Repeat…
Behind each name was/is a life, a life overlooked by most, if not all competitor databases. Peerage of Racehorses specifically rectifies this palpable omission offering a three dimensional image… endeavouring to breathe life into each name
A long time in coming, Peerage of Racehorses does not boast a plethora of names, just 50,000 or so. But each entry umbrella’d by “Peerage” is the name of an animal a link in the chain to those that today dominate the breed. Broadly said, if one cannot find and connect a mare, or the dam of a colt, with its Family within six generations, then almost certainly, its place in Turf annals will lapse, fading until it is unremembered.
Peerage of Racehorse is not a database of theories. It does not promise the “Holy Grail.” It does not promote any theory beyond the thought that familiarity and familiarisation is the key to understanding, and that “Peerage” is a gateway to this ken. On the way, it may provide data to support a ‘pet’ theory, but this will be incidental. Although a comment that the present demonstrable, “nicks,” may occasionally be found as: “… appears to nick well with…,” I am suspicious of this as a reality. That Emperor of “nicks,” Nasrullah over Princequillo failed miserably when Nasrullah (1940) covered a daughter of Princequillo, the offspring of the union failing ever to win or place!
Image: http://www.circledhorses.com
Most theories in the breeding of the racehorse are seen clearly after the event, and then are trumpeted loudly. Has one ever heard voiced before the event, even from the most rabid of theorists, that a horse will be a success as a result of this or that theory.’ The theorist is silent until wise after the event. That theories may provide hours of enjoyment, in afterglow, is not denied – but Nature’s secrets remain unlocked – stillborn after one proving. This one-proof, notwithstanding, all too often becomes sustaining. In the thousand and one theories that abound there is always someone to tell “the story.” But common sense dictates that one be wary of the promise of gold from lead.
If theories were as successful as their promoters gainsay, they would never appear of the market. And would not the successful theorists be dominating racing, owning all successful horses that in hindsight they find configures to the pattern of their theory. Countless advertise the “Tesio Theory”, despite the undisputed fact that Tesio never had a theory, or at least one he enunciated.
I think that here it is worth repeating the words of Franco Varola:
“A specific history of Dormello does not exist, not, to my knowledge, any single book dealing exclusively with the Tesio operations, and it is unlikely that any such work will ever be put out, since very few people who could have dealt with Tesio’s racing and breeding activities from their inception with a first hand knowledge have long since passed away.
On the other hand, thousands of articles have been written on Tesio and Dormello, but they are mostly of little value to a student or researcher, because most are apologetic, and the few which are not have been written by people, who, albeit of deep learning, were not in close terms with Tesio personally, either because they lived elsewhere, or because it was practically impossible to be close Tesio, who used to be close only to himself.”
This assertion makes a mockery of those who perpetuate the ideals of “upgrading stock using Federico Tesio’s proven guidelines.”
Despite this there is always another to tell you that they have discovered the theory that Tesio never declared – in fact, reading his mind in hindsight. That which Tesio did have was knowledge harvested over countless years, and more, an empathy with the thoroughbred
Only knowledge and understanding and the nurturing of empathy, can offer a way to breeding successfully.
As an instance, and to illustrate that which can occur in ignorance, I cite the example of a consultant of my acquaintance, who recounted to me that she was contacted by a mare owner and asked to comment on a projected pedigree, he proudly declaring that he had been contacted by a stud that had suggested the mating. It appears that a programme in their computer had come up with a projected mating with one of the Stud stallions and his mare that gave it a high inbreeding ratio.
He was, then, shocked when the consultant later contacted him to declare reservations on the projected mating.
From high ground, the mare owner pointed attention to the duplications of those scions of the breed, Bold Ruler, Forli and Raise a Native. It was, of course, just these duplications that were the source of the consultant’s reservations. It was a case of being blinded by names, and in ignorance of any of the problems that lay within those names
The simple fact is that although these horses are celebrated both as racehorses and stallions, obviously neither the mare owner nor the stud, knew, or had ignored, that all were the subject of bad legs and/or feet, and to a greater or lesser degree transmitted their aberrations… in this instance, times three.
Researching “Peerage” brought to light the impact of the post-barren foal (more aptly the after fallow-year foal, but throughout referred to as “post-barren,” as this appears the accepted terminology) both as racehorses, and then at their court when stallions. I am without doubt that others will discover and bring to light other interesting aspects in the upgrading of the breed of the Thoroughbred.
Peerage has this information… Peerage alone has any information.
A century or so ago, C Bruce Lowe’s name was savaged for a system of breeding by numbers. Is it progress then, to be breeding by names sans information/knowledge.
It is this knowledge and this empathy that I hope “Peerage” delivers.
Trail..Richard’s Articles
