A Means to an End

In my last post I showed that foals whose dams had 24 total dosage points (the maximum possible) had pretty good results relative to their (high) prices. Today I will show results for the entire gamut of possibilities, from zero to 24 points.

First, some benchmarks. The average for all 70,714 sales foals of 2003-2007 was 8.36. The median was eight. The mode (number which appeared most often, 13,660 times) was also eight.

Below are the prices for the various groups.

Dams’ Total Points          Foals          Average          Maverage          Price Index

0-2                                     7,689         $39,107              136.37                   0.84

4-6                                    21,494        $43,483              146.99                  0.90

8-10                                  25,014        $51,152              161.64                  0.99

12-14                                10,032        $66,215              180.95                  1.11

16-18                                  4,243         $88,313              211.41                  1.30

20-24                                 2,242         $122,504            254.53                 1.56

Note that I have combined groups to smooth out the results. And the results are indeed pretty smooth. The average rises uniformly from $39,107 for the 0-2 group (the lowest one) to $122,504 for the 20-24 group (the highest one). Ditto for the maverage, rising from 136.37 for the 0-2 group to 254.53 for the 20-24 group. The Price Indexes mirror the maverages by definition, rising from 0.84 for the 0-2 group to 1.56 for the 20-24 group.

So buyers evidently seem to think that this factor has a strong correlation with expected results on the racetrack. Actually, I doubt if they are thinking in terms of chefs and total points. Rather, they like to see good sires in the pedigrees of the dams of the foals, and the more good sires, the better.

Below are the results for these same groups. APPPSW stands for average Performance Points per stakes winner, a measure of the quality of stakes winners involved.

Dams’ Total Points        Foals          Stakes Winners          %          APPPSW          PPI (Result)

0-2                                  7,689                   204                    2.65            585                      0.73

4-6                                 21,494                   716                    3.33            586                      0.92

8-10                               25,014                  916                    3.66             604                     1.04

12-14                             10,032                  351                    3.50             704                     1.16

16-18                               4,243                   147                    3.46             677                      1.11

20-24                              2,242                     81                    3.61             724                      1.24

These results are not quite as smooth as the prices were. The 8-10 group was best with 3.66% stakes winners from foals (3.42% being the overall figure). The 20-24 group was best by average Performance Points per stakes winner with 724 (the overall average being 620).

Taking both quantity and quality of stakes winners into account, the PPIs (results) rise almost uniformly from 0.73 for the 0-2 group to 0.92 for the 4-6 group to 1.04 for the 8-10 group to 1.16 for the 12-14 group to 1.11 for the 16-18 group (a glitch here) to 1.24 for the 20-24 group.

The chart below compares prices to results.

Dams’ Total Points        Foals          Price Index          PPI (Result)

0-2                                  7,689                 0.84                      0.73

4-6                                 21,494                0.90                     0.92

8-10                               25,014                0.99                     1.04

12-14                             10,032                1.11                      1.16

16-18                               4,243                 1.30                     1.11

20-24                              2,242                 1.56                     1.24

The 0-2 group was an underperformer, with a price of 0.84 and a result of 0.73. The next three groups (4-6, 8-10, and 12-14) were all overperformers, with respective price-results of 0.90-0.92, 0.99-1.04, and 1.11.-1.16. The highest two groups were both underperformers, with 16-18 having a price of 1.30 and a result of 1.11 and 20-24 having a price of 1.56 and a result of 1.24.

So buyers were correct in thinking that the more good sires in the pedigrees of dams of foals the better. They simply overestimated the amount of racetrack benefit from this factor. They paid too much for foals whose dams had 16+ total points.

The 375 foals with 24 total dam points did have good results (2.02, as demonstrated in my last post). The 847 foals with 22 total dam points had fair results at 1.43. The 1,020 foals with 20 total dam points had abysmal results at 0.79. Taken altogether, the 2,242 foals with 20-24 dam points had a PPI (result) of 1.24, which does not compare favorably at all to their Price Index of 1.56.

