Foal Limits - A suggestion

[Ronnie Dee]

Keep in mind every action has a reaction. Laura Ferguson (and many others) pushed for the change from 20 or less gender specified breedings to a "50-50" rule. So I listened to the postings of Pete Vella (and others) and figured that I needed some "colt stallions" (formidable+ stallions where I could send my many formidable or better mares to breed colts). So I added Arrogate (from Skippy/Xander) and then (recently) Peace Be Still from Cleo. I am not sure what changes that you are hoping for but it might not yield the results that you are hoping for.

[Tom Lin]

So laura I would like to know which stallions you are using and what their freak percentages are? And how do you decide who to use if not by the stats provided us by the game? What other factors are we supposed to use to choose a stallion? Stallion A hasnt had any winners all his foals are claimers I think i will pick him? What everything else is there?

Well, let's see. My mixer crops are tiny and not very representative of anything, so I'm not sure what this will tell you, but for say, QHs of all distances, I bred 17 total.
9 of those were to 8 different SIM-bred stallions. All those stallions are hitting at 21% stakes or better and all but one are between 2-6% freaks, if stats are what floats your boat. Only one of those 8 is fully booked, even at this point in the year. I crossbred to TBs 3 times and, yes, I used the holiday stallions four times. So sue me. I'm happy with all those breedings, and I may not be a master QH breeder, but I do OK.

I can feel everyone rolling their eyes already, but I'm going to talk about TS for a sec (big surprise right) because besides crossbreedable QHs, the TS division was one of the ones most affected by this change.
Two, almost three, of the top stallions are currently booked full or close to it. The commonality between all three was that their stud fees did not accurately reflect the demand for them, demand which, at the time, was largely based on their high hypo grades and no other criteria. People got really upset that "the best stallions" were off the market on the first day of this season. "Now who will I breed my nice mare to?" etc.

Stallion X, fine. He has a stakes gallop % three times higher than most. He also has 240 yearlings, and 32 of the top 50 yearling works. That is UNBALANCED. If breedings to him were left unchecked, it would be damaging for the division.

Stallion Y is also lovely, so lovely. Stallion Y is booked full, because he is a hot hypoer and has produced nice gallops and was also underpriced. He has two crops on the track and strikes at 13%ish stakes winners.
Just going by raw racing stats, there are five other TS stallions with 50 or more foals to race, none of which are booked full, that meet or exceed that stakes winner%.
Like gallop stats better? No problem. There are ten other stallions at stud with a reasonable sample size of gallopers (more than 15 or so) that meet or exceed Stallion Y's stakes gallop %. None of which... you guessed it... is booked full.

Or how about we don't talk about stats at all, cause you asked about other factors, right? There were 41 G1 turf sprint stakes run in Y49. Those 41 races were won by 27 different offspring of 24 different stallions, 15 of which don't rank better than Stallion Y on either list. Not saying you statistically have exactly as good a chance to get a stakes winner by any of them -- but it's VERY POSSIBLE, even LIKELY, to get an excellent horse from any one of at least twenty or more stallions that are NOT named Stallion Y.

None of which is booked full.

In fact, I can think of 7 or 8 top shelf sires, off the top of my head, that can and have thrown good %'s and get "big horses," that are being woefully underutilized just because they sit 0.1% further down the "stakes gallop%" column than some other horse does. People need to read a little further than the studbook gallop% number.

Sorry this has been OT and not very mixer-related, but I feel like those principles hold up across a lot of divisions.
Back to mixers for a minute maybe? QH routers I'm reasonably comfortable with. Yes, it's weak compared to the other QH divisions. But even *with* crossbreeding, there are still seven or so stallions with very fancy percentages and only one is full. Can't tell me there aren't lots of options there. I know things are tough in the sprinters and mids. It does need fixing, but with a tweak or two and the market adjusting itself, I bet it'll even out in the end.

TL;DR : Yes, this thing needs to be tweaked for mixers, but in general, just because a couple of horses aren't available doesn't mean you should rage quit.

