got a kick out of this...

[sighthound]

The buyer, their personality and tolerances and intended use of the horse, is the largest variable, and sets up what the vet advises them regarding a purchase.
 
Every comment a vet makes about a horse is in relation to your intended use, your personal stated tolerance for financial and emotional risk.

My advice to buyer A on purchase of a specific horse may be different than my advice to buyer B on purchase of the same horse.

My job is to document what I find, and give you my best impression of how it could potentially influence your purchase\'s subsequent performance and use.

The itemization of any physical defects found in a particular horse, and the opinion of what those defects mean to the future, are two entirely separate things  (you know this, TGJB, it\'s more for the folks here that don\'t)

Say we are at Keeneland September yearlings, and you want an XX baby from this newly-popular rising sire.  You tell me to look at the rads of 10 XX colts you have on your long list.  

Well, the growthy big ones are gonna likely have small OCDs in their front ankles (because they all do from this sire), half of them will also have small OCDs in their stifles.  

And it\'s worse for the early-born ones who have been \"forced\" by the sales crew 60-90 days to put on some size and weight and muscle to bring top dollar for the sale.

I\'ll go to the barn and evaluate their conformation and way of going, too, to compare to the rads, because that\'s the way I do it - and that helps tell you what to worry about in the future, and what not to (the defect in light of the whole package).

And we know, from recent years, that this sire is pretty good for horses running well nationally at 4 and above, and he\'s got alot of 2 year olds that end up needing time due to shins and chips so don\'t get involved until second half of their three year old year.
 
But some few of them do very well in the early 3-year-old races, and these rare ultra-stars make some pretty big noise and big $$ (that\'s why you want one!)

But that\'s only 1 in 50 of these XX babies.  How do we find that one?

So if you are set on the August debut at SAR, and the big fall baby races, and the Triple Crown trail, I\"ll warn you off this sire\'s kids.  

It\'s very unlikely you\'ll beat those odds.  The reward is high, but the risk is very high.  

And I really don\'t care to see this baby end up broken down by an owner who forged ahead with a sloppy trainer and an ego, in spite of what the colt needed.

If you want to take the risk, fine, but the chances are not good that you\'ll be saying,  \"I bought the horse anyway in spite of the vets advice, he\'s an idiot, and thank you for the Derby Trophy, it\'s lovely!\".

I\'ll not tell you to buy one of these to pinhook, either.  And not the choice for a new young horse for your syndication packaging - your buyers want to be at the races, not receiving notes from the farm on when the horse can make it back into training.

But if you have money and patience, and the risk-reward is wanting to make national noise summer-fall of the three-year old year, and on the next year - wow, go for it, those OCD\'s will give us some great $$ bargains when they go through the ring.  If you have some patience and a good trainer.

[TGJB]

Sight-- if all vets did it that way things would be a lot easier. But they don\'t.

I had a conversation with a vet one time that was an absolute classic. He refused to say whether he would pass the horse, said he would never use the term. I tried to find a question he would actually answer. Finally got to \"If your granmother was looking at this horse, would you tell her it\'s okay to buy her\"? Guy said, \"Depends how much money Grandma has, and how many horses she wants to buy\".

You describe an analysis that is forward looking, has to do with the future, which is what I need as a buyer. Bill Baker will do that for you. Some vets will not. They will tell you what they see, not what it means-- they are worried that offering an opinion can get them in trouble or make them look bad if they are wrong. Just reciting facts can\'t.

Grandma\'s filly turned out to be very sound. We bought her for Graph for 50k, she ran about 20 times in 2 years in California, placed in a couple of stakes.

[sighthound]

What you describe is why people should realize they will probably go through a few agents and vets in order to find one that meshes well with your teams business resources, approach and goals.

I don\'t expect you to recommend the same horses to me if I say, \"Find me a $100K 2-yr-old that will stay sound and I can run in NYRA for a few years\", versus, \"Find me ten $100K 2-yr-olds that we can try and get on the Derby trail\".

[sighthound]

they are worried that offering an opinion can get them in trouble or makthem look bad if they are wrong. Just reciting facts can\'t.

Grandma\'s filly turned out to be very sound. We bought her for Graph for 50k, she ran about 20 times in 2 years in California, placed in a couple of stakes.

Additional comment:

But if you were advised to purchase the horse, but Grandma\'s filly broke down after two races, would you ever use that vet again?

It\'s very highly competitive and cutthroat in the equine vet world.

[TGJB]

Exactly my point. That\'s why they won\'t offer an opinion. And unless I have specific reason to think a vet missed something, I would have no problem using them again. The one who turned down Xtra Heat and Magic W-- not so much.

But on your other post-- if that is what a vet wants to predicate his/her answer on, so say that, put the opinion in that context. Problem is they often don\'t give an opinion at all. Keep in mind that I am dealing with horses in training-- if they said (and sometimes they do) an average result would be you get 5 starts, it would be fine. But not giving you anything you can actually use is CYA territory, stealing money. It would be like your doctor handing you your X rays and lab results to look at, but not giving you an informed opinion.

[sighthound]

>>It would be like your doctor handing you your X rays and lab results to look at, but not giving you an informed opinion.


Exactly.  Good description.  

But consider also if many of that physicians patients were high-end, hard-working, extremely successful people very used to having their way and getting what they want just for the demanding

BTW, some clients only want to pay the cost of those lab results and rads, and not the informed opinion

[shanahan]

who is the best vet, Jerry?  How about a top 5?

[BB]

I never knew about that one. Must have been a major ouch. For any pups too young to remember Prized, he also defeated Sunday Silence on dirt at Hollywood in the \'89 Swaps, one of only two horses to beat the brilliant champion that year (in nine starts).