So the good results for those 375 foals with 24 total dam points turned out to be misleading (another false alarm). The 20 and 22 groups were not nearly as good as the 24 group. So overall, the 20-24 group was NOT good relative to its prices.

OK, I think I am finally done with dosage. I apologize to anyone who thinks I have spent way too much time on this subject. The fact that I have spent a lot of time on this subject does NOT mean that I think it is important. If anything, the exact opposite.

Dosage has been a convenient means to an end. It has allowed me to bash a lot of names in pedigrees (chefs) all at one time. That was the means. And the end of course is to highlight the fact that the worship of names in pedigrees, as I have stated many times already, is nothing more than that, blind worship unsupported by facts.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Too Much Negativity Again???????

Two posts back I gave you something “positive.” Today I am going to do the same.

A few months back I posted on dosage total points. While researching this topic I was struck by the number of sires with good pedigrees and high dosage total points who were NOT good sires. This is mainly because they generally did not have very good race records.

I thought to myself at the time that this was one reason dosage total points was not going to work out very well. And that indeed did prove to be the case. Sales foals with 40+ dosage total points (the highest category, out of a possible total of 64) were the most underperforming group relative to their (high) prices.

I also thought at the time that perhaps dosage total points might work better if applied to dams only. The average sire has a pretty good race record (is at least a stakes winner). The average mare has a pretty ordinary race record. A really good pedigree does not help the average sire much (because the bar for sires is set so high). I thought it possible that a really good pedigree might help the average mare a lot more than the average sire (because the bar for race records of mares is set so low). In other words, pedigree is more important for broodmares than it is for sires.

I decided to test this theory. Today I will present some evidence that the theory holds some water.

The maximum number of dosage total points is 64 (40 through the sire, 24 through the dam). If all seven sires in the first three generations of a dam’s pedigree are chefs, she contributes 24 dosage points to all her foals. Here are some stats on such mares that contribute 24 dosage points to their foals.

There were 375 such foals among all 70,714 sales foals of 2003-2007. Needless to say, they were not cheap, selling for an average of $131,048 (much higher than the overall average of $54,140), a maverage of 271.19 (compared to the overall maverage of 163.11), and a Price Index of 1.66 (1.00 being average by definition).

Included among these 375 foals were 18 stakes winners. Included among these 18 stakes winners were three pretty good ones: Game Face (Menifee–Galleon of Gold, Gone West, 2,399 Performance Points), War Pass (Cherokee Run–Vue, Mr. Prospector, 2.383), and Dream Rush (Wild Rush–Turbo Dream, Unbridled, 2,179). The three dams in question (Galleon of Gold, Vue, and Turbo Dream) all contributed the maximum of 24 points to their foals.

Eighteen stakes winners from 375 foals is 4.8%, which compares quite favorably with the overall figure of 3.42%. Those 18 stakes winners averaged 893 Performance Points apiece, which compares quite favorably with the overall average of 620.

So taking both quantity and quality of stakes winners into account, these 375 foals had a PPI (result) of 2.02. That compares quite favorably with their Price Index of 1.66. They sold for prices about 66% above average and achieved results about 102% above average. (And a Price Index of 1.66 should produce a PPI somewhat lower than 1.66, perhaps around 1.50-1.55 or so. They actually produced 2.02.)

So that lends some credence to the notion that dosage total points work better with dams alone than with sires AND dams. I say “some” credence because naturally you need to examine the entire gamut of possibilities (zero to 24 points for dams) to reach more reliable conclusions. That will be the subject of my next post.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

He Was Not Unique

I demonstrated in my last post that mares inbred 4×4 or closer to Northern Dancer, Hail to Reason, and Mr. Prospector did have pretty good results among sales foals of 2003-2007. Now I do the same for all sires with a significant number of foals out of mares thusly inbred, starting with prices.

