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.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s