Court Masterpiece
British-bred Thoroughbred racehorse
Court Masterpiece (foaled 12 May 2000) is a British Thoroughbred racehorse and sire. He showed promise and consistency in his early career, winning a competitive maiden race as a juvenile, winning the Listed Thoroughbred Stakes as a three-year-old and taking a valuable handicap race at Ascot Racecourse in 2004. He emerged as a top-class performer over seven furlongs and one mile as a five-year-old when he won the Lennox Stakes in England and the Prix de la Forêt in France. In 2006 he recorded his biggest victory when he won the Sussex Stakes at Goodwood Racecourse, a track at which he had an exceptional record. Apart from his wins, he was placed in many important races including the Queen Elizabeth II Stakes, Queen Anne Stakes and the Celebration Mile. He was retired to stud in 2008 but proved to be sub-fertile. After returning to racing with little success and was retired again at the end of 2009.
Background
Court Masterpiece is a bay horse bred by Gainsborough Stud, the breeding operation of his owner Maktoum Al Makroum. He was sired by Polish Precedent, a lightly-raced horse who won the Prix Jacques Le Marois and the Prix du Moulin in 1989 before sustaining his only defeat when finishing second to Zilzal in the Queen Elizabeth II Stakes. He later became a very successful breeding stallion, siring Pilsudski, Rakti, Darsi, Pure Grain and Polish Summer (Dubai Sheema Classic).
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Court Masterpiece” is british-bred Thoroughbred racehorse. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Court, Masterpiece and British-bred, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “british-bred Thoroughbred racehorse” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Oct 31, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q22006547. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2000, 2004, 2006 and 2008.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Court Masterpiece”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Court Masterpiece primary sources, Court Masterpiece archive and Court research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Court Masterpiece”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Court Masterpiece” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.