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.