You have probably been wondering why I went to all the trouble of identifying all the tail-female descendants of La Troienne in this group and then listing every single one. Well, I did NOT do it just for my health.
“If LT had about 1,000 foals among these sales foals of 2003-2007, her results were indeed pretty good. If she had about 1,500 foals, her results were just slightly above average. If she had about 2,000 foals, her results were well below average,” I noted in the first part of this series.
So the reason I listed every single foal I found was to document how many there were, the prices for which they sold, and the level of success they achieved on the racetrack.
There were 1,738 foals in this group tracing to LT in tail female. Those 1,738 foals sold for a gross of $114,280,408 and an average of $65,754 (compared to the overall average of $54,140 for all 70,714 foals). These 1,738 foals had a maverage of 175.88 (compared to the overall maverage of 163.11 for all 70,714 foals). So the 1,738 foals tracing to LT sold for prices better than average and should have had results better than average as well.
Of those 70,714 overall foals, 2,373 were stakes winners (3.36%). Of the 1,738 foals tracing to LT, 56 were stakes winners (3.22%). That is a BELOW-average result.
The 2,373 overall stakes winners earned a total of 1,431,147 Performance Points, an average of 603 apiece. The 56 stakes winners tracing to LT earned a total of 32,217 Performance Points, an average of 575 apiece. Again, that is a BELOW-average result, reflecting the fact that the quality of the 56 LT stakes winners was not as good as average.
I mentioned that the 1,738 LT foals had a maverage of 175.88, compared to the overall maverage of 163.11. The former divided by the latter is 1.0783. I call this the Price Index, and it means that the LT foals should have been 7.83% better than average based on their prices.
Taking both quantity and quality of stakes winners into account, the LT foals were in fact 8.4% BELOW average. The 70,714 overall foals earned a total of 1,431,157 Performance Points, an average of 20.24 per foal. The 1,738 LT foals earned a total of 32,217 Performance Points, an average of 18.537 per foal. The latter (18.537) divided by the former (20.24) equals 0.916. I call this number the Performance Points Index (PPI). With 1.00 being exactly average, 0.916 means that the racing results of the 1,738 LT foals were 8.4% BELOW average.
It should not come as any surprise to any rational person that LT is actually below average. After all, she was a foal of 1926. But evidently there are not many rational people devoted to the study of pedigrees today. Because it seems to have become accepted “wisdom” that La Troienne is thy lady and thy goddess. Thou shalt not put strange chestnut gods before her.
“Plum Pretty rode high Beyer speed figures, monumental linebreeding, a great family, and a stretch an inch too long for runner-up St. John’s River to victory in the Kentucky Oaks (G1). Crosses of icons Damascus and Silent Screen in the fourth key the surface linebreeding. Liszy, by A.P. Indy, is 4×4 to Buckpasser, which triggers six lines of La Troienne in the dam to go with two in in Plum Pretty’s sire Medaglia d’Oro. . . . ”
The quote above is typical of the UTTER DRIVEL that gets written and published these days about LT in otherwise reputable magazines. The gist of the theory (for lack of a better term) seems to be that the more LT you find in a pedigree, the better that pedigree is. Reality tells a different story.
I will relay a conversation I had with the former editor of one of those otherwise reputable magazines a few months ago. This conversation took place over a copy machine in a library (I was copying some Charles Hatton in fact). I came across an old quote about LT, chuckled at it, and showed it to this former editor.
I decided to test his acumen. I posed him a theoretical question. If you traced all the foals descending in tail female from LT in five years’ worth of recent sales foals, and 1.00 were exactly average, what would her results be?
About 4.0, he took a wild-ass guess. I laughed like a maniac and told him the results would be closer to 1.1 or 1.2. I had just started this project at that point and knew the results would be somewhere close to 1.0. I erred on the side of conservatism in quoting those figures of 1.1 or 1.2 to him. The actual figure is 0.916, with prices at 1.0783.
Anyway, this conversation illustrates the point that even otherwise knowledgeable people seem to have fallen hook, line and sinker for the canard that LT is “magic.” It illustrates the power of propaganda.
You might also be wondering why I confined myself to the tail female (fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth dams) in evaluating LT. Those names were relatively easy to find. All I had to do was search straight down the female line.
The other reason is that I knew from previous research that LT has the BEST results in tail female and worse results in all the other possible places in pedigrees. See La Troienne (“Talking World War III Blues”).
So I was giving her the benefit of the doubt by concentrating on the places in pedigrees in which she had had the BEST results in the past. LT appears in many more places in pedigrees than just the female line. Anyone want to wager that she has good results in these other places????
The perception that LT is somehow “magic” in pedigrees has little to do with reality and everything to do with religion. It is all about “worship.”
And that is OK. Freedom of religion still pertains. Worship LT all you want. Make her the goddess of your religion. Just keep in kind that religion is all about faith and not about reality at all in many cases. Just do not delude yourself that worshiping LT has anything to do with reality, with “magic” success. Because it does not.
LT was a foal of 1926. Foals of 1926 or thereabouts do not have any discernible “influence” on “success” in modern pedigrees at all. Feel free to worship all you want, but I choose to abstain from such nonsense. As Huck said, “I reckon I just think different.”