Hypomate is a waste of game points

[Dave Mackay1]

I hypoed a mare with stallion james dean and it nicked A- So I bred the mare for $150k and the resulting yearling gallops "I hope to see improvement next time" crock of *....really

I just find it easier sometimes to see what sticks.
Then you don’t get upset when something doesn’t cause something else does lol.

Just one more reason why i can't be * anymore

[Ali Hedgestone]

I hypoed a mare with stallion james dean and it nicked A- So I bred the mare for $150k and the resulting yearling gallops "I hope to see improvement next time" crock of *....really

I get it. A-. 150,000 sire, has to be good right?

Not to pick on you Dave, cause I am definitely incredibly guilty of this over the years too but just to present the counter argument...

James Dean has been bred to Just Victory mares 39 times. 21 of which are 3 or older.

https://www.simhorseracing.com/horses.p ... GPSired=-1

Of those 21, 1 is a freak for sure (out of a mare that is stupid good), there is a stakes 3 year old and then there are 5 allowances I think. So that gives us about 33% allowance or better. Might be as high as 38 percent if I'm off by one. Which is good. By normal standards. But James Dean is a freak of all freaks. He is producing at almost a 60% allowance or better across all mares. Which, holy jeepers. But I think it's pretty evident that JV mares are probably not the best combo for James Dean.

Give that mare a try with a miler is my two cents.

^^ This, you want to improve your gallops - There is a good method! <3

[Andrew James]

I hypoed a mare with stallion james dean and it nicked A- So I bred the mare for $150k and the resulting yearling gallops "I hope to see improvement next time" crock of *....really

I get it. A-. 150,000 sire, has to be good right?

Not to pick on you Dave, cause I am definitely incredibly guilty of this over the years too but just to present the counter argument...

James Dean has been bred to Just Victory mares 39 times. 21 of which are 3 or older.

https://www.simhorseracing.com/horses.p ... GPSired=-1

Of those 21, 1 is a freak for sure (out of a mare that is stupid good), there is a stakes 3 year old and then there are 5 allowances I think. So that gives us about 33% allowance or better. Might be as high as 38 percent if I'm off by one. Which is good. By normal standards. But James Dean is a freak of all freaks. He is producing at almost a 60% allowance or better across all mares. Which, holy jeepers. But I think it's pretty evident that JV mares are probably not the best combo for James Dean.

Give that mare a try with a miler is my two cents.

^^ This, you want to improve your gallops - There is a good method! <3

Thanks Ali! Can't wait for the Steward to drop by and casually drop a "James Dean - JV is a sick combo" to destroy everything I think I know lol. Although out of the 17 mares she's sent to James Dean not one has been JV lined. There are an odd amount of Flames and War Daddy lines though so that might be where to send mares by War Daddy and Flames sons too.

[Kaine Saracen]

So we are really talking clear as mud:

A) Hypo's...

You PAY to find out if a mare will work with a stallion.

So what works? Clearly not A+, not sure they exist in TB's, A- is as effective as a flat B. Now the other issue is, there is are blanket results for the majority of hypo's where a stud will produce at one of two (usually) levels with a mares BSA rating (which actually means nothing in the pedigree)
Example:
Blue Hen: A/A-
Star: A-/B
Formidable: B+/B
Unpredictable: B/C+
Now there are a few select mares(very few) that bat above their average and actually hypo one step above. Those I have used to separate the claimed top hypo studs from the apparent real top studs. In TR there is in fact 7 or 8 standouts of the 200+ listed in the division.
I am also guessing from the following comment that the hypo is in fact Sire X Damsire rating which in no way accommodates for the dam's damsire and due to the aforementioned blanket results, the hypo basically conforms whether the sire and damsire are surface compatible

Oh and if they all work... Then the initial comment about the GP's being a waste is in fact accurate!

B)Bloodstock Agent:

The bloodstock rating counts THE MARE'S ABILITY, not the 3 generation pedigree, etc.

It is based strictly only on ONE thing, her flat rate generic broodmare ability.
It does not include: whether she has a great dam sire (that's a hypo mate grade thing), whether she has a dam who is best as the producer of other dams, whether she is going to cross superbly with 1 1/8 mile stallions that liked the wet track, how many awesome foals she could have, or if the random slide will smile on her, etc. It's JUST on her ability alone, which is one basic number between 1.00 - 20.00, parroted back to you as a comment.