Very nicely laid out Laura. It show's if you put in the research you don't have to go with the "flavour of month". I know you can certainly substitute trotter for TS and I sure other divisions.

[Laura Ferguson]

Keep in mind every action has a reaction. Laura Ferguson (and many others) pushed for the change from 20 or less gender specified breedings to a "50-50" rule. So I listened to the postings of Pete Vella (and others) and figured that I needed some "colt stallions" (formidable+ stallions where I could send my many formidable or better mares to breed colts). So I added Arrogate (from Skippy/Xander) and then (recently) Peace Be Still from Cleo. I am not sure what changes that you are hoping for but it might not yield the results that you are hoping for.

Pretty sure I didn't push for a 50/50 rule. I can live with that one, and take the same approach you do, but I actually had higher percentages of colts in each of my crops before the current 50/50 rule was implemented (not including horses I bred for players under the Nursery Stud lease program, which skewed heavily filly). Still, it's annoying to have to breed some colts before I can get back to breeding a filly, especially when I want a filly from a popular sire, in which case, I feel rushed.

[Laura Ferguson]

Laura,

I read your post, and looked at your foals. As you noted, of the 17, 4 required GPs to breed, including Heza Dasha Fire, who was booked full at 120, until I messaged the Steward and asked that GP sires have their limits increased to 150, especially since Heza is multi-distance, multi-breed, which happened (I think he's at 129 right now). Not every player can afford to pay GPs. I'll also note that since stallion limits were implemented, several top TB crossbreedable sires had that option either completely disabled, so they are no longer available for crossbreeding, or charge TB prices, which given that mixers don't run for TB level purses, knocks them off my list.

Another foal was bred out of your own sire. Two are bred out of Let's Be Off (booked full), one of out Mark Me Gold (booked full). All Out Freaky is three away from being full. Let You Shine was listed as booked full for a portion of the year, until his owner released some breedings. That's also been the case with several other sires, who spent part of the year either listed as booked full, or were disable from breeding with no fee listed, which gets back to my point about having to constantly monitor this.

As you noted, you've got a number of QH dirt routers, and that's actually the easiest of the divisions. Having a stakes galloping router actually can mean something, and there are plenty of unfilled races. I can't tell you how many stakes galloping sprint and mid QHs I run in claiming races.

Back to diversity. For example, the QH sprint division has an overabundance of Strike the Fire/Fire Fire/Stealin Dreams blood. I love Jetaway Easy, who you used, but the mares I have left are also by Strike a Fire, so that doesn't do me any good. Many of the older sires with good stats have already been used multiple times by me, or are the sires/grandsires/by the same sire as my mares, so from a diversity/pedigree perspective, they aren't workable options.

I get your points on the TS, which is why I didn't post this thread in the thoroughbred forum. I specifically posted this in the mixer forum because of the impact on mixers - in particular sprint/mid Appy/QH/Paint. I can't stop people from posting about TBs, but those issues are not the same.

[Laura Smith]

Absolutely fair points, Laura, and I hope you know that I have an incredible amount of respect for you, your knowledge of the game and your breeding skills -- I was just trying to push back a bit against some of the intense and occasionally overreactive (IMO) negativity that has surrounded this change.

What can I say? You pretty much nailed it -- I am lucky to have a small barn and my most competitive horses are in the weaker divisions. I might be singing a very different tune if I had 150+ QH sprinters or mids, as many people do, instead of the same amount of TS. I think I am also lucky that I was okay with doing most of my QH breedings early on in the season and just kind of whenever the whim struck me, so I didn't find myself stuck with a pile of mares at this time of year, with limited options.

I hear you about the density and diversity issues with the QH sprint/mids for sure; ongoing problem for years, and one reason why I got rid of most of my QH sprint mares awhile back. I think the holiday stallions were a necessary addition to get away from some of the inbreeding (though, okay, maybe they didn't have to be such superstars, but if they weren't, would anyone have used them much?) since, let's see, seven of the 10 best freak gallop% producing QH sprinters have Strike A Fire in the first two gens. But I also feel like the addition of these new awesome horses necessitated limits of some kind, right? I mean, it would kill the market for all other stallions otherwise.

