't, but in any event, I'm finally experiencing racing the way many of you have for the last however many years.
Today the announcers (I believe two were Simon Bray and ex-major league catcher Paul Lo Duca) told us that Keeneland allowance starter Garnet Crystals, being by Lion Heart out of a Silver Ghost mare, had the pedigree to transition to turf. Or, to be more accurate, the announcers made noises that sounded like they were eating a really tasty sandwich, but I think I got the right idea.
I'm holding out hope against hope that they had some basis for this statement, were thinking of something definite in their minds. But I have my doubts. Lion Heart never ran on the turf. Neither did his sire, Tale of the Cat. I don't think Silver Ghost ran on turf. I don't think Silver Ghost's sire, Mr. Prospector did. About the most I can say is that Silver Ghost's broodmare sire was Halo (although this Halo dam, Misty Gallore fared extremely well in dirt races).
Now it's certainly possible that, despite not running on turf, some of these ifluences have proven good on turf through the years. I don't know what goes into Tomlinson ratings, but this possibility didn't show up there: Garnet Crystal's turf rating was 8th of 11 in the field. Lion Heart sired Breeders' Cup Turf winner Dangerous Midge, but Dangerous Midge was out of a turf mare. Lion Heart's list of top horses features a preponderance of dirt horses.
I'm sure my categorization of sires as dirt and turf is less than perfect, and not just because I am less than perfect, but because I don't work hard enough at it. My initial categorization based on the horse's race record probably persists in the face of evidence sometimes. I don't have a rule that it takes this percentage of turf stakes horses or that percentage of turf stakes horses to change my mind. I am sincerely curious to know how other people make their assessments.
But I am hoping they actually make assessments, rather than just chattering because it sounds good to say a horse is bred for the turf. I hope they are not chattering to create a mood, the same way Tom Durkin will proclaim sizzling fractions when nothing of the kind has been established. The more empty statements are made, the more confused fans new to pedigree assessment could be. I can't blame them for tuning out the pedigree aspect.
One way of telling whether a commentator is actually analyzing the pedigree or just adding to the hubbub is if he always says a first-time turf starter is bred for it. I do think the declared ratio of turf-bred horses to dirt-bred horses in first-time turf appearances is much higher than it could possibly be.
Garnet Crystals wasn't bad, by the way: 5th as the 9th choice (26-1) in the race. Just think what price she would have been if she didn't have that turf pedigree!
No comments:
Post a Comment