Raise A Native Sire Line

[stancaris]

Aethervox

Very interesting statistics. Of the 4 fillies that ran in the Belmont did any of them have the RAN sire line? I know Rags to Riches did not carry that line.

[stancaris]

Aethervox: I just realized why the fillies do not become part of this study. They don't receive the Y chromosome. Anyway I calculated the impact values for the RAN sire line in the Belmont from 1994-2011. The following data will show how this works:

There were 177 total starters and 60 of the 177 carried the RAN sire line. This translates into 33.9% of the starters with this lineage. Since there were 13 winners in the 18 years the percent of winners is 72.2%. The impact value for the RAN sire line is 2.13 (72.2% winners divided by 33.9% of the starters). This means that horses with the RAN sire line are winning the Belmont more than twice as often as is statistically expected over the last 18 years.

Since there were 117 entries that did not carry the RAN sire line, the percent of starters without this lineage of RAN is 68.4% (117 divided by 177 equals .661 or 66.1%. Since the percentage of winners NOT carrying the RAN sire line is 27.8% (5 divided by 18) the impact value for horses NOT carrying RAN in their sire line is .42 (27.8 divided by 66.1 equals .42). This means that horses not carrying RAN in their sire line are winning the Belmont 58% less often than statistical expectation.

There is a big swing from those with RAN in the sire line to those without RAN in the sire line--- 2.13 versus .42. The RAN sire line horses are outperforming their opportunities in the Belmont. From 33.9% starters we get 72.2 % winners. Similar stats with the RAN sire line are to be found in the Derby and Preakness as well. Although the above represents a small sample size, the fact that similar results are found in the Derby and Preakness lends support to the RAN sire line dominance theory.

[ElPrado]

No, they just don't run in the Belmont.

[stancaris]

Probably at any distance at any track female horses run slower than male horses in general. Fillies lack the Y chromosome whereas male horses carry the Y chromosome. This is evidence that performance is connected to or certainly dependent on the Y chromosome. Peformance genes may be located on other chromosomes but in order for them to produce their phenotypic effects (faster runners) these genes are dependent on the functioning Y chromosome.

[DDT]

Stan

How about geldings, they have their hormone generating, exclusively Y connected equipment removed, they still are pretty effective, wonder why? Do you think it could be because the Y is not necessary for superior performance. On the Derby card Groupie Doll set a track record for 7 furlongs, no horse male or female has run the distance in a race at Churchill Downs faster than her time. On average, males are stronger and faster, but there are exceptions without the Y coming into play.

DDT

[stancaris]

Yes, there are exceptions but in general males are stronger and faster and the only macroscopic difference between males and females regarding chromosomes is the presence of the Y in males and its absence in females.

Race horses carrying the Y chromosome are generally faster than females
Human male runners are generally faster than females.
Human male basketball players are generally much stronger and faster than females
Human male athletes in general are stronger and faster a foot than are females.

One can easily conclude that the basic reason for male superiority in horse racing is due to the Y chromosome. Genes on the Y produce maleness via hormones etc. and in conjunction with genes on other chromosomes probably are responsible for the greater musculature and racing performance in general that males consistently demonstrate.

Rachel Alexander, Zenyatta and some others are clearly exceptions to the above rule and exceptions prove the rule.

[DDT]

Stan

You can draw any conclusions you desire.

DDT

[stancaris]

DDT
I have presented evidence for the conclusion I made. Have you presented evidence to the contrary? Just because geneticists haven't found a gene on the y chromosome that dictates performance does not mean the y chromosome isn't important in developing strength and speed when in the presence of other genes on other chromosomes. Male horses are consistently faster than female horses. It's logical to assume the Y chromosome is related to this superiority.

[Bast]

It's logical to assume the Y chromosome is related to this superiority.

Not really. Racing performance is about more than strength.

[Pan Zareta]

Just because geneticists haven't found a gene on the y chromosome that dictates performance does not mean the y chromosome isn't important in developing strength and speed when in the presence of other genes on other chromosomes. Male horses are consistently faster than female horses. It's logical to assume the Y chromosome is related to this superiority.

Stan, the advantage for performance the Y chromosome gives males over females and, to a more limiited extent, geldings, is no big secret. Intact males produce 5-10X the amount of testosterone that females or neutered males do. Testosterone is an anabolic (building) steroid. Intact males usually have greater muscle mass. But testosterone is certainly not the only important mediator of muscle mass in the horse. Also, in an environment tolerant of supplementing nature's supply of anabolic steroids it's difficult to specifically quantify the advantages of the Y chromosome.

[DDT]

Stan

You are aware that all males from the Raise a Native, Northern Dancer and Bold Ruler lines have the same Y, since that is the case how can you explain the classic success of Mr. Prospector by simply saying it is the Y? If it was just the Y involved, under your logic, the Bold Ruler line and the Northern Dancer line should be responsible for additional classic winners.

DDT

[stancaris]

DDT
I believe it's the other genes that are present on other chromosomes found in Raise a Native that when combined with products dictated by the y chromosome have the affect of molding that superior sire line.

Does it really matter what causes the Ran sire line to be superior in all three triple crown races. It is what it is and the best place to start handicapping the Belmont is still with horses that have the Ran sire line.






chr

[Bast]

DDT
I believe it's the other genes that are present on other chromosomes found in Raise a Native that when combined with products dictated by the y chromosome have the affect of molding that superior sire line.

Does it really matter what causes the Ran sire line to be superior in all three triple crown races. It is what it is and the best place to start handicapping the Belmont is still with horses that have the Ran sire line.






chr

You're proposing that there is something unique to the Raise a Native y-chromosome that enhances ability to the point of dominance in American classic races. Raise a Native, Bold Ruler, and Northern Dancer ALL carried the very same y-chromosome and passed on that very same chromosome.

It matters. Science is not witchcraft.

[diomed]

You're proposing that there is something unique to the Raise a Native y-chromosome that enhances ability to the point of dominance in American classic races. Raise a Native, Bold Ruler, and Northern Dancer ALL carried the very same y-chromosome and passed on that very same chromosome.

It matters. Science is not witchcraft.

Yeah.Right? So, explain the success of the QH line of Special Effort as well. Same y, completely different breed and opposite of the spectrum in regards to classic distance ability but still the Raise A Native male line.

[stancaris]

I never proposed that at all. What I said was as follows: There are other genes on other chromosomes (autosomes) present in RAN that when in the presence of the products made by the y chromosome (hormones, proteins etc) mold and shape the RAN male line descendants into superior runners.