Mare Inbred To          Foals          Average          Maverage          Price Index

Northern Dancer        3,180          $60,177             174.68                    1.07

Bold Ruler                    1,898          $56,244            164.52                    1.01

Raise a Native             1,718           $48,047            160.55                    0.98

Native Dancer             1,657          $60,425             183.63                    1.13

Nasrullah                      1,628         $44,385             145.73                    0.89

Nearctic                           682          $45,334            156.39                    0.96

Princequillo                     654          $43,370            148.74                    0.91

Turn-to                           635          $52,111             159.01                    0.97

Buckpasser                     554          $89,073             197.38                    1.21

Hail to Reason               480          $47,101              157.37                    0.96

Nashua                           435           $59,541             176.22                    1.08

Ribot                               402          $34,394             135.64                    0.83

Tom Fool                       391           $49,590             161.15                    0.99

Mr. Prospector             374           $73,977              169.76                    1.04

Secretariat                    203           $59,941             186.51                     1.14

all others                      4,952         $50,038            154.10                     0.94

Totals                          18,386        $54,426             164.31                     1.01

The overall average for all 70,714 sales foals was $54,140. The overall maverage for all sales foals was 163.11. Sixteen groups (including all others) are listed above. Only seven of them had maverages above 163.11 (Price Indexes above 1.00, the overall average by definition).

Buckpasser had the highest average ($89,073) and maverage (197.38, which translates into a Price Index of 1.21). The prices were all pretty close to the overall benchmarks though, the Price Indexes ranging only from 0.83 to 1.21.

The 4,952 foals in the all others group includes 1,308 foals whose dams were inbred to females. The dams of some foals were inbred to more than one ancestor. The individual numbers do not add up to the total of 18,386 for this reason, because such duplications were eliminated.

Below are the results for all 16 groups. APPPSW stands for average Performance Points per stakes winner, a measure of the quality of stakes winners involved, 620 being average.

Mare Inbred To          Foals          Stakes Winners          %          APPPSW          PPI (Result)

Northern Dancer         3,180                   140                   4.40           673                      1.40

Bold Ruler                     1,898                    66                    3.48           620                      1.02

Raise a Native              1,718                    51                     2.97           686                      0.96

Native Dancer              1,657                    47                     2.84           582                      0.78

Nasrullah                       1,628                   35                     2.15          586                       0.60

Nearctic                            682                   20                     2.93          538                       0.75

Princequillo                      654                   14                     2.14          525                       0.53

Turn-to                            635                   22                     3.46           433                       0.71

Buckpasser                      554                    28                    5.05           481                      1.15

Hail to Reason                 480                    22                    4.58           693                      1.50

Nashua                             435                    19                     4.37           462                      0.95

Ribot                                 402                    11                     2.74           880                      1.14

Tom Fool                         391                     14                     3.58          454                       0.77

Mr. Prospector               374                    16                     4.28           716                       1.45

Secretariat                      203                      5                     2.46           584                      0.68

all others                        4,952                 158                    3.19           556                       0.84

Totals                            18,386                620                   3.38           598                       0.95

The only three sires other than Northern Dancer, Hail to Reason, and Mr. Prospector to achieve a PPI (result) higher than 1.00 were Buckpasser (1.15), Ribot (1.14), and Bold Ruler (1.02). The other ten groups were all below 1.00. All 18,386 foals collectively were at 0.95.

The table below compares prices to results.

Mare Inbred To           Foals          Price Index          PPI (Result)

Northern Dancer         3,180                1.07                     1.40

Bold Ruler                     1,898               1.01                      1.02

Raise a Native              1,718               0.98                      0.96

Native Dancer              1,657               1.13                      0.78

Nasrullah                       1,628              0.89                     0.60

Nearctic                            682              0.96                     0.75

Princequillo                      654              0.91                     0.53

Turn-to                            635               0.97                     0.71

Buckpasser                     554                1.21                      1.15

Hail to Reason                480                0.96                     1.50

Nashua                            435                1.08                      0.95

Ribot                                402                0.83                     1.14

Tom Fool                         391                0.99                     0.77

Mr. Prospector               374                1.04                     1.45

Secretariat                      203                1.14                     0.68

all others                        4,952              0.94                    0.84

Totals                            18,386             1.01                     0.95

Northern Dancer, Hail to Reason, and Mr. Prospector fared well, as already mentioned. Only two other sires posted better results than prices. Ribot had a Price Index of 0.83 and a result of 1.14 (thanks to 880 average Performance Points per stakes winner). Bold Ruler just barely qualified with a Price Index of 1.01 and a result of 1.02.

