The La Troienne (LT) female line came up with an other stakes winner recently. That is Fair Grounds Handicap (G3) winner Chocolate Ride (Candy Ride–Heatherdoesntbluff, Old Trieste, sold for $260,000 as a yearling in 2011, 362 Performance Points).
That does not change the prices, but it does change the results (PPI) a little. The PPI (result) for the 1,108 foals with LT in the female line increases from 0.94 to 0.96 (0.944 to 0.958, if you want to get technical). All my previous posts on the LT female line among sales foal of 2008-2111 have been updated accordingly.
I came across Chocolate Ride as I was preparing some statistics on the female lines of the eight broodmares named in the title above (Almahmoud, Best in Show, Bourtai, Courtly Dee, Grey Flight, Knight’s Daughter, Missy Baba, and Rough Shod II, hereafter to be referred to as the ABBCGKMR group).
I chose these eight mares for examination because I thought their female lines had the best chance of selling for high prices and/or producing good results. These eight mares are renowned for their female lines and should be familiar to all readers. Listed below are the individual prices for this group.
Female Line Foals Average Maverage Price Index
Almahmoud 182 $50,592 165.53 1.07
Best in Show 104 $68,089 194.61 1.26
Bourtai 363 $69,108 190.21 1.24
Courtly Dee 81 $133,090 263.74 1.71
Grey Flight 230 $64,399 187.42 1.22
Knight’s Daughter 135 $67,539 187.57 1.22
Missy Baba 139 $106,360 250.34 1.63
Rough Shod II 166 $44,028 153.34 1.00
Totals 1,400 $70,128 192.47 1.25
The overall average for all 45,562 sales foals of 2008-2111 was $46,418. All eight mares exceeded that figure except for Rough Shod II ($44,028). The overall maverage for all sales foals of 2008-2111 was 154.0. All eight mares exceeded that figure except for Rough Shod II (153.34).
In my last post I speculated why most people accept the rise and fall of male lines but not of female lines. It appears to me that most buyers are giving up on the Rough Shod II female line, accepting that its time has come and gone.
Listed below are the 46 stakes winners in this ABBCGKMR group. Listed for each stakes winner are its name, pedigree (sire–dam, broodmare sire), sales information, and number of Performance Points it earned. They are listed in descending order of Performance Points under their individual female lines. Discussion resumes after the list below.
ALMAHMOUD
Eskendereya (Giant’s Causeway–Aldebaran Light, Seattle Slew), 08Y250,000, 1,526 Performance Points.
Calgary Cat (Cowtown Cat–Big Sink Star, A.P. Indy), 11Y40,000, 922.
Centralinteligence (Smarty Jones–Shootforthestars, Seattle Slew), 09Y90,000, 709.
Free World (Stormy Atlantic–Welcometotheworld, Woodman), 11Y35,000, 511.
Bond James Bond (Old Topper–Excitations, Jolie’s Halo), 09Y3,196, 506.
Awesome Act (Awesome Again–Houdini’s Honey, Mr. Prospector), 08Y240,000, 501.
Trac N Jam (El Corredor–Swan River, Hennessy), 09Y4,500, 260.
Up Jumps a Monster (Proud Citizen–Hail the Flag, Devils’ Bag), 11T25,000, 224.
Dr John’s (Consolidator–Well At the Top, Sadler’s Wells), 10Y5,000, 200.
BEST IN SHOW
Estrela Monarchos (Monarchos–Dance Fever, Fusaichi Pegasus), 11Y20,000, 1,100.
Pathfork (Distorted Humor–Visions of Clarity, Sadler’s Wells), 09Y230,000, 938.
Sensational Slam (Grand Slam–Roman Romance, San Romano), 09Y80,000, 954.
Can the Man (Into Mischief–Smolensk, Danzig), 11W40,000, 526.
BOURTAI
Jack Milton (War Front–Preserver, Forty Niner), 11Y100,000, 971.
