- This topic has 86 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 23 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Steve, you weren’t trying to be patronising in your last post, were you? And here’s me thinking I do understand the principle, what part don’t you think I understand?
One of the points I was getting at is very fundamental one. That being being dosage will reflect speed/stamina etc. only where there are chef de race sires in that particular horse’s pedigree. I understand that is at the very heart of dosage. My debating point is; with so few chef de race sires, is it right (or fair) to totally ignore any other influence. As an example, who’s to say that Val De L’Orne is not an influence for stamina, whilst, say, Chaucer is? It’s very subjective. I think I’d be more comfortable if there were a larger pool of chef de race sires. What are your views on that issue?
To reiterate another of my points. When a horse gains an unhealthy pertcentage of dosage points from one half of his/her pedigree (& I accept it could be either side). It’s not unreasonable to suggest that that half of the pedigree is going to be disproportionately represented in his final dosage figures. I accept this is the norm for dosage calculations, but I am not totally at ease with this. Which brings me back to Hawk Wing, in his case you could agrue his dosage represents his sires side OK, but is not that representative of his dams side. His dosage, whilst being accurate, ignores stamina infuences that a pedigree analylsis would not.
After all that, I am a great supporter of the dosage theory, but I’m not adverse to seeking, & bolting on additional information where I feel it may help.
Colin, I assure you that I am not in the least attempting to be condescending. Just answering what you appeared to be saying. However, as you now seem to acknowledge that there isn’t an in built bias against the damside we can continue.
Your point now appears to be that whatever side the disproportion appears to be on makes the analysis uneven. This is to misunderstand the very basis of Dosage, which intentionally does not acknowledge unprepotent influences. This is what Dosage is about, identifying significant influence and weeding out that which is not.
On your point about sires being added to the list, it is both a strength and a weakness of the system that sires cannot become chefs-de-race until there is enough evidence of aptitudinal prepotence. As a means of addressing the weakness aspect of this there is a secondary list of active sires listed under five stamina characteristic categories (dominant speed, intermediate speed, balanced speed, intermediate stamina and dominant stamina, which correspond to the five chef-de-race categories of Brilliant, Intermediate, Classic, Solid and Professional. While the stallions on the secondary list are not chefs-de-race they could be promoted to the main list eventually (but not necessarily). The list is maintained as a guide to typical performance traits for the progeny of stallions and is often useful in cases where chefs-de-race do not appear close up in the pedigree. A successful or a prolific stallion is not necessarily a prepotent one. New stallions are continually considered for inclusion, but they need to show incontrovertible evidence of aptitudinal prepotence to be added. The pool can neither be too small or too large, but it MUST only include such qualifying stallions to be of use.
(Edited by Steve M at 5:36 pm on May 31, 2002)
Just to add my contribution – not to the dosage debate in general but with regards to Hawk Wing in particular…
Although Val de L’Orne seems to be a stamina influence as a sire, as a damsire he doesn’t seem to have a particularly strong influence on his grandchildren.  Interestingly, most of the group, grade and listed performers produced from a cross with the Mr Prospector line have been best over distances typical to Mr P sires – suggesting (very simply!) that the stamina genes donated from V de L’O are ‘overruled’ by the speed genes from the Mr P side.
I imagine this is a case of a sire (as a damsire) not showing the prepotence Steve describes as necessary to be a chef-de-race stallion.
However, the one black-type performing exception to the Mr P-V de L’O cross won over 1m5f – so there is always hope for Hawk Wing!
Steve, I think when Colin talks of the dam line being omitted, he is meaning the tail female line, as in the Bobinski/Bruce Lowe family part of the pedigree, which is responsible for the mitochondrial dna.  I agree this is the aspect of pedigree research missing from dosage theory but I suppose that is what makes it different from other theories.
:wave: ÂÂÂ
Hi Steve, it’s not a case of me misunderstanding the dosage theory….it’s just a case of me politely questioning it. The theory may be set in stone, but it’s principles are surely not above debate, are they? The point about the number & quality of chef de race sires is very fair one. The secondary lists seem do seem by far the best direction to follow. Btw, do you intend to use the secondary lists in any way?
Sal, don’t start on Mr.Prospector crosses or I will end up out of my depth! :confused:<br>At the risk of repeating myself, my comments were not just about HW’s tail female line. It was much a more general point, that probably applies to 100’s & 1000’s of poor horses, who just don’t pick up many dosage points from certain parts of their pedigree due to lack of qualifying sires. I know, I know…..that’s what dosage is all about. ;)
<br>
Now I relent and admit it is a disappointing Derby field. I can imagine about seven runners and the fact that only six trainers are represented is a joke. I remember in 1994 and 1995 when the fields were big and it was amazing to watch. What an uncompetitive Classic. The horses may be good top class decent ones who go on to do well afterwards but you can’t help but be disappointed.
Hmmmm, small field – lack of pace? Will Moon Ballad lead? That’s probably the most intriguing aspect of the race. I will make the most of it though, and the Oaks looks a cracking race.
It’s getting a bit of a circular discussion Colin. I can only repeat that it is the point of Dosage to deselect any influence which has not proven prepotence, based on Vuillier’s/Varola’s principle that thoroughbred evolution proceeds through the influence of a much smaller number of prepotent stallions in any era than is widely appreciated.
You need to take this on board to appreciate what the system is telling you. Of course the premise can be questioned and you can choose to ignore its findings as you can with anything in life.<br>
(Edited by Steve M at 6:17 pm on June 3, 2002)
Talking to a few at Naas races today and all the talk was of the Derby horses from Ballydoyle. Seemingly it’s Aidan O’Brien himself who is very keen to go for the Derby with Hawk Wing. It was left to him where to go straight after the Guineas.The plan after the Derby is possibly the Irish Derby or straight back to shorter distances if he does’nt stay the Derby trip. But there is huge confidence behind this horse.While its said every year that Coolmore has a great horse Giant’s Causeway and Galileo to name just two there is a belief this horse is capable of something very special this year i.e Breeder’s Cup. I find it hard to believe but from everything I have heard that it could be that Hawk Wing will start closer to odds on rather than against such is the faith Aidan has in the horse.<br> High Chaparral is also going very well. The French Derby was under serious consideration for him last week but he worked so well last Tues or Wed that it was decided that he would be a good back up should anything go wrong. Mentally he is much the sharper after his last run and is looking a picture. He’ll go on good fast ground but very firm ground would be a worry on a track like Epsom. He will have the King George as his target later on all going well now that Milan is injured.Only if there is a deluge of rain will Kinane ride him. <br> Looking ahead to Ascot Marino Marini(who could end up in the Breeders Cup Juvenile by the end of the year) and Spartacus(who’s form is working out exceptionally well) are considered the top two 2 year olds at this stage likely to go.
Here is some analysis of the thirteen horses left in Saturday’s Derby.
As stamina tends to be one of the greatest factors in identifying potential Derby winners, the first part of my analysis involved looking at the form shown by all the runners (including race readers’ comments) and guesstimating what I imagine their most effective distance range will be. This is by no means an exact science, but I have found that establishing this type of guideline can prove invaluable. In essence, what I am saying is that within this range, I would be reasonably confident that the horse will be able to show its ability, based on what he has already achieved.
Listed from most guesstimated stamina to least…
FIGHT YOUR CORNER (10f:12f)<br>HIGH CHAPARRAL (9f:12f)<br>{ COSHOCTON (9f:11f)  <br>{ THOLJANAH (9f:11f)
FRANKIES DREAM (9f:10f)<br>BANDARI (8f:10f)<br>{ MOON BALLAD (8f:9f)<br>{ JELANI (8f:9f)<br>{ LOUISVILLE (8f:9f)<br>{ WHERE OR WHEN (8f:9f)<br>> HAWK WING (7f:9f)<br>> DUBAI DESTINATION (7f:9f)<br>NAHEEF (7f:8f)
<br>Secondly, and still on stamina, based purely on Dosage information fed through my spreadsheet "shredder", these are my ratings for each runner, along with what (my computer’s interpretation of) the Dosage indices suggest would be their most effective distance.