The other 11 groups all had lower results than prices. They all underperformed, in other worlds. The Price Index for all 18,386 foals was 1.01, but their results were only 0.95. So they sold for prices about 1% ABOVE average and achieved results about 5% BELOW average. Needless to say, that is the opposite of what you want to see to support “proof” of a particular theory.

I hope that all this illustrates that you cannot just use certain sires (Northern Dancer, Hail to Reason, and Mr. Prospector in this example) to attempt to “prove” a theory. If a theory applies ONLY to certain sires, that in itself disproves it. A theory needs to be tested over the entire gamut of the population.

And speaking of populations, those 18,386 foals represent 26% of the entire population of 70,714 sales foals of 2003-2007. That is a large segment of the entire population.

Perhaps “Uncle” Abe Hewitt failed to take into account what a large segment of the population is out of mares (or by sires) with “close-up” inbreeding. He was looking at the best horses only and ASSUMING that their inbreeding “build up” was somehow UNIQUE and responsible for the quality of those good horses.

He was certainly NOT looking at their entire population to determine how many BAD horses were similarly bred. In this he was not unique. Almost all writers on Thoroughbred pedigrees up to the time of “Uncle” Abe Hewitt have made this same mistake (looking at good horses only). Only recently has this fundamental mistake begun to be rectified.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Too Much Negativity??????

“Too much negativity” is the one criticism most often directed toward me, both personally and professionally. In terms of the latter that means I delight in debunking breeding theories but fail to offer anything positive to breeders, anything that actually seems to “work.” Today I am going to offer you three things that actually seem to “work” in breeding or buying a foal at public auction.

In my previous post I revisited “Uncle” Abe Hewitt, who speculated about inbreeding of parents (sires and dams, not just foals). To oversimplify his message somewhat, if what he believed holds true, inbred dams should make pretty good broodmares.

In three cases that hypothesis does hold true. Mares inbred 4×4 or closer to Northern Dancer, Hail to Reason, and Mr. Prospector did have pretty good results among sales foals of 2003-2007. The prices for these three groups are summarized below.

Mare Inbred To          Foals          Average          Maverage          Price Index

Northern Dancer        3,180          $60,177             174.68                    1.07

Hail to Reason               480          $47,101              157.37                    0.96

Mr. Prospector             374           $73,977              169.76                    1.04

The overall average for all 70,714 sales foals was $54,140. The overall maverage for all sales foals was 163.11. Mr. Prospector and Northern Dancer were above both figures. Hail to Reason was below both figures. But all figures are pretty close to the norms, the Price Indexes ranging only from 0.96 to 1.07 (1.00 being average by definition).

Below are the results for the three sires. APPPSW stands for average Performance Points per stakes winner, a measure of the quality of stakes winners involved, 620 being average.

Mare Inbred To          Foals          Stakes Winners          %          APPPSW          PPI (Result)

Northern Dancer         3,180                   140                   4.40           673                      1.40

Hail to Reason                 480                    22                    4.58           693                      1.50

Mr. Prospector               374                    16                     4.28           716                       1.45

The overall percentage of stakes winners from foals was 3.42. All three sires were considerably better than that. The overall average Performance Points per stakes winner was 620, as mentioned above. All three sires were considerably better than that.

So taking both quantity and quality of stakes winners into account, Northern Dancer comes up with a PPI (result) of 1.40, Hail to Reason 1.50, and Mr. Prospector 1.45. All three numbers are well above their Price Indexes, as illustrated below.

