One thing I forgot to mention. The fifth generation produced zero stakes winners from 25 foals. The tenth generation produced four stakes winners from 34 foals. Is it reasonable to conclude from that that LT has better results farther back in pedigrees than closer up????
In a nutshell, no. Too few foals in the fifth and tenth generations to make that absolute judgment. More importantly, there is no clear pattern of improvement from the fifth to the tenth generations. There is no particular pattern at all.
Fifth generation zero for 25 (0%). Sixth generation ten for 293 (3.41%). Seventh generation 18 for 638 (2.82%). Eighth generation 15 for 504 (2.98%). Ninth generation nine for 244 (3.69%). Tenth generation four for 34 (11.76%). Difficult to make much sense out of that.
Probably the best way to make sense of it all is to compare the fifth and sixth generations to the seventh-tenth generations. The 318 foals in the fifth and sixth generations sold for an average of $75,463 and a maverage of 197.52. The 1,420 foals in the seventh through tenth generations produced an average of $65,516 and a maverage of 172.55.
The fifth-sixth generations had ten stakes winners from 318 foals (3.14%). The seventh-tenth generations had 46 stakes winners from 1,420 foals (3.24%). Those ten stakes winners earned 8,525 Performance Points (an average of 853 each). Those 46 stakes winners earned 23,692 Performance Points (an average of 515 each).
Therefore, the fifth-sixth generations had a PPI (result) of 1.32 off of a Price Index of 1.21. The seventh-tenth generations had a PPI (result) of 0.82 off of a Price Index of 1.06.
So if you look at it that way, the small minority closest to LT had pretty good results, but the large majority farther away from LT had pretty bad results. The latter swamps the former in terms of overall results. And the important thing is the overall results (PPI of 0.916 off a Price Index of 1.078). The overall results are decidedly negative.