Feature Race | Auction | Breeding | General | Hall of Fame | Harness | Interviews | Mixed Breed | New Players | Racing | Site Updates | Steeplechasing | Steward's Cup | Triple Crown
What I Love About Nicks
Original article written by Regina Moore posted 9 years 1 week agoNicks are fun. Usually. Occasionally boring. But now they're all fun again, with the recent downgrade, as in "ooh, now I don't know what grade I'm going to get this time."
What I love most about nicks, what makes them the most fun, is that I don't understand them.
SOMETIMES THEY'RE EASY
I think the three greatest horse I have bred, raced to high success, and stood at stud to high success, are turf miler War Lock, Paint sprinter Ohio Charmer, and Quarter horse router Attack Mode. All three were bred from high nicks for their category.
I also bred the thrice Steward's Cup champion Dream Splash, a mid distance Paint mare. She was from a high A- nick and retired to be a blue hen mare.
Honestly, how hard is this?
SOMETIMES THEY'RE PUZZLING
I bought two "scary good" yearling trotter colts from the same breeder, a number of years back. TT was from a solid A nick (and is still a solid A). BE was from an A- nick (and is still an A-). BE obviously got the better random slide. He was quite a bit faster than TT on the training track. Though he took a while to get rolling, and didn't win his first stakes until late in his 3yo season, he turned out to be a much better racehorse than TT. BE won eight stakes, while TT only won three.
I retired both to stud, because I was so curious about how they would nick, in terms of an apples-to-apples comparison. I mean, TT had the stronger pedigree, considering the slightly higher nick, so it would seem that he would have the better credentials to breed on.
I nicked both guys with 17 mares, after the nick downgrade. To my surprise, BE had good number of A- nicks, amongst a lot of B+ nicks. TT, while from a stronger pedigree, couldn't nick higher than B+ with anybody, and had some B nicks, and even a B-. There was one blue hen mare that BE nicked a solid A with. TT could still only nick a B+.
So, what's going on here? Wouldn't a breeding animal from a higher nick indicate a stronger pedigree, which in turn would indicate the horse most likely to have a better influence over the long-term success of one's barn?
Apparently not.
SOMETIMES THEY'RE USELESS
A number of years back, I bought a turf miler colt from a Steward-bred auction. I nicked the parents after the purchase and was surprised that it was a mere B-. Granted, turf milers nick lower than the other turf and dirt divisions, but why would The Steward breed a B-?
The colt was a multiple graded stakes winner, but nothing particularly special. He retired to stud with less than a half million dollars in earnings, and little interest from outside breeders. Probably an experiment that The Steward would rather forget. Yet... she ended up breeding a mare to him. So, he's "Steward approved". (And has also given me a Grade 3 stakes winner, from few foals.)
Now, why the heck would The Steward breed a B-, and then decide that the B- was worth continuing to breed on?
The bottom line, in this case is: Don't get rid of a low nick, just because it's a low nick. You know?
So, nicks are really helpful. And they're really puzzling. And they're really useless.
Is this incredibly fun, or what?