Pedigree Query

how much stock do breeders put in the available theories of dosage and GSV?

I read an article a long time ago, it said use nicks with common sense. When I look at nicks I look at the DI and the CD and Q rating. I don't care if it is a F nick if the CD & Di are good. After you review and spend hours on the computer nicking and studying throw it all in the trash & breed something that ran to something that ran and you will probably be a success. Speed to speed distance to distance.

None.

Yeah, for most people - none.

I don't rest my hat on those.. what is the expression? There are lies, there are damned lies, and then there are statistics.

I don't believe race horse breeding can be quantified into neat little equations and numbers in that way. How many great horses out there started with poor dosages? The dosage is very subjective, and based only on the sires in a pedigree. Ditto for nicks. If you have a GREAT broodmare in the line, she doesn't count. The whole tail female of the sire and the dam do not count. It is an incomplete theorem.

Someone on another thread summed it pretty well when he or she said these things are tie breakers when two stallions have all the other more important factors. When you think about the misuse of all of these tools its kind of funny and sad. I know people who planned matings only on nicks or dosage. Look at dosage, it only tells us how far a horse should run not how fast that horse will run.

I'll mildly disagree with what people are saying this thread. I think breeding CAN be quantified and that these theories CAN be tested for effectiveness. Unfortunately, the data needed for us to test them for their effectiveness in predicting breeding success is often either unavailable or prohibitively expensive for most of us, and many in the industry don't understand (or have a vested interest in ignoring) proper statistical testing methods. The end result is that most either ignore the statistics or are left to guess which ones 'work' and which don't. Anyone who's seen the changes in baseball analysis over the past 25 years should have a pretty good idea of what can happen once the statistics are evaluated properly.

One one end of the spectrum is a dart board. A dart doesn't care about inbreeding, GSV, genetics. If the dart hits Stallion "x", and its inbred 2x2 to Storm Cat, so be it. On the other side is mountains of research (pedigree analysis, physical matchups, nicking and historical data, GSV, speed matching, heart scoring, linebreeding, stride analysis and all the general genetic influences you can study forever). Personally, a good review would go something like this:

• Mares race record (if available).
• Mares produce record (if available).
• Mares conformation/physicals.

Once that picture is established:

• Sires produce record (if available).
• Sires conformation/physicals.
• Price
• Nicking (past successes based on similar breeding pattern).
• A good look at the linebreeding/inbreeding patterns
• All the other stuff

After that (which I believe is the fun part), it comes down to the single most important thing for me: Feel. That's really it. Can't explain it much better than that... it's feel (and hope!). Oh, and asking you people on the board, and various other friends

""""Oh if it was as easy as adding numbers....It's much much more"""

Just keep in mind that these studies and numbers are based on past history so it's simply a gauge as to what your results MAY BE.....

Des wrote:""""Oh if it was as easy as adding numbers....It's much much more"""

Just keep in mind that these studies and numbers are based on past history so it's simply a gauge as to what your results MAY BE.....

This is exactly right. However, what's frustrating is that there has been very little research done on how well past history using various statistics has tended to predict future results in the thoroughbred industry .

After that (which I believe is the fun part), it comes down to the single most important thing for me: Feel. That's really it. Can't explain it much better than that... it's feel (and hope!). Oh, and asking you people on the board, and various other friends

dray - you've hit the nail on the head. I look at so many variables (conformation - visual and EQUIX, inbreeding/linebreeding, professional analysts, nicks, X Factors, Dosage, Ken McLean's "Genetic Giants," free advice from people who share their opinions on various forums, breeding books, etc., etc., etc.) but when it comes down to decision time when you put your money on the line, it has to FEEL Right! Breeding is an art/science combination and the "feel" is the art part.[/i][/b]

I'm with Dray and Merse. For me it's really just another form of handicapping and placing a bet. I consider all angles and then finally try to buy buy a season at a price.