What Stallions prodginy dooesnt enjoy or act on the sand ?

Albert Hall is the other

Prodginy

Four sires I always like on sand are Windrush, Albert Hall, Tiger Ridge and Fort Wood

there are many more who don't act on sand, mainly Jallad's.

Western Winter is hit or miss, I think Horse Chestnut will be a super sand sire.

i think the ap arrow does well imo

rob faux Wrote:

---

> This is a subject I have done no stats at all so I
> can't comment other than I would have thought that
> it was more about action than breeding and actions
> don't appear to be restricted by sires????? or are
> they?????

Correct ......it is the action and not genetics that make the ability to take to surfaces......however one can try the stats and make of them what you want......most horses are worked on sand anyway......

Even Grant Knowles said today that the Albert Hall's love the sand but it is just a matter of a biased opinion

Even form on sand is not that reliable as the 2 sand venues we have can behave with the widest parameters as the conditions or compact vary with the type of work or maintainance and conditions the tracks receive.....
So getting technical and trying to factor something with all the variances not really known is a pointless exercise because sand racing does not attract the best horseflesh from around the country......why should it when the top race is only a G2.......and what is the top end MR ever raced at Kimberly.......so to try and find a winner amoungst lesser horses is like playing lotto if one is trying to grade them on pedigree......

Muhtiman Wrote:

---

> rob faux Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > This is a subject I have done no stats at all so
> I
> > can't comment other than I would have thought
> that
> > it was more about action than breeding and
> actions
> > don't appear to be restricted by sires????? or
> are
> > they?????
>
> Correct ......it is the action and not genetics
> that make the ability to take to
> surfaces......however one can try the stats and
> make of them what you want......most horses are
> worked on sand anyway......
>
> Even Grant Knowles said today that the Albert
> Hall's love the sand but it is just a matter of a
> biased opinion
>
> Even form on sand is not that reliable as the 2
> sand venues we have can behave with the widest
> parameters as the conditions or compact vary with
> the type of work or maintainance and conditions
> the tracks receive.....
> So getting technical and trying to factor
> something with all the variances not really known
> is a pointless exercise because sand racing does
> not attract the best horseflesh from around the
> country......why should it when the top race is
> only a G2.......and what is the top end MR ever
> raced at Kimberly.......so to try and find a
> winner amoungst lesser horses is like playing
> lotto if one is trying to grade them on
> pedigree......


SAND Racing = 30% Form 70% Breeding...

Does sand racing need more stamina than the same distance on turf?

?........still can't quantify on breeding ......until River Trip won on sand......the stats for aTrippi on sand were poor.....because so very few have found themselves chucked out and forced to go there .......some one said it is the lesser stallion that is better on sand........only because the poorer horses breeding wise are forced to go there to try recoup for owners......the good Trippis may never have to do that and thus the stats become skewered......this does not mean Trippi is no good on sand just that the bad ones are no good on any surface

Trippi first 2 USA crops did extremely well on sand as they predominantly only raced 85% on sand tracks
and thus some one there is saying that they were not ideal turf horses.......get the picture

Muhtiman Wrote:

---

> ?........still can't quantify on breeding
> ......until River Trip won on sand......the stats
> for aTrippi on sand were poor.....because so very
> few have found themselves chucked out and forced
> to go there .......some one said it is the lesser
> stallion that is better on sand........only
> because the poorer horses breeding wise are forced
> to go there to try recoup for owners......the good
> Trippis may never have to do that and thus the
> stats become skewered......this does not mean
> Trippi is no good on sand just that the bad ones
> are no good on any surface
>
> Trippi first 2 USA crops did extremely well on
> sand as they predominantly only raced 85% on sand
> tracks
> and thus some one there is saying that they were
> not ideal turf horses.......get the picture


agree abt the Tippri's Mman.They should do very well on the sand.1 Sire i neglected to mention.

Mac Wrote:

---

> Prodginy


My bad Mac. Went to school in Methil. Lol

?.......our local sand tracks are not ideal ......you can have a very good horse go there but not like it......not the surface...but the kick back.....a.horse needing cover is going to be shot blasted with kick back and take no interest.......seen good sand performers come back bleeding from the eyes but still in the no 1 box......hardy horses but no fun in the kick back.......

I like the .PE polytrack as there is no kick back....yet.....this is fair to horses that like cover and hence imo turf form is holding up.....not due to breeding ,action nor style of running.....just a very fair and forgiving surface

I got told by a trainer a horse needs to have big feet. Very few horses with small feet can go on the surface.