Mare Inbred To           Foals          Price Index          PPI (Result)

Northern Dancer         3,180                1.07                     1.40

Hail to Reason                480                0.96                     1.50

Mr. Prospector              374                 1.04                     1.45

So foals out of mares inbred 4×4 or closer to Northern Dancer sold for prices about 7% above average and achieved results about 40% above average. Foals out of mares inbred 4×4 or closer to Hail to Reason sold for prices about 4% below average and achieved results about 50% above average. Foals out of mares inbred 4×4 or closer to Mr. Prospector sold for prices about 4% above average and achieved results about 45% above average. All three were excellent results.

Taking these results at face value, it would appear that Hail to Reason was best, followed by Mr. Prospector and Northern Dancer. I would counsel taking these results with some grains of salt, however. I am much more impressed by Northern Dancer than the other two simply because he achieved his results with 3,180 foals, compared to only 480 and 374 foals for the other two. The more foals, the more difficult it is to achieve good results. (And the number of foals out of mares inbred 4×4 or closer to Mr. Prospector will have increased exponentially in later years.)

So the results above seem to substantiate Hewitt’s point. If all sires had similar results, his point would be completely substantiated. Next time around I will list results for some other sires and for all foals out of such inbred mares as a whole.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

“Uncle” Abe Hewitt Revisited

The Great Breeders and Their Methods, by the late Abram S. Hewitt, seems to have acquired a formidable reputation. I searched for this book about a month ago in the Lexington public library system. The system had one copy, in the reference section downtown. Meaning that the book could not be borrowed nor leave its downtown location.

I was a little surprised that this book was classified as reference material and its availability therefore restricted. Perhaps it is a matter of scarcity. Not that many copies of the book exist, which enhances its formidable reputation and restricts its availability.

At any rate, I borrowed the book from a friend and read it again in its entirety recently. I would like to share some quotes from it.

Page 313:

“It should be noted that Bromus, the dam of Phalaris, was inbred 2 x3 (one free generation) to Springfield, the fastest horss of his time in England; also that her sire Sainfoin, though only a fairly modest racehorse himself (he did win the Derby but not much else), was inbred to Stockwell 3 x 3 (two free generations), and Sainfoin’s dam was inbred 3 x 2 to the full brothers Rataplan and Stockwell.

“Thus, Bromus, though of little racing merit herself, carried intense inbreeding to highly superior strains, both in her own pedigree and the pedigree of her sire Sainfoin.”

Page 183:

Sweet Tooth, the dam of Our Mims, Alydar, and Sugar and Spice, is inbred 3 x 3 (two free generations) to the old Calumet champion sire Bull Lea. Similarly, Davona Dale and Before Dawn are inbred 4 x 4 x 4 to Bull Lea, their dams being inbred 3 x 3 to Bull Lea.”

Page 192, on Planetoid, the dam of Grey Flight:

More interesting, perhaps, was the fact that Planetoid was inbred 3 x2 (one free generation) to Sweep, who combined some of the best American strains of the time, being by Ben Brush out of a mare by Domino. The author did not then know the great advantage, for stud purposes, of an intense gathering of superior genes one generation or so back in a pedigree.”

The author appears to be leading the reader to believe that inbred mares make better broodmares. This is not exactly a new or novel observation. When I did my first series on inbreeding 20+ years ago for Thoroughbred Times (see “To Build a Pile”), I included an entire chapter on inbred broodmares. No one chastised me for wasting time and effort on a loony idea.

But to say that inbred mares make better broodmares is oversimplifying the views of Hewitt.

Page 290:

“This suggests that inbreeding to the best strains can be successfully exploited, though the direct results of such inbreeding, that is, the inbred animals themselves, may not be very successful on the track. It is when the closeup descendants of these inbred animals are mated to sires of classic stature, such as Swynford, Gainsborough, Prince Rose, and Phalaris that great successes on the track, and even more so at stud, are realized.”