Hoosier Kingdom (Repent–Aunt Pansy, Quiet American), 08T22,000, 758.
Peace Preserver (War Front–Preserver, Forty Niner), 10Y120,000, 682.
Millionresonswhy (Grand Slam–In Secure, A.P. Indy), 10Y115,000, 623.
Modern Cowboy (Tiznow–Western Woman, West by West), 08Y200,000, 589.
Giants Play (Giant’s Causeway–Playful Act, Sadler’s Wells), 08Y850,000, 459.
COURTLY DEE
Bet Seattle (Seattle Fitz–Second Bet, Belong to Me), 10Y1,500, 701.
Kindergarden Kid (Dynaformer–Amelia, Dixieland Band), 08Y500,000, 639.
Super Espresso (Medaglia d’Oro–Amizette, Forty Niner), 08Y1,100,000, 576.
GREY FLIGHT
Integrity (Hard Spun–Generosity, Unbridled’s Song), 11Y320,000, 346.
Verso a Verso (Circular Quay–Folk Art, Bertrando), 11Y4,000, 308.
KNIGHT’S DAUGHTER
Fed Biz (Giant’s Causeway–Spunoutacontrol, Wild Again), 10Y950,000, 1,770.
Macias (Purge–Azelna, Tropular), 08Y170,000, 625.
Nana Knows (Bold Tribute–Bold Threat, Bold Ruckus), 08Y2,000, 347.
Endless Chatter (First Samurai–Orate, A.P. Indy), 11Y77,000, 322.
Dream Nettie (Dixie Union–Tell It, Storm Cat), 08Y130,000, 246.
Hoarding (Elusive Quality–What a Treasure, Cadeaux Genereux), 11Y150,000, 170.
MISSY BABA
Havre de Grace (Saint Liam–Easter Bunnette, Carson City), 08Y380,000, 4,586.
Pleasant Prince (Indy King–Archduchess, Pleasant Tap), 08Y30,000, 1,096.
Bouquet Booth (Flower Alley–Toll Order, Loup Sauvage), 10T30,000, 827.
Sky Kingdom (Empire Maker–Sky Beam, Kingmambo), 09W180,000, 712.
Hot Summer (Malibu Moon–Summer Delight, Quiet American), 09Y180,000, 699.
Moon Philly (Malibu Moon–Astor Place, Deputy Minister), 10Y25,000, 655.
Lady Cohiba (Broken Vow–Cohiba Miss, Cat Thief), 10Y240,000, 632.
Otero (Honour and Glory–Divot Doll, Dance Brightly), 08Y14,000, 205.
Lord Sinclair (Mizzen Mast–Great Connection, Dayjur), 10Y52,000, 151.
ROUGH SHOD II
Effie Trinket (Freud–Maya’s Note, Editor’s Note), 11Y4,000, 985.
I Think So (Proud Citizen–Steve’s Little Girl, Catienus), 10W7,000, 453.
Millennia (Milwaukee Brew–Sararegal, Regal Classic), 08Y70,000, 440.
Musical Flair (Songandaprayer–Highwaytohappiness, Catienus), 11T47,000, 428.
Fusa Code (Fusaichi Pegasus–Lasting Code, Lost Code), 09Y55,000, 288.
Galloping Giraffe (Tapit–Fountain Square, Danzig Connection), 11Y130,000, 268.
Jubliant Girl (Henrythenavigator–Gamely Girl, Arch), 11Y270,000, 207.
Rough Shod II has a Price Index of 1.00 and a PPI (result) of 0.86 (see its seven stakes winners listed above from 166 foals). It appears that buyers were correct in giving up on Rough Shod II. Those 166 foals sold for prices very close to average and produced results about 14% below average.
