Consensus on “longer career”
Forum rules
Do not to post anything abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, or sexually-orientated.
Do not post anything negative about any player.
No advertising other games.
The management reserves the right to delete or lock threads and messages at any time.
Read the complete SIM rules and legal information.
Do not to post anything abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, or sexually-orientated.
Do not post anything negative about any player.
No advertising other games.
The management reserves the right to delete or lock threads and messages at any time.
Read the complete SIM rules and legal information.
-
- Derby Contender
- Posts: 251
- Joined: 5 years ago
Consensus on “longer career”
I know this was up for debate when we first started getting these comments but I stopped following.
Have we reached on consensus on whether “longer career” equals bad for breeding?
Have we reached on consensus on whether “longer career” equals bad for breeding?
-
- Grade 2 Winner
- Posts: 775
- Joined: 4 years ago
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
It appears to just mean that the racing number is higher than the breeding number. I have retired stakes longer career mares that are blue hens. I also retired a stakes longer career stud that hypos under the top studs but isn't terrible (he's mostly B+ hypos but I've gotten a decent amount of A- and a couple flat A). I wouldn't say longer career = bad for breeding, but we all probably have different standards of 'bad.'
Notacatbutalawyer 16: 8-3-1, earnings of $381,300 Founder Stakes, Flat Out Stakes, Lexington Race Course Stakes, Dade County Classic, Sunshine State Stakes, Distorted Reality Stakes, Midnight in the Sahara Stakes
- Carole Hanson
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5826
- Joined: 15 years ago
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
The Steward has pretty much confirmed it means the racing number is higher than the breeding number, but it could be just a tiny bit higher (like 0.1). I’ve found it to be not very accurate for studs, and pretty accurate for mares although longer career mares produce just as well as the breeding shed ones of the same racing quality.
- Danny Derby
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 3677
- Joined: 14 years ago
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
My consensus opinion is that these comments are more or less worthless and I don’t even pay attention to them.
- Nini Panini
- Eclipse Champion
- Posts: 1812
- Joined: 12 years ago
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
+1Danny Derby wrote: ↑8 months ago My consensus opinion is that these comments are more or less worthless and I don’t even pay attention to them.
"How do you describe perfection? Why try, let's just watch her run!"
- Laurel Addams
- Classic Contender
- Posts: 333
- Joined: 4 years ago
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
I use it to decide if a productive mare is worth hypoing or checking BSA on If I’m on the fence about her
Standing at stud
Bannerlord - DM/DR, 30k, A+ hypos
Funky Stank - TR, 10k, A+ hypos
Codebreaker - DR, 5k
Bannerlord - DM/DR, 30k, A+ hypos
Funky Stank - TR, 10k, A+ hypos
Codebreaker - DR, 5k
- Nick Gilmore
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5373
- Joined: 16 years ago
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
DittoNini Hunter wrote: ↑8 months ago+1Danny Derby wrote: ↑8 months ago My consensus opinion is that these comments are more or less worthless and I don’t even pay attention to them.
- Gwayne's World
- Eclipse Champion
- Posts: 1919
- Joined: 14 years ago
- Location: 6th floor, south side
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
I always thought this comment referred to their racing career?
After reading the negative comments who knows?
After reading the negative comments who knows?
-
- Listed Stakes Winner
- Posts: 584
- Joined: 6 years ago
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
Agree +10Nick Gilmore wrote: ↑8 months agoDittoNini Hunter wrote: ↑8 months ago+1Danny Derby wrote: ↑8 months ago My consensus opinion is that these comments are more or less worthless and I don’t even pay attention to them.
I need supervision 24/7.
- Andrew James
- Grade 1 Winner
- Posts: 999
- Joined: 11 years ago
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
I'm closer aligned to this. I'll let it influence whether to run an allowance in a claimer or not and whether to BSA Productive horses.Laurel Addams wrote: ↑8 months ago I use it to decide if a productive mare is worth hypoing or checking BSA on If I’m on the fence about her
Allowance LC's from questionable pedigrees I wont hesitate to drop into a claimer, knowing they are most likely formidable. Productive shed horses with nice pedigrees I'll retire and most of the time they are Star broodmares.
It's another piece of information to factor into whether or not to breed a horse. Combine it with pedigree, speed figure, produce records etc... And hopefully make correct decisions on who to keep and who to run in a claimer.
Edit: One thing I'd love clarity on. If a horse is "longer career" and a "Allowance Late Bloomer" does that mean the horse has worse breeding numbers than the horses current racing numbers or worse breeding number than the peak racing number?
AJR SC Winners: Karsa, Can't Reconcile, The Reckoners, Amsterdam, Forge of Darkness, Nightchill, The Wheel of Time
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
Here here (I agree)Danny Derby wrote: ↑8 months ago My consensus opinion is that these comments are more or less worthless and I don’t even pay attention to them.
-
- Grade 2 Winner
- Posts: 775
- Joined: 4 years ago
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
IIRC a couple of my stakes peak LC horses who turned into hens started out with the LC comment as allowance late bloomer, so I think it's peak racing number vs breeding number. But I guess I also don't know how the racing levels and breeding levels overlap (someon else may).Andrew James wrote: ↑8 months ago Edit: One thing I'd love clarity on. If a horse is "longer career" and a "Allowance Late Bloomer" does that mean the horse has worse breeding numbers than the horses current racing numbers or worse breeding number than the peak racing number?
Notacatbutalawyer 16: 8-3-1, earnings of $381,300 Founder Stakes, Flat Out Stakes, Lexington Race Course Stakes, Dade County Classic, Sunshine State Stakes, Distorted Reality Stakes, Midnight in the Sahara Stakes
- Kelly Haggerty
- Eclipse Champion
- Posts: 1548
- Joined: 3 years ago
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
This gives me some hope. I decided to use one of my slots on a dispersal horse, and was bummed that he is a LC. He'll get his earnings, and I guess I will hypo him and see.
- Ma Springs
- Grade 1 Winner
- Posts: 893
- Joined: 4 years ago
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
+Andrew James wrote: ↑8 months agoI'm closer aligned to this. I'll let it influence whether to run an allowance in a claimer or not and whether to BSA Productive horses.Laurel Addams wrote: ↑8 months ago I use it to decide if a productive mare is worth hypoing or checking BSA on If I’m on the fence about her
Allowance LC's from questionable pedigrees I wont hesitate to drop into a claimer, knowing they are most likely formidable. Productive shed horses with nice pedigrees I'll retire and most of the time they are Star broodmares.
It's another piece of information to factor into whether or not to breed a horse. Combine it with pedigree, speed figure, produce records etc... And hopefully make correct decisions on who to keep and who to run in a claimer.
Edit: One thing I'd love clarity on. If a horse is "longer career" and a "Allowance Late Bloomer" does that mean the horse has worse breeding numbers than the horses current racing numbers or worse breeding number than the peak racing number?
And I would also believe it is in relation to the peak comment. Have not seen or heard of a horse changing from breeding shed to longer career as they bloom, but who knows… (oh, I know who knows…)
Nashville Stud
Elite Power | DS/DM/AWS/AWM/AWR | $40,000
Levels | TM | $12,000 with incentives
Kacchan | TM | $3,500
Elite Power | DS/DM/AWS/AWM/AWR | $40,000
Levels | TM | $12,000 with incentives
Kacchan | TM | $3,500
- Carole Hanson
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5826
- Joined: 15 years ago
Re: Consensus on “longer career”
I’m almost certain the comment takes into consideration the horse’s final number rather than the one it currently sits at.