So much wrong here and yet a light bulb just went off in my head. For whatever reason, always assumed that weather and equipment was random, but if the mare is going to like “stallions that liked the wet track” then that is clearly not so random and might explain the frequently mentioned comment that peoples stakes horses more often than not prefer wet.

15.3 (this is a VERY high broodmare rating)

This one has always puzzled me to, the mare was rated as a “blue Hen” despite despite having only a 76.5% (1-20 right?) rating and was tagged as very good. Standards are pretty low on the grading bar. This with the other data from this quoted thread have blue hens listed at 14.7+. That is a large percentage of the 1-20 rating. I also assume from her failures she was in fact an A- hypo mare to the best studs and not a flat A (as I understand things)

I will throw out a bone and say I would consider Doctor for Christmas Story, because he has speed (JV), and stamina (won at 1 1/4, gives three lines to AAIA).

As that would have made the resultant foal 4X4X3 to AAIA, I am still as confused as the first time I read that on the comments. I tend to look deeper in pedigrees, because that is just me, but apparently the Sim doesn't despite a rather clear example that the Steward considers the lines further back.

At the end of the day, we are charged $10,000 sim dollars for a comment that does not accurately reflect the mares overall ability.
We pay 250gp's for a hypo that is a brood generalisation with what I would rate as little as a 0.005% usefulness based on the fact that I hypo the same two to three mares for ALL studs, because everything else is a repeat of the former in some way.

As a small stable player, I have neither the time nor the desire to breed 300 horses a year just because there is a minute chance that one of the 280 formidable or less I would have might have a 5% chance of producing an allowance or better.

I also have no desire in clogging up my barn with poor gallopers past 2yo (at two I can retire and pension) on the a 0.5% chance that a claimer might jump to a stakes as it matures. The late maturing types are way to unpredictable to figure out which will and which won't.

Personally think the whole comments sections needs to be revamped and actually come closer to meaning what they say

[Tammy Stawicki]

I think the moral of the story here is this game isn't supposed to be easy. Lets say our broodmare rating and nicks are perfect and tell you exactly how good your mare/foal will be. Well of course everyone will only want the best mares so those will go to the established players with the most money. And they will only breed the best nicking foals. So now we have a bunch of superstars, but of course only one of them can win any given race so your super stars still aren't going to be any good. And of course best of luck to new players that don't have the resources to get those best mares.

Instead, we have a system where lots of things determine how good a horse is going to be and we don't really know how good our horse is until after it is born. So you don't just get to click a button and get all the answers. You need to research. And sure buttons tell you some of the information but how much time and effort you are putting into your breeding is going to play a big role. A new player can put in just as much effort as an old one so that levels the playing field some (sure they need to learn the ropes but they can get here). There is also a smidge of luck involved, again level playing field. And sure it makes it harder to breed 1,000 horses successfully because who has time to research for that many horses it would be so much easier to just press a button, but this is why I keep a smaller stable and focus on a few divisions that I can know reasonably well.

Also lets not forget that we don't need magical buttons to know how good horses are. We can look at the results. If your mare is throwing nothing but claimers after a few foals even if the magical button says she is the best mare ever it may be time to move on.

[Kaine Saracen]

I think the moral of the story here is this game isn't supposed to be easy.

I actually don't mind a challenge, but if things go wrong I like to know why as well. At the moment, the only excuse of "gone wrong" is it must be the random slide.

ell of course everyone will only want the best mares so those will go to the established players with the most money.

Generally does already

And they will only breed the best nicking foals.

The point of paying GP's if that is not the goal?

We have a system where lots of things determine how good a horse is going to be and we don't really know how good our horse is until after it is born. So you don't just get to click a button and get all the answers. You need to research.

No, we don't know how good the foals are, even after the first gallop because somehow I keep getting told I should let claimer trash mature. As yet, no one can give me a definitive answer as to how you can tell the difference between a random slide and a late bloomer other than just hold them, wait a few weeks and lo and behold.... Click a button!

And as for the buttons that tell stuff... The information paid for from various resources is to vague and quite often wrong!

Nightmarch, ultra consistent throughout, but ran his best race in the Arc on a yielding track...
Y45-Preseason Whisperer: Rain? Snow? Not if you want this horse to actually try in a race.