The most expensive of the eight mares was Courtly Dee (average of $133.090, maverage of 263.74, and Price Index of 1.71). Based on its three stakes winners (listed above) from 81 foals, that works out to a PPI of 1.10, which does NOT compare favorably to its price of 1.71. Those 81 foals sold for prices about 71% above average and achieved results about 10% above average.
Missy Baba was not far behind Courtly Dee in terms of prices, and the other six were well behind those two. Missy Baba had an average of $106,360, a maverage of 250.34, and a Price Index of 1.63. Based on its nine stakes winners (listed above) from 139 foals, that works out to a PPI (result) of 3.21, which compares very favorably to its price of 1.63. These 139 foals sold for prices about 63% above average and achieved results about 221% above average.
Among those nine stakes winners was Horse of the Year Havre de Grace (4,586 Performance Points), which is the main reason Missy Baba fared so well. Without Havre de Grace this group’s PPI drops to 1.70, much more in line with its price of 1.63.
The third dam of Havre de Grace is Toll Booth. Five of the nine stakes winners listed under Missy Baba trace to Toll Booth. So does Belmont Stakes winner Tonalist (who is not part of this study group; he was a $195,000 RNA as a yearling in 2012). Most people think of Weekend Surprise as the best scion of Missy Baba in the female line. It appears that momentum has shifted in favor of Toll Booth over Weekend Surprise.
I did not list the individual results for the eight mares. You have their number of foals and their stakes winners listed. You can work it out from there if you are so inclined. I was more interested in the composite results for these eight mares than their individual results.
Listed below are the composite prices for these eight mares.
Mare Foals Average Maverage Price Index
Totals 1,400 $70,128 192.47 1.25
Listed below are the composite results for these eight mares. APPPSW stands for average Performance Points per stakes winner, a measure of the quality of stakes winners involved (661 being average).
Foals Stakes Winners % APPPSW PPI (Result)
1,400 46 3.29 688 1.06
The overall percentage of stakes winners from foals for all sales foals of 2008-2111 was 3.24%. This group is slightly better at 3.29%. It is also slightly better by APPPSW (688 to 661). So its overall PPI (result) is 1.06. That is not bad in absolute terms, but it is not good relative to its price of 1.25.
Let us compare this group to LT in terms of prices versus results.
Group Foals Price Index PPI (Result)
LT 1,108 1.15 0.96
ABBCGKMR 1,400 1.25 1.06
See the similarity???? ABBCGKMR has prices 0.10 higher than LT (1.25 to 1.15). It also has results 0.10 higher than LT (1.06 to 0.96). In both cases the difference between prices and results is 0.19. That is an approximate measure of how much each group was similarly overvalued.
SO LT is not the only female line that the market overvalues. The same is true of ABBCGKMR collectively. From which one might tentatively conclude that the market pays more attention to female lines than they really deserve.
A few more observations are in order. You see these eight names duplicated in pedigrees (Rasumussen Factor) rather frequently (particularly Almahmoud). One reason RF does not work is because you are duplicating names that have no positive value to them (at last not relative to their prices).
And at the risk of being repetitious, I will say again that female lines are purely a play on names in pedigrees. They have nothing to do with the racing/producing class of the sires and dams involved. This is what happens when you concentrate on names in pedigrees. You pay more than you should for the results you actually receive.
I am working on some other female lines as well. Perhaps I will post on them at a later date (unless you readers want to persuade me that enough is enough, that I have made my case against the obsession with female lines quite convincingly already).
Boojum's Bonanza 
So, with the availability of better data retrieval and the comparison data, it becomes obvious that female lines rise and fall like male ones, do you find also that female lines fall as quickly as male ones? Based anecdotally on my observations in the Polish Arabian I would say that quality persists longer in the dam line–so, how long does quality persist in the female lines of Thoroughbreds?
Entrancement with names in pedigrees is a distracting if not destructive influence in evaluating the potential of a horse on paper. Can we even do that on paper? Are there physical/genetic qualities (positive and negative) that need to be affixed to the names of individuals on a pedigree page for that pedigree to be worth taking the time to study?
