Pedigree Query

I look at dosage numbers, not as absolutes, but mainly to see what they predict.

Today I looked at Safely Kept on this web site and found she has a DI of 31.00. I've never seen a DI in double digets and wondered if this is a mistake or if she really does have a DI = 31.00

griff

griff

It is correct. DI is determined by adding the speed components plus one half of the Classic points and then dividing that by the stamina components plus half the Classic points. Her dosage profile is 9-6-1-0-0. 9+6+.5 divided by .5 = 31.

DDT

In other words, don't cross her with a quarter horse.

I read somewhere that very few KY Derby winners have a DI >3.00

and here we have a 31.00. WOW

griff

The current (almost has been) version of Dosage was updated by Steven Roman and, like it's kissing cousin Nicking, has been disproven so many times as a reliable predictive tool that it's hard to say which of the two has the least credibility.

In theory, high Dosage Indeces (like 31.0) indicate speed, while lower one indicate stamina. In this case SAFELY KEPT's 31.0 DI is accurate, because she has no stamina chefs in her pedigree. Instances like her are easy to spot by simply looking at a five-generation pedigree, where only sprinters inhabit stallion positions.

But because Dosage COMPLETELY IGNORES ALL FEMALE CONTRIBUTIONS to pedigrees renders it as useless as NICKING PRODUCTS in pinpointing quality racing performance.

If this thread continues I will expand but am pressed for time at the moment. But I will leave with one example:

Champion sprinter KONA GOLD has a DI=1.31 and the great stayer JOHN HENRY has a DI=3.31.

Why shouldn't it continue? Inbreedings and Breakdowns has, and it's based on the same thing. The mare is totally ignored.

Dosage has become ever more irrelevant in the US with the demise or diminishment of races contested at a distance. Without them it's impossible to assess and assign Solid and Professional aptitudes.

As Sid Fernando has pointed out there has been a steady tilt toward shorter races. When Graded races first started in the 70s there were no Grade 1 races at six furlongs for older horses. Today there are fifteen Grade 1 races at six and seven furlongs for three and up -- eleven for males and four for older fillies plus an additional five Grade 1 races exclusively for 3yos at sprint distances.

In the 70s two races at 1 3/4 miles or beyond enjoyed Grade 1 status. Today the San Juan Capistrano is no longer a Grade 1 and the Jockey Club Gold Cup has been reduced from 2 miles to 10F.

The new genetic findings of the "speed gene" to me is an indicator of genetic dosage or so to speak. A horse that carries the CC allele will never get a Belmont win. I really can't wait for science to find more genetic information towards performance.

diomed wrote: A horse that carries the CC allele will never get a Belmont win.

You may be right, but according to one of the speakers at the 2010 Pedigree & Genetics symposium several horses with two copies of the 'sprint' allele (C/C) have won the KY Derby.

Did they mention which horses won the Derby with C/C?

Pan Zareta wrote:

diomed wrote: A horse that carries the CC allele will never get a Belmont win.

You may be right, but according to one of the speakers at the 2010 Pedigree & Genetics symposium several horses with two copies of the 'sprint' allele (C/C) have won the KY Derby.

hi Pan,

This info used to be available..........in the past......

M.m. would know,

Regard's,

Siegy,

I'm in the middle of reading Abram Hewitt's Sire Lines. It's rather interesting how many speedballs and super fragile horses have now come down as stamina and soundness influences.

One suggestion that he makes, which is what the National Hunt people do as a formula, is to put speed on top of stamina and soundness and breed out the fragility over time. He also mentions that in the 1960s there were only four sprint stakes for horses over four. Now they predominate the racing for that age group in the US.

What do you want? If you breed for two year old development, you get two year old race horses. That doesn't mean they will stay sound.
However, blaming it on a particular sire line isn't the answer. The main problem is that the breeders are now focusing on two year old sales with horses not bred for early speed. 17 hand + 2 year olds don't work out too well. The buyers look at them and drool over how big they are. The trainers let them go ahead and buy them, paying big bucks for horses that need more time than they are going to get with present day racing. All the money is focused on 2 year olds. "Get yer money back fast!" So, the trainers have vets give them every drug known to make them grow. If they live past 2, their knees are already dissolved by the drugs. By the time they are 4 they look like Austrian coach horses, which were up to 21 hands. (Look it up, I'm not exaggerating. Kladrubers.) Imagine that coming into a breeding shed at you, snorting and bugling.

Amen, El Prado! You voiced my sentiments much better than I could have.

At the basis of this market-driven quest for Warp Speed is greed. Greed with no patience. Greed with no patience fueled by kickbacks and no concern for the animals or the sport. Just quick bucks.

Barcaldine

What non-speed, non-fashion sires did you breed to this year"

DDT