Page 388:

The presence of close inbreeding in a close-up ancestor of the key horse has occurred too often–Lexington, Domino, Commando, Phalaris, Pharos, Nearco, Blandford, Tourbillon, Djebel, St. Simon, Stockwell–to be ignored as a favorable factor in the makeup of both stallions and mares.”

So here Hewitt is referring to both stallions and mares. He SAYS that this factor has occurred too often, but does he prove it???? In a nutshell, no. It is all anecdotal evidence. There was no scientific survey of the entire breed to determine how often this factor actually occurred.

One of the reasons for that is that the factor (close inbreeding in a close-up ancestor of the key horse) is dot defined very well at all. It is totally amorphous.

This is absolutely typical of most breeding theories. (Just ask “Uncle” Joe Estes, if you do not believe me.) Make your definitions as amorphous as possible. Throw in some exceptions to the rule. Leave yourself plenty of loopholes and fallback positions. Recite some anecdotal evidence and act as if you have proved your point.

Nevertheless, all this speculation is somewhat interesting. One thing that CAN be empirically tested is the proposition that inbred mares make better broodmares. I am in the process of doing so and should have some results in about another month.

——————————————————————————————-

For a study on inbred sires, see this linked article.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Zenyatta, Curlin, and English Channel (a pretty big IF)

So dosage is a “method of pedigree classification.” Like it or not, those classifications are going to have varying prices and results. It is always fascinating (at least to me) to see how prices and results vary for any pedigree factor (be it a theory, a “method of classification,” or whatever).

Dosage is no exception. So I decided to see how prices and results varied for assorted ranges of DI and CD using sales foals of 2003-2007. The prices for DI ranges are summarized below. Keep in mind that the overall average for all 70,714 foals is $50,140, the overall maverage is 163.11, and the Price Index is 1.00 by definition.

Also, there were ten foals with no dosage points at all. These foals were omitted from the charts below. That is the reason they add up to 70,704 foals (not the actual total of 70,714).

DI Range               Foals                   Average             Maverage              Price Index

1.00 or lower        1,844                   $36,924               127.85                        0.78

1.01-2.00             16,822                  $50,939              155.79                        0.96

2.01-2.99             18,741                   $49,523              160.17                        0.98

3.00                      10,458                   $55,511              163.14                       1.00

3.01-4.00             12,507                  $73,661               186.26                       1.14

4.01+                    10,332                  $45,824              158.70                        0.97

The most popular of these DI ranges is 2.01-2.99, with 18,741 foals. More than half (37,407 of these 70,704 foals) had DIs of 2.99 or lower. So the median is somewhere high in the 2.01-2.99 range, say about 2.75.

A DI of exactly 3.00 was also very popular, with 10,548 foals, which is why I gave it a range of its own. Undoubted that is the mode (the number that appears most frequently) of this population.

The prices themselves are below average up to 2.99 (with the lowest range having the lowest prices of all). The two ranges from 3.00 to 4.00 have above-average prices. The 4.01+ range is slightly below average, well above 1.00 or lower, and about in line with the ranges from 1.01 to 2.99.

The overall lesson here is that the middle ranges produced the highest prices. The lowest range had by far the lowest prices. The highest range was only slightly below average.

Listed below are prices for assorted CD ranges.

CD Range               Foals                   Average             Maverage              Price Index

Zero or lower        1,143                   $31,881                118.07                       0.72

0.01-0.50            14,410                  $51,365               155.37                        0.95

0.51-0.79             24,818                  $57,916               170.09                       1.04

0.80-0.99            17,143                   $60,191               168.53                      1.03

1.00                       4,257                   $45,753                151.11                       0.93

1.01+                    8,933                    $43,410               157.39                       0.96

The 0.51-0.79 range was by far the most popular, with 24,818 foals. More than half (40,371 of these 70,704 foals) had CDs up to 0.79. So the median is somewhere high in the 0.51-0.79 range, maybe about 0.75.

This chart shows the same overall pattern as the first one. The highest prices were produced by the two middle ranges (0.51 to 0.99). The other four ranges all had below-average prices, with the lowest range (zero or lower) being lowest of all.