Sorry I went down a very non-mixer rabbit hole, but I was specifically asked how I go about a selection process without just picking the highest percentage stallion off the top of the list, and I reverted to what I know best. I think the principles hold true across divisions, though obviously it's a very different situation.

I totally agree that the crossbreedable horses should have increased limits. If the team is still worried about overuse, perhaps some amount of that limit could be reserved for crossbreeding mares only.

[Jo Ferris]

Well, the rule as currently implemented is absolute murder on the mixer division, and if the goal is to force mixers into the diversity, it is failing.

I believe this sums it up pretty well.

Anyway, some more of my thoughts. The QH limits are way to low in my opinion, there limit needs to be either way higher or none at all (my favorite option), they cover 3 separate breeds, do the math that allows only 40 foals a breed, the any distance QHs (Heza Dasha Fire mainly, though I know there are a couple) are just flat out screwed, that is 9 divisions that they cover. Which due to these limits, fees have been jacked up to be completely unreasonable for Paints and Appys (don't blame owners one bit on that, as someone said earlier, this is basically every man for himself).

Onto Paints, as someone with one of the largest Paint operations, especially in mids (I breed roughly 150 midders a year), restricting the amount of mares I could breed to one stallion would be murder, I have 9 freak producing options, NINE, that's it. And as with all mixer divisions, to win big, you almost always have to have freaks (however, rarely a stakes will win big... Surprise Kiss, I'm looking at you). Unlike TBs, we don't have "other stakes options", we have 2 G1 races a year, 1 G2, and 1 G3, then 1 stakes per raceday. There is nowhere to go with a horse that galloped stakes from a lesser stallion, people will still have those foals from the top stallions, they will win and your horse that you bred to that 2nd tier sire will be struggling to get a win, they won't be a good broodmare or a good stallion which destroys the point of forcing us to breed to them to force diversity, it won't do a thing, top stallions will produce the future stallions, that's how it goes. Diversity is happening, you can't force it, it takes time, just give it time. Allowing more QH breedings will help, then we can cross breed and still get decent foals.

Also I'd like to give praise to everyone, this thread has been a very civil discussion

[Tammy Stawicki]

So it seems while there is some disagreement over whether there needs to be some form of limit on crop size there seems to be pretty universal agreement that something should be done about the crossbreeding situation.

I'd like to give some further support for my per breed limit rather than the original suggestion of a slight bump.

1. The slight bump rule would make it easy for people to game the system. Got a turf sprinter limited by the new foal limits. You could pay 10,000 game points a year to get some extra slots, or just pay a one time 5,000 game points. Doesn't matter that your horse as a turf horse has zero crossbreed utility you just got a bunch of extra slots on the cheap.

2. It has been mentioned in this thread that in addition to seeing a lost of crossbreeding stallions due to books filling or horses being taken off the market we've seen a raise in stud fees for those that remain. It makes sense if you have a limited number of spots why would you want to have some of them go at 50% of the value as others so of course you're going to want to make your stud fees equal. But paints/appys don't have the earning potential of quarter horses and quarter horses don't have the earning potential of thoroughbreds. Equal stud fees don't really work. If the limits were per breed then you could go back to making breed appropriate stud fees without losing out on money.

I am strongly hoping that this will be addressed during break. We were told at the onset of these changes that very few horses would be affected and for the most part that is true. But crossbreedable quarter horses have been hit particularly hard with 10% of horses over 120. That is not a trivial amount and is disproportionate to other divisions (with the exception of Pacers) and doesn't take into account horses that have been made private or have significantly elevated stud fees. I put the current numbers of booked full and over 120 for every division below.

Division, Number Booked Full, Number over 120 but not full, Total (% full, %over 120 but not full)
Turf sprinter 1, 3, 162 (0.6, 1.8%)
Dirt sprinter 4, 0, 170 (2.4%, 0%)
**2 are crossbreed eligible
AW sprint 0, 0, 34
Turf mile 0, 0, 114
Dirt Mile 0, 0, 86
AW mile 0, 0, 29
Turf Router 1, 0, 218 (0.5%, 0%)
Dirt Router 2, 2, 264 (0.8%, 0.8%)
**1 over 120 is crossbreed eligible
AW Router 0, 1, 45 (0%, 2.2%)
**1 over 120 = crossbred
Steeplechaser 0, 0, 55
Any Dirt 0, 0, 7
Any All Weather 0, 0, 7
Any Miler/Mid 0, 0, 1
Crossbreedable Thoroughbred 2, 4, 99 (2%, 4%)
Unspecified 0, 0, 6

Appy Sprint 1, 0, 51 (2.0%, 0%)
Appy Mid 0, 0, 47
Appy Router 0, 0, 44
Appy Any 0, 0, 3

Arabian Sprinter 0, 0, 34
Arabian Router 0, 0, 31
Arabian Unspecified 0, 0, 3

Paint Sprint 0, 1, 45 (0%, 2.2%)
Paint Mid 1, 0, 34 (2.9%, 0%)
Paint Router 0, 0, 35
Paint Any 0, 0, 3
Paint Unspecified 0, 0, 1

Quarter Horse Sprint 5, 0, 79 (6.3%, 0%)
**5 booked full are crossbreed eligible
Quarter Horse Mid 0, 2, 77 (0%, 2.6%)
**2 over 120 are crossbreed eligible
Quarter Horse Route 2, 0, 43 (4.7%, 0%)
**2 booked full are crossbreed eligible
Quarter Horse Any 0, 0, 1
Crossbreedable Quarter Horse 7, 2, 88 (7.9%, 2.2%)
Quarter Horse Unspecified 0, 0, 1

Pacer 4, 0, 96 (4.2%, 0%)
Trotter 1, 1, 73 (1.4%, 1.4%)

[Laura Ferguson]

I don't know how easy it would be to implement the per breed limit, Tammy, but I like it, for the reasons you stated.

[Irving Faulkner]

Well I think there are discomforts, maybe because of the form of limitations, of the stallions, since the owners must have a lower profit margin, since there is no free trade

the question that I ask myself, that is sought, try to avoid that the big barn, continue doing a lot of money all year, and be the magnates of the game. I think it does not make sense

if they have, the best stallions, and the best breeding mares, they will dominate the races.

I think that this type of limitation has made it more expensive, the stallion horses, that people use, and disappear them from the market, and now who benefits, with this their level is sought, the question is what is the level what are you looking for

to end the inbreeding, which wow is immense, I had not paid much attention, to this detail, until recently, when I read Louise Bayou say, that she struggles, not to enter into inbreeding.

buy a Blue Hen mare, and last night try to find a stallion that did not give inbreeding, WOW, of the productive, none is acceptable, because it is cousin brother, father uncle, grandfather nephew, mother sister, and how do you get rid of having a foal with inbreeding, you must use a stallion, which does not produce, no quality foal, and is still lost.

In my opinion this is the reason, for which, there are many stables, which have stagnated, because they can present this problem, and I think it is at the level of all races.

As you can filter all this, good many stallions, active, blood line, which is present today, the question, who are going to have these new stallions, if it is possible to bring them to the market.

if they are placed in semenatles of game points, wow, not all podemops have a lot of game points, to serve our few mares

a possible solution, would be that The Ssteward, sold to each player, a stallion, of some race, with the same quality for each player, either Route, or Sprinter, there would be a balance, and there could be filtered, the inbreeding

Maybe this idea is out of context, but you have to look for the solution, not continue with the problem.

limits, I think a very simple exit, which can help everyone, in the limits, would be, and before I mention it, maybe I do not misunderstand.

I fly it to repeat, I think it's wrong to place limits on the stallion, since that has caused all these inconveniences to many, or few players

for example every week, all players have, a limit of 5 purchases in Alexandra Jaysman, only 5 for all, the end of season, The Steward, opens the unlimited purchase, when they remind you.

a code that does not allow you to buy more than 5, and opens to buy everything you want

because I repeat this d enuevo, since I get upset, that Mr. Stormy, making plans from the beginning of the season with a stud, today has discomfort, which attacks your health, unfortunately, and with discontent, because that stallion is not available, and ready, you can not do anything, that's the way things are, and if you can not, you can not be certain


then we have to find a solution, we continue with the limits, a study solution from me.

could be, no longer be limited to the stallion, your owner can raise all your mares for your mares, if you want 500 mares you can do it, since it is your horse, and you should not place limitations, (Example if I I buy a pizza, which is my self, I pay for it, and I want to eat it all, because it's mine, someone tells me, you can not eat it all, you only eat it, 2 servings, and you have to eat 2 porations, because if the pizza is mine) then you should not place the owner of the horse limitations.

but you can assure the player, a limited quota, for your peace of mind, daily, and protect your health, from rages, which do not help, and fatigue from spending time researching, about stallions, etc. etc. etc.

As you put a maximum of each stallion, each race, retired, and assets, for retirement, say an amount

7 places per year of Dragonfly, where I will administer my 7 slots for each horse, I finished the quotas, good that a fee of 1000GPs is assigned, for one more quota, and the payment of the stallion.

As simple as opening a tangerine.

so the owner of the stallion, will not have to place quotas, very high, people can breed when they want, you have your stallion, insured, and each person to use, your favorite stallion. and the one that has the best one, that one will have better gains, and I as owner of other stallions, I can not be bothered, because if that stallion were mine, then, I would be happy

there are changes, if the changes can be good, but always the changes should continue to give joy, to the people, and more when we talk about a game, something that should be a way out, to have some joy, of the problems, that always They attack us

and I do not need to have 1000 people affected, to look for a solution, and to give importance, it is enough that one is wrong, one person is wrong,

to see, how much more will be, aml, and you have to look for the solution, so that you do not keep multiplying the discomfort

I have a very small stable, too, and I have seen that if I want to use Dirt Sprinter, I see in my opinion that there is no quality, for me in my taste, and the horse that I could use, its service rate is very high.

then I forget the Dirt Sprinter, since I can not invest in so much, to have, a Claimer, not

really, I do not know who the people are, that they can speak for all, and look for a nice solution, I think The Steward, should not carry all the weight of the events, so I think there is a very strong group, of many years, that can do something for this, always with dialogue, and wisdom, that all conflict, to say something, this present

I say the limit for the player, with an assured quota, it is better, than what is present today.

if someone does not like it, I'm sorry, I'd like to read, his ideas to solve, the problem that is present today.

[Louise Bayou]

I finally threw up my hands last night on breeding QHs. Spending 35-50k a pop on the few that are even left to be able to use has made this NOT fun at all for me. Look I love mixers, always have but if anything was going to push me out this is it. Beyond frustrated.

[Laura Ferguson]

Louise, I left a bunch of fillies in training, including Steward's Cup winner Bourbon Heritage, because I couldn't stand the thought of breeding them this year. So, I get your pain.

[Tan Gent]

Foal limits at this moment is far from perfect as I know. I would suggest foal limits should only be restricted to owner for raising the quality of horses.

[Tammy Stawicki]

I don't know how easy it would be to implement the per breed limit, Tammy, but I like it, for the reasons you stated.

I admittedly know nothing about the logistics of coding in the changes. One thing that I imagine shouldn't be impossible would be to simply have separate limits for within breed and crossbreed. The game already handles the two separately for determining stud fees so I would think it would also be able to track separate limits. That would also probably be simpler to display than the three breed limits for quarter horses, but would still open up a lot more quarter horse and crossbreeding availability.

[The Steward]

We promise to do *something* for you guys for next year.

[Irving Faulkner]

We promise to do *something* for you guys for next year.

I'm 100% sure it will be like you said