I am becoming concerned with the tendency towards inbreeding increasing. Inbreeding need not be a bad thing, but when done with fragile/flawed individuals it is unwise. Dortmund is presently unbeaten and impressive, but he’s doing it while inbred 3 X 3 to Danzig (3 lifetime starts) and inbred to Northern to Dancer 4 X 4 X 4 X 5 on a 17 hand frame with one of those repetitions coming from Nureyev with his 3 lifetime starts and the last from Storm Bird with 6 lifetime starts. (May we reasonably say that Danzig~Nureyev~Storm Bird each bring a frailty to the genetic repast that is Dortmund, be it from the sire or dam?)
Male lines rise and fall (and sometimes drop right off a cliff). Female lines rise and decline. As I stated earlier, they almost never disappear. If you think about it that way, yes, I think it is safe to say that female lines do not deteriorate nearly as quickly as male lines are known to do. I am thinking about a project to determine how long female lines retain any degree of positivity.
Can we affix certain qualities to names in pedigrees???? You can try to do so but with no guarantee whatsoever of accuracy. Think of dosage. It strikes me as the epitome of human vanity to say that sire X always stands for characteristic Y.
Even full siblings are only 50% related on average. A sire always contributes 50% of the genes to a foal but never the SAME 50%. And no one yet knows which of those genes has anything to do with performance.
Think of this in human terms. I am one of four full siblings. The four of us are about as different as different can be (North, South, East, and West).
Boojum (South)
If there is a belief that one female family is better than another then in genetic terms you should be looking at them in terms of mitochondrial DNA haplogroup.
In that respect, there is no difference between La Troienne (1-x) and Courtly Dee (A4). They share the same (distant) female ancestor.
Similarly, descendants of Almahmoud (2-d), Best in Show(8-f) and Knight’s Daughter (2-f) are the same mitochondrial haplogroup.
Grey Flight (5-f) and Rough Shod II(5-h) are the same haplogroup so share the same distant ancestor.
Missy Baba (3-l) is a separate haplogroup to others, as is Bourtai (9-f).
The differences in performance of each of these female lines doesnt seem to have anything to do with the female line itself, rather the nuclear DNA, that is, the quality of the stallions that they are bred to.
So, you sort out the mDNA for the best mares, and discover what that mDNA has in common?
No. The mtDNA doesnt change. You inherit it from your mother and it is passed on female to female so the mtDNA La Troienne has is the same as any other branch of the #1 family and for that matter further back the A4 and 25 family. It doesnt make one mare special over another.
Read more here
http://performancegenetics.com/mitochondrial-dna-and-tregonwells-natural-barb/
Of course the mDNA does not change, but you would look for commonalities between either branches or families–this would of course be a very small part of what you looked at on the molecular level. Is the mDNA in successful mares like or unlike that of mares who could not run and could not produce?
You would also track down Utter Loser female lines and compare the mDNA there.in lines that do not produce winners, etc. Have they mutated? Are they different? The mDNA is a small chunk, a place to begin.
mDNA does change slowly. If it is ALL much the same, then it is only useful as an identifier–but even that is useful information.
Or maybe these names are no more important that any other name in the same generation.
Boojum
There are haplogroups and sub-haplogroup, that are broke down into haplotypes. Like the 2 and 3 family are from the D haplogroup, but are from different sub-haplogroups. The 2 family is from the D1/D3 haplogroup and the 3 family is from the D2 haplogroup, they have the same base family tree that has mutated at some point in time. Certain haplogroups have produced the most classic runners than others. I have been doing thoroughbred research for over 30 years and followed the female families as well as the sire line closely. Since the information has come out on the mtDNA it has opened up a lot more for me in my research. There are similar traits that the female lines pass down and if you can match them with the sire lines that will best complement their good traits and bring in what they need, you can produce quality runners and possibly produce that champion one hopes to produce.