The chart below lists the results by DI ranges. The overall percentage of stakes winners from foals was 3.42%. APPPSW stands for average Performance Points per stakes winner, a measure of the quality of stakes winners involved (the average being 620).

DI Range                Foals             SWs           %           APPPSW           PPI (result)

1.00 or lower        1,844              42            2.28             673                     0.73

1.01-2.00             16,822            520          3.09             610                     0.89

2.01-2.99             18,741             642          3.43              647                    1.05

3.00                      10,458            401          3.83              593                    1.08

3.01-4.00             12,507           504           4.03             630                    1.20

4.01+                    10,322           306           2.96             590                    0.83

These results pretty much reflected their prices. The middle ranges from 2.01 to 4.00 all had positive results. The fringe results were all negative (in keeping with their prices). The lowest range had the worst result of all.

Listed below are the results by CD ranges.

CD Range                Foals             SWs           %           APPPSW           PPI (result)

Zero or lower        1,143                20          1.75             720                    0.60

0.01-0.50            14,410              439         3.05            599                    0.86

0.51-0.79             24,818              897         3.61             662                    1.13

0.80-0.99            17,143              600         3.50             607                    1.01

1.00                       4,257               159         3.74              575                    1.02

1.01+                    8,933               300         3.36              565                    0.90

This chart looks pretty much like the one above it. The results reflected the prices. The middle ranges from 0.51 to 1.00 all had positive results. The fringe results were all negative (in keeping with their prices). The lowest range had the worst result of all.

Of course the most important test is the comparison between prices and results, which is listed below for DI ranges.

DI Range               Foals                  Price Index                PPI (result)

1.00 or lower        1,844                         0.78                          0.73

1.01-2.00             16,822                       0.96                          0.89

2.01-2.99             18,741                       0.98                           1.05

3.00                      10,458                      1.00                           1.08

3.01-4.00             12,507                      1.14                            1.20

4.01+                    10,322                      0.97                            0.83

The three middle ranges (2.01 to 4.00) all had good results (PPIs higher than Price Indexes). The fringe ranges all had poor results (PPIs lower than Price Indexes).

Listed below are the comparisons between prices and results for CD ranges.

DI Range               Foals                  Price Index                PPI (result)

Zero or lower        1,143                        0.72                          0.60

0.01-0.50            14,410                       0.95                          0.86

0.51-0.79             24,818                      1.04                           1.13

0.80-0.99            17,143                       1.03                           1.01

1.00                       4,257                        0.93                          1.02

1.01+                    8,933                        0.96                           0.90

The 0.51-0.79 and 1.00 ranges both had good results (PPIs higher than Price Indexes). The other four ranges all had poor results (PPIs lower than Price Indexes).

The best overall performer appears to be the 0.51-0.79 CD range, with a Price Index of 1.04 and a PPI (result) of 1.13. So that group sold for prices about 4% above average and achieved results about 13% above average. Not bad.

I said “appears to be” for a reason though. The three best stakes winners in this whole group were Zenyatta, Curlin, and English Channel. All three fell into that 0.51-0.79 CD range. Without those three the results for that range were 1.065, still better than their Price Index of 1.04 but not nearly as good as 1.13.

For the record, here are their dosage numbers. Zenyatta has a DI of 2.00 and a CD of 0.58. Curlin has a DI of 3.00 and a CD of 0.71. English Channel has a DI of 2.64 and a CD of 0.65.

All six of those numbers are very near the middle of the population. And the middle ranges for both DI and CD produce the best prices and results. Lower and higher ranges are not nearly as good, particularly the former. That is the overall lesson of this study.

IF dosage has anything to do with performance at all. That remains a pretty big IF.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

2013 in review

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2013 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

The concert hall at the Sydney Opera House holds 2,700 people. This blog was viewed about 18,000 times in 2013. If it were a concert at Sydney Opera House, it would take about 7 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.

Click here to see the complete report.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment