Sir Gaylord, Fourth Generation

Last week featured Charles Hatton’s description of Sir Gaylord from the 1962-1963 American Racing Manuals. Now let us turn our attention to Sir Gaylord as a name in more current pedigrees, specifically in the fourth generation of all weanlings, yearlings, and two-year-olds sold at public auction in North America in 1999-2002.

Sir Gaylord appeared 3,808 times among these 54,000+ foals, ranking him 19th among these 20 sires in overall popularity.

At P1 in the fourth generation (the male line) Sir Gaylord had a Price Index of 0.48 (17th among these 20 sires) and a PPI (result) of o.16 (19th), not very good. He had 36 foals at P1, including one stakes winner (2.78%) with 132 Performance Points.

At P2 in the fourth generation Sir Gaylord had a Price Index of 0.35 (18th) and a PPI (result) of 3.14 (first). That result was based on only seven foals, however, including two stakes winners (28.57%). Those two stakes winners (both by a son of Dr. Blum, I believe) had only 512 Performance Points (an average of 256).

At P3 in the fourth generation Sir Gaylord had a Price Index of 0.91 (11th) and a PPI (result) of 0.90 (13th), much more typical and credible results. He had 1,450 foals at P3, including 49 stakes winners (3.38%), including Artie Schiller (3,989 Performance Points). Artie Schiller was by El Prado (by Sadler’s Wells out of Lady Capulet, by Sir Ivor, by Sir Gaylord.

At P4 in the fourth generation Sir Gaylord had a Price Index of 0.97 (seventh) and a PPI (result) of 0.44 (16th), not very good on either score. He had 455 foals at P4, including nine stakes winners (1.98%), none with 2,000+ Performance Points.

At P5 in the fourth generation Sir Gaylord had a Price Index of 0.83 (15th) and a PPI (result) of 1.22 (fourth), good improvement on both scores. He had 468 foals at P5, including 19 stakes winners (4.06%), including Behaving Badly (2,149). Behaving Badly was by Pioneering out of Timeleighness, by Sir Raleigh, by Sir Ivor.

At P6 in the fourth generation Sir Gaylord had a Price Index of 0.85 (13th) and a PPI (result) of 1.16 (eighth), good improvement on both scores. He had 347 foals at P6, including 14 stakes winners (4.03%), including Left Bank (3,303). Left Bank was by French Deputy out of Marshesseaux, by Dr. Blum (by Dr. Fager out of Due Dilly, by Sir Gaylord).

At P7 in the fourth generation Sir Gaylord had a Price Index of 1.15 (sixth) and a PPI (result) of 1.09 (ninth), a slight regression on both scores. He had 735 foals at P7, including 21 stakes winners (2.86%), including Voodoo Dancer (3,628), Financingavailable (2,258), and Eddington (2,117). All three had one thing in common, second dams by Sir Ivor.

At P8 in the fourth generation Sir Gaylord had a Price Index of 1.22 (seventh) and a PPI (result) of 0.72 (17th), poor results on both scores. He had 310 foals at P8, including 11 stakes winners (3.55%), none with 2,000+ Performance Points.

Overall, taking all eight positions into account, Sir Gaylord had a Price Index of 0.97 (13th) and a PPI (result) of 0.93 (17th), a slight regression on both scores. He had 3,808 foals overall, including 126 stakes winners (3.31%).

About 29% (1,119) of these 3,808 foals involved daughters of Sir Gaylord in the third generation. Those 1,119 foals had a Price Index of 1.00 and a PPI (result) of 0.76 (very poor). The remaining 2,689 foals involving sons of Sir Gaylord in the third generation had a Price Index of 0.95 and a PPI (result) of 0.99 (slight improvement).

To recapitulate, sons of Sir Gaylord in the third generation (Price Index of 0.95 and PPI of 0.99) were better than daughters of Sir Gaylord in the third generation (Price Index of 1.oo and PPI of 0.76). Both results were below average (1.00) though. Sir Gaylord’s overall results (0.93) were slightly worse than his prices (o.97). Both numbers were right around the average (1.00) though, which is par for the course after four generations.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Sir Gaylord, Fourth Generation

  1. fmitchell07 says:

    Back in the days when I was young and relatively uninformed, I expected that Sir Gaylord had a better chance than most of generating an enduring male line, better it appeared than even his illustrious half-brother Secretariat. And Sir Gaylord did get a pair of important stallions. So to that extent, my expectations were fulfilled.

    But I did not think we would see the precipitous drop off, the effective disappearance of SG in the male line and his continuance through the female lines and internal links from his sons. That is the nature of names in pedigrees, however, no matter the success of individual sires.

    Your research on this group of stallions, Boojum, is most interesting for its illumination on the aging and mechanics of pedigrees. They do not perform as most people imagine or speak of them, “as enduring lines of influence” or as “evidence of prepotency stamped on the breed for generations.” Transmission is much more like quicksilver, more fleeting and changeable, but taken from as a whole, it seems even more magical that way.

    Cheers,
    Frank

    • ddink55 says:

      “Unpredictable” is as good as word as any to describe the transmission of genetic influence. “Crapshoot” also comes to mind. And all the assorted theories blithely ASSUME a certain amount of predictability in genetic inheritance.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s