I received the following comment on my recent post, “You Learn Something New Every Day.”
David, as you know as well as anyone, genuinely positive proof of inbreeding success has long proven to be highly elusive and scant at best. Congratulation on coming up with this welcome addition to the latter.
I’ve always maintained that inbreeding should be practiced only through superior performing animals in an effort to filter out negative recessives. That’s why, despite a lack of evidence, I’ve half-heartedly clung to the notion that stakes-winning broodmares bearing the Rasmussen Factor might prove to be somewhat better producers.
Do you have any information on the quality of the inbred components of the 150 mares in your project?
Good work, as usual!
Listed below are the dozen stakes winners out of dams who were stakes winners and also inbred 3×3 or closer. Listed for each is its name, pedigree (sire–dam, broodmare sire), the inbreeding of the dam, sales info, and number of Performance Points earned (highest, best stakes winners, listed first).
Stakes Winners out of Dams Who Were Stakes Winners and Inbred 3×3 or Closer
Alpha Bettor (Alphabet Soup–Scatter Buy, Relaunch), 2×3 In Reality, 10T27,000, 1,825.
Al Qasr (Aptitude–Majestic Dy, Dynaformer), 3×3 His Majesty, 09Y8,500, 1,439.
Sweet Lulu (Mr. Greeley–Successful Outlook, Orientate), 3×3 Blushing Groom, 11Y270,000, 1,094.
Bear No Joke (It’s No Joke–Nithi, Wolf Power), 3×3 Round Table, 09Y73,136, 978.
Caminadora (More Than Ready–Stoneway, Storm Boot), 3×3 Mr. Prospector, 08Y150,000, 354.
Madrilena (Stormy Atlantic–Brush Over, Broad Brush), 3×3 Hoist the Flag, 08Y80,000, 321.
Max Me Out (Max’s Pal–Tambien Me Voy, Orono), 3×3 Arts and Letters, 08Y5,000, 266.
Hidinginplainsight (Elusive Quality–Hot Storm, Stormy Atlantic), 3×3 Seattle Slew, 11T80,000, 253.
Xaverian (Sky Mesa–Majestic Dy, Dynaformer), 3×3 His Majesty, 11W280,000, 242.
Lemon Splendor (Lemon Drop Kid–Karakorum Splendor, A. P Jet), 3×3 Mr. Prospector, 10Y100,000, 234.
Hunt Crossing (Corinthian–Silver Lace, Silver Deputy), 3x3x3 Mr. Prospector, 09W260,000, 210.
Elusive Noise (Elusive Quality–Noisette, Broad Brush), 3×3 Hoist the Flag, 09Y110,000, 170.
The first thing you might notice is that I have listed a dozen stakes winners but reported only 11 in my previous post. That is because I noticed a new one this morning, Xaverian, winner of the Raymond Earl Stakes yesterday at Gulfstream Park. So the results for the 150 foals are even slightly better than I previously reported.
You inquired as to the quality of the inbred components. That is why I listed the details of the inbreeding of the dam.
Three of the 12 stakes winners were out of dams inbred to Mr. Prospector. That is not exactly surprising. Nor is it out of proportion to the overall population. If all 12 dams were inbred to Mr. Prospector, then you might conclude that it was inbreeding to Mr. Prospector that did the trick, not the inbreeding in general. But that is not the case here.
Actually only 11 dams account for these 12 stakes winners. Majestic Dy shows up twice, as the dam of Al Qasr and of the aforementioned Xaverian. Majestic Dy was inbred 3×3 to His Majesty.
Only one other sire showed up twice. Both Brush Over (dam of Madrilena) and Noisette (dam of Elusive Noise) were inbred 3×3 to Hoist the Flag. Both were by Broad Brush, coincidentally or not.
The remaining five stakes winners were out of dams inbred to five different sires: In Reality, Blushing Groom, Round Table, Arts and Letters, and Seattle Slew. Of those five, Arts and Letters and Round Table are the hardest to find in the overall population. Mares inbred to Seattle Slew, Blushing Groom, and In Reality are not that hard to find.
So I hope that gives you a fair idea of the quality of the inbreeding components involved. Judging by the stakes winners, it is a representative sample, not dominated by one particular name. It is not surprising that Mr. Prospector shows up most often. It is a tad surprising that Northern Dancer did not show up at all.
You mentioned “the notion that stakes-winning broodmares bearing the Rasmussen Factor might prove to be somewhat better producers.” Not one of the 11 mares listed above was inbred 3×3 or closer to a female ancestor. I do remember seeing some of that description among the 150 foals, but I really can not say how many.
Nevertheless, I think that might be a really good project for future research. Do RF mares (especially stakes winners) make better producers? I think you would have to examine their degree of inbreeding as well (3×3 or closer, 4×4 or closer, the rest).
So anyway, Allison, I hope this post helps to answer your questions. And thank you for the idea for future research.