I thought it might be interesting to compare the presences of Secretariat among sales foals of 2003-2007 by dividing them into two groups: Secretariat duplicated between sire and dam (inbred) and Secretariat not duplicated between sire and dam (not duplicated).
I did the same for Mr. Prospector a few months back. I have already examined inbreeding to Secretariat (see Totals–Cut to the Chase and the posts linking back from there). Today I will examine Secretariat not duplicated (outcrossed).
Let us begin by listing the best stakes winners (those with 2,000+ Performance Points) having Secretariat (not duplicated) in their pedigrees. I have done so below for the second through fifth generations and have broken it down further by positions within each generation. The stakes winners are listed in descending order (best ones first).
At the end of each paragraph I have listed the Price Index and PPI (result) for all the foals in that category. That way you can see at a glance whether the overall results for a given category were good or bad or close to expected relative to their prices. There were plenty of examples of all three possibilities.
Stakes winners with 2,000+ Performance Points showed up at all the possible positions except in the second generation and P1 in the third and fourth generations and P5 in the fourth generation.. I lumped the fifth generation into one category of its own (did not try to differentiate among the 16 possible positions there). Discussion resumes after the lists below.
Second Generation, P1. No stakes winners. Price Index 0.40, PPI 0.
Second Generation, P2. No stakes winners. Price Index 1.21, PPI 0.
Third generation, P1. No stakes winners. Price Index 0.55, PPI 0.
Third Generation, P2–Magna Graduate (4,183 Performance Points), Rags to Riches (2,943), Soldier’s Dancer (2,825), Leah’s Secret (2,559). Price Index 1.38, PPI 1.39.
Third Generation, P3. Price Index 0.79, PPI 0.49.
Third Generation, P4–Court Vision (6,547), Thorn Song (2,433). Price Index 1.16, PPI 1.65.
Fourth Generation, P1. No stakes winners. Price Index 0.24, PPI 0.
Fourth Generation, P2–Flat Out (3,762), Sun King (3,240), Rail Trip (2,909), Surf Cat (2,845), Life At Ten (2,778), Haynesfield (2,719), Silver Train (2,659), Leah’s Secret (2,559), Henny Hughes (2,525), Swift Temper (2,397), River’s Prayer (2,222), Dancing in Silks (2,200), Red Giant (2,192), Corinthian (2,067), Miraculous Miss (2,032), Lord Shanakill (2,008). Price Index 1.15, PPI 1.07.
Fourth Generation, P3. Price Index 0.71, PPI 1.61.
Fourth Generation, P4–Kip Deville (5,925). Price Index 0.62, PPI 1.95.
Fourth Generation, P5. No stakes winners. Price Index 0.63, PPI 0.
Fourth Generation, P6–Wait a While (5,382), Midnight Lute (4,091), Zanjero (2,521), Any Given Saturday (2,184), City to City (2,030). Price Index 1.40, PPI 1.60.
Fourth Generation, P7. Price Index 0.87, PPI 0.75.
Fourth Generation, P8. Price Index 1.03, PPI 1.26.
Fifth Generation—Stardom Bound (3,862), Rail Trip (2,909), Scat Daddy (2,734), Haynesfield (2,719), Dangerous Midge (2,390), General Quarters (2,227), Capt. Candyman Can (2,192), Adieu (2,008), Lord Shanakill (2,008). Price Index 1.15, PPI 1.20.
Secretariat (not duplicated) showed up 22,345 times (about 32% of all 70,714 foals). He showed up most often in the fourth generation (14,826 times), then the fifth generation (4,964 times), then the third generation (2,390 times), then the second generation (165 times).
I am going to spare you the breakdowns by generations and positions within generations. The overall results were that those 22,345 foals sold for a gross of $1,630,038,109, an average of $72,949 (well above the overall average of $54,140), a maverage of 189.25 (well above the overall maverage of 163.11), and a Price Index of 1.16 (1.00 being average).
Included among those 22,345 foals were 878 stakes winners (3.93%, well above the overall figure of 3.41%). Those 878 stakes winners averaged 619 Performance Points apiece (just slightly above the overall average of 616). Taking both quantity and quality of stakes winners into account, that works out to a PPI (result) of 1.16.
So these 22,345 foals had a Price Index of 1.16 and a PPI (result) of 1.16. Their results were totally consistent with their prices. They were almost exactly fairly valued.
Now let us compare those results with the 1,857 foals with duplications of Secretariat between sire and dam (inbred). Those 1,857 foals sold for an average of $113,697 (compared to the overall average of $54,140 and $72,949 for unduplicated foals), a maverage of 232.52 (compared to the overall maverage of 163.11 and 189.25 for unduplicated foals), and a Price Index of 1.43 (compared to the overall average of 1.00 and 1.16 for unduplicated foals).
So the market clearly expected foals inbred to Secretariat to be better racehorses than foals with Secretariat (but not duplicated). The former 1,857 foals had a Price Index of 1.43. The latter 22,345 foals had a Price Index of 1.16.
In fact though the former 1,857 foals were slightly WORSE than the latter 22,345 foals. The former (inbred) had a PPI (result) of 1.15. The latter (not inbred) had a PPI of 1.16.
So inbreeding to Secretariat was decidedly NOT a good idea in retrospect. It produced negative results relative to its prices. Secretariat alone (not duplicated) produced results exactly in line with its prices.
As has been pointed out by others (including Dr. Rifat Hussain), the reason for this might be because Secretariat was NOT a very dominant sire.
Mr. Prospector, on the other hand, did have good results when inbred compared to not duplicated. The 35,766 foals with Mr. Prospector (not duplicated) improved from a price of 1.08 to a result of 1.11. The 5,825 foals with Mr. Prospector duplicated between sire and dam (inbred) improved from a price of 1.17 to a result of 1.31. The latter improvement is visibly better than the former improvement.
I commented on the Mr. Prospector results in my post on that subject: “I would not expect that to hold up as a general rule with all sires (or dams). Mr. Prospector is Mr. Prospector. Other sires could have exactly the opposite results. I hope to examine a few other sires similarly in the future and find out.”
I did examine Secretariat similarly and have found out that he had exactly the opposite results from Mr. Prospector. Inbreeding to the latter had pretty good results. Inbreeding to the former had pretty dismal results. That is pretty much par for the course. It all depends upon the sire and numerous other factors. Blanket statements about inbreeding are usually not very helpful.