So no, I don't want it on a silver platter, but when delivering paid for information, it does need to be accurate!

[Cleo Patra]

One thing almost everyone in this thread is forgetting is that game points are there to provide extra perks and information but NOT to allow players to have a guaranteed way of buying success. You can theoretically do extremely well at the game without ever paying GPs. I personally wouldn't try it now because I love simperior but the admin team has, and always will be, very conscious of maintaining this particular status quo.

I'm grateful for random slide, which is the primary reason for so much variability. It gives newer players a chance to strike lucky and eventually become one of the big guns. Random slide certainly made my early SIM career worth having. Its also realistic. Breeders in real life have similar amounts of information, breed the best to the best and still get animals that I could outrun on foot.

One thing that people have stopped doing is breeding full siblings. Once upon a time, there was a player who bred all of his mares to one stallion pretty much every year. The same mare would have 4-8 foals by the same sire. And they would all be different. I decided to experiment with this myself in recent years.

Meet Alsotravelsintime. She is a Blue Hen and was a stakes winner herself but has very little other pedigree. Her full sister is basically the only other horse in her female line that has broken the 200k mark in earnings. Her sister, Gallifreyan, has failed to fire as a broodmare, despite being sent to some of the best. However, she has never been sent to Together, which is the nick I've used to demonstrate full siblings.

Control group
Telos - ch.m.5 - Cyberman (A- cross) - $0 - 0: 0-0-0 - Productive
Binary - ch.f.4 - Happy This Way (A- cross) - $15,400 - 3: 1-0-1 - Allowance

Full siblings by Together (A- cross)
No Way Never - ch.f.1 - $0 - 0: 0-0-0 - Stakes
Horse 1525784764 - ch.g.2 - $0 - 0: 0-0-0 - Allowance
Always Go Together - ch.g.3 - $0 - 0: 0-0-0 - Allowance
Rift in Time - ch.m.6 - $257,000 - 12: 5-5-1 - Stakes
Soulmate - ch.m.7 - $520,500 - 14: 7-2-3 - Freak

I'll let you all draw your own conclusions, but I find this a strong demonstration of (a) random slide, and (b) gender bias (she's clearly better at producing fillies when bred on an "ideal" nick)

[Laura Smith]

And as for the buttons that tell stuff... The information paid for from various resources is to vague and quite often wrong!

Nightmarch, ultra consistent throughout, but ran his best race in the Arc on a yielding track...
Y45-Preseason Whisperer: Rain? Snow? Not if you want this horse to actually try in a race.

So no, I don't want it on a silver platter, but when delivering paid for information, it does need to be accurate!

It's a stew-stated fact that weather condition moves your horse up or down a (small) set amount in every race. If your horse hates mud, his "number" or whatever for a muddy race will be worse, but it doesn't mean that he can't still run the race of his life and/or still be better and/or run a better race on that day than all the other horses in the race. There is an element of randomness, as there has to be. The buttons are just reading the info in the database, they can't actually be "wrong" unless there's a serious error.

[Laura Smith]

Haven't had time to do more than skim this thread, but my take is this.

Do you really want all the foals that you think are supposed to be "good" to be good? Everyone else's would be too, and then we'd all have lots of sad freaks and AJ anything that came out stakes or worse. No thanks.

The hypos and BSA ratings are a guideline, representing a range of numbers, and nothing else; they're meant to be considered together with a lot of other things. If you start taking them as gospel, and start feeling entitled to a good horse just because you bred an A cross from a blue hen, then you're setting yourself up for disappointment, IMO.

This game is hard, and it should be. It can't be oversimplified to the point that many of us, myself included, try to do.

That being said, I'd love to have a little extra light shed on the numbers side of the hypo grade. Always wondered what exactly it represents.

[Rochelle Bos]

One thing almost everyone in this thread is forgetting is that game points are there to provide extra perks and information but NOT to allow players to have a guaranteed way of buying success. You can theoretically do extremely well at the game without ever paying GPs. I personally wouldn't try it now because I love simperior but the admin team has, and always will be, very conscious of maintaining this particular status quo.

I'm grateful for random slide, which is the primary reason for so much variability. It gives newer players a chance to strike lucky and eventually become one of the big guns. Random slide certainly made my early SIM career worth having. Its also realistic. Breeders in real life have similar amounts of information, breed the best to the best and still get animals that I could outrun on foot.

One thing that people have stopped doing is breeding full siblings. Once upon a time, there was a player who bred all of his mares to one stallion pretty much every year. The same mare would have 4-8 foals by the same sire. And they would all be different. I decided to experiment with this myself in recent years.

Meet Alsotravelsintime. She is a Blue Hen and was a stakes winner herself but has very little other pedigree. Her full sister is basically the only other horse in her female line that has broken the 200k mark in earnings. Her sister, Gallifreyan, has failed to fire as a broodmare, despite being sent to some of the best. However, she has never been sent to Together, which is the nick I've used to demonstrate full siblings.

Control group
Telos - ch.m.5 - Cyberman (A- cross) - $0 - 0: 0-0-0 - Productive
Binary - ch.f.4 - Happy This Way (A- cross) - $15,400 - 3: 1-0-1 - Allowance

Full siblings by Together (A- cross)
No Way Never - ch.f.1 - $0 - 0: 0-0-0 - Stakes
Horse 1525784764 - ch.g.2 - $0 - 0: 0-0-0 - Allowance
Always Go Together - ch.g.3 - $0 - 0: 0-0-0 - Allowance
Rift in Time - ch.m.6 - $257,000 - 12: 5-5-1 - Stakes
Soulmate - ch.m.7 - $520,500 - 14: 7-2-3 - Freak

I'll let you all draw your own conclusions, but I find this a strong demonstration of (a) random slide, and (b) gender bias (she's clearly better at producing fillies when bred on an "ideal" nick)

I have the same thoughts Cleo! “Oh she had a claimer with X never breeding her to him again!” Is just crazy talk! The random slide happens both ways, there’s no way to tell why your foal is a claimer

Last year I bred Finely Balanced back to the only sire who gave her a stakes (her first foal) and boom got a second Stakes from him. Unfortunately he pensioned last year. That being said I tried that method with a bunch of mares and not everyone panned out, but I also don’t expect it to every time. But yeah if a stallion gives me a freak or a stakes I will 100% try them again, or their sire line, if possible!

[Gwayne's World]

I like the randomness of it all.
Signed, A Satisfied Customer

[Fern Thompson]

This thread has been very useful, and I appreciate all the feedback! I never once thought that buying game points would be a guarantee of anything, but like I said, it's just very discouraging when you think you've done all the right things in every way and you don't get the results you want. And I'll keep buying game points when I want. They're wonderful.
(and for me to be one of many who has felt this way is very encouraging-thanks to some comments made by Regina early on in the thread, I definitely have a new outlook, so thank you, Regina!)
This is not the first time I've been disappointed nor will it be the last, I'm sure, but I continue to enjoy the game!

[Kent Saunders]

Hypomating is just one tool to help you put your mares in the best possible position to get a decent foal. It does not guarantee a good foal, it does add a layer of information. After breeding several thousand foals in 17 seasons I can tell you with confidence...you breed a bunch of A- foals they will come out markedly better (as a group) than a similar bunch of B+ foals which in turn will be markedly better than B Foals. To me it's pure math. That said does than mean all the good mares/studs are going to come up with good foals or will all Good/potential mares always have bad foals? Nope...there is enough combination of Randomness and again pure math that keeps the breeding world straight. I have no idea of the real math involved but just to give an example....If I had a A- hypo with a well bred Blue Hen mare I would guess I have about a 5 to 1 chance to get a Stakes and 20 to 1 to get a Freak. Does that mean every time I breed 6 foals I will get a Stakes? Some mares/people will be luckier and do better. Some will do worse. The bad mares might be 300 to 1 for a stakes...but someone will hit it . I am a satisfied customer as well even though I had my share of disappointments this season more so than normal. Maybe next season.....

[Fern Thompson]

I don't understand the math either, but of those two foals that were claimers, the mares were either a blue hen or a star, and they both nicked A-'s, so I thought this was a great sign!!
One blue hen has nicked B+ with every stud, it seems, and she also produced a claimer, but she nicked an A with James Dean, so there's a real possibility I'll do that breeding.

[George Knatz]

Pretty sure my mom was a hen and she hypoed A to my dad.

I was the first child. 5’8 180 and slow. Definitely a small negative slide.
Next my brother. Same everything. 6’1 210 Track star. Big positive slide.

Happens in real life too.