INGOMAR.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume I, Issue 18, 29 November 1890, Page 5

INGOMAR.

(To the Editor Sporting Review.) Sir,—In your issue oi November 9 I read with interest your reply to my letter on above subsubject. In giving my name I expected (before I saw the letter in type) one of your arguments would be that I was an Irishman. However, you are mistaken, as I never saw that country except on paper. You will perhaps admit that your surmise was wrong (No. 1). I. did not “stick up” for the horse on that account, therefore, but because his good name was being slandered (No. 2). I repeat his stock have been sucsessful in England and Ireland—successful so far as winning goes (No. 3). Do you deny that ? I neither said they were Ormondes nor Carbines, and am therefore not at all out of my calculations. As to your statement that he never got one at home within 3 st of a good one, that is merely an assertion—nothing more. Why Mr. Campbell secured him for a “ very low figure ” was because those who sold the horse did not know his real value. Another statement, that none of his stock I mentioned was within 4-st of a good one, I consider ridiculous. What about Alcinous ? When well, where is the horse that could give him 4St or the half of it ? After seeing the race for the New Zealand Cup, I am confident that had Strephon (IngomaPs son) been properly ridden he would have won. In this opinion I do not stand alone. The following day, however, he won the Metropolitan, carrying 7St 21b (ylb more than in the Cup), going i£ miles in 2 min. 40 secs., or 3 secs, quicker

than the first or last three parts of the Cup took. Considering the chances he has had Ingomar has done wonderfully well, and his stock will bear comparison with other sires. If he was sold cheaply it was because the supply of blood stock was greater than the demand. For the same reason Musket and Traducer horses are hawked about New Zealand season after season without any buyers being forthcoming, and it was only recently that a Musket horse was sold in Auckland for about £2O l As to my beating you with reference to Ingomar’s being in a place as a winning sire, I will explain. The difference between Ingomar’s total and that of Leolinus 165.), who was third on the list I^ ,s> — would have been won by Vandal had he lived. I hope you do not doubt D. O’Brien’s judgment in putting Rubina to Ingomar in-prefer-ence to other sires. I am sure he does not regret it, and consider that sport a better judge than I, or perhaps the editor S.R. Hoping I have convinced you, and thanking you in anticipation, I remain, etc., Oileus. [I have not time to answer “Oileus”’ letter in full. As he is satisfied that his arguments are right, let it be so ; but in justice to myself I must answer two or three of his remarks. In answer to Nos. 2 and 3. It is quite evident he knows nothing of English racing. With regard to his remark “as to your statement that he never got one at home within 3st. of a good one, that is merely an assertion ” —that is false. I was both racing and breeding in England forty years ago. Uncas, the sire of Ingomar, was foaled in my paddocks. That Mr. Campbell bought Ingomar cheap because the market was overstocked displays “ Oileus’ ” ignorance. The English market is never overstocked, owing to the numerous foreign buyers, and a horse having proved himself a successful sire will always command thousands, let alone hundreds. His remark “ would have been won by Vandal had he lived” is really laughable. I never knew any racing man calculate his winnings until he got them paid. With regard to D. O’Brien, I admit he is a splendid judge of a yearling, and knows his work as a trainer —then lam done. In conclusion, I will say that “ Oileus ” has not convinced me. Should he come to Auckland I hope he will call on me, and I think I can prove in‘print that I know a little more about racing than he gives me credit for. But this must end the correspondence te Ingomar, though I shall be glad to hear from him on other subjects.—Ed. S.R.J