Listed from greatest stamina to least…
HIGH CHAPARRAL – 105.8 (10.2f:12.4f)<br>THOLJANAH – 104.9 (11.0f:13.1f)<br>JELANI – 100.9 (9.9f:12.5f)<br>FIGHT YOUR CORNER – 99.4 (9.8f:12.0f)
MOON BALLAD – 92.8 (8.9f:11.1f)<br>COSHOCTON – 86.0 (8.2f:10.2f)<br>NAHEEF – 76.8 (7.8f:9.9f)<br>WHERE OR WHEN – 76.4 (8.0f:10.2f)<br>HAWK WING – 74.5 (7.5f:9.8f)<br>FRANKIES DREAM – 59.1 (7.0f:9.0f)<br>DUBAI DESTINATION – 58.1 (6.8f:8.9f)<br>LOUISVILLE – 56.5 (6.9f:9.0f)<br>BANDARI – 37.0 (6.4f:8.4f)
<br>Finally, I ranked each horse on the level of form shown, based upon it’s highest topspeed ratings.
Listed from best proven form downwards…
HAWK WING<br>HIGH CHAPARRAL<br>NAHEEF<br>WHERE OR WHEN
BANDARI<br>MOON BALLAD<br>FIGHT YOUR CORNER<br>DUBAI DESTINATION<br>THOLJANAH<br>JELANI<br>COSHOCTON<br>FRANKIES DREAM<br>LOUISVILLE
<br>By combining each prospective runner’s rankings according to each of the above three ‘measures’, I have ended up with a final ‘order’ for the race. This should now take into account the likelihood of the horses getting the trip and the level of their proven ability, I hope. (The distances do reflect the relative combined rankings quite closely, but are included primarily to keep me amused!)
<br> 1     HIGH CHAPARRAL
2  3l  FIGHT YOUR CORNER
3  1l  THOLJANAH
4  3l  MOON BALLAD
5  nk  WHERE OR WHEN
6  2l  COSHOCTON
7  dht  JELANI
8  hd  HAWK WING
9  4l  NAHEEF
10  2l  BANDARI
11  7l  FRANKIES DREAM
12  6l  DUBAI DESTINATION
13  6l  LOUISVILLE
(Edited by non vintage at 12:16 am on June 4, 2002)
Interesting stuff NV. And it doesn’t sound off the mark either, although I think Toljanah will need the run.
Thanks Mesh!
I also think that Tholjanah may need the run, although the yard seem to have made a more solid start than usual this year.
Having flicked through some of the earlier posts on this thread, I see that Steve M appears to have reached almost exactly the same conclusion, which is quite interesting.
I almost feel confident for once (probably the kiss of death)! We should be guaranteed a half-decent price now that Mick Kinane has opted for Hawk Wing, so roll on Saturday!
For those of you who may have seen the rather flawed critique of my article on bettingmarket.com this is my response (I have sent it to them but have no indication as to whether they will publish it). I am posting my response here so that no one can accuse me of being wise after the event. Thanks for your indulgence.
A flawed review of a useful system
I am responding to the review of my article Hawk at full stretch for Derby now to avoid the criticism of being wise after the event. Had the reviewer bothered to read my article he/she would have spotted that Bandari was excluded on the grounds that his points total (16) was too low for an accurate reading. This also applies to previous winners Henbit (12) and Dr Devious (14, who I also drew attention to in my article).
Had the reviewer also been paying attention he/she would have seen that the Dosage figures do in fact give Hawk Wing a chance of getting the 12 furlongs, although there are others in the race that are better suited to the task. Indeed I had pointed out that previous winners of the Derby had quite similar profiles. The main objection to Hawk Wing is that I believe his physique his unsuited to Epsom. I went as far as to suggest the Irish Derby (also run over 12 furlongs) as a more appropriate (although not ideal) alternative.
Turning to the more specific criticism of Dosage, it is a common misconception that the system does not take account of the dam’s side – it does through qualifying chef-de-race sires that are present in that half of the pedigree. The reasons females are excluded as individuals are: 1) characteristics transmitted by a given individual are not necessarily those they possessed as a racehorse, 2) There is not enough data to make any assumption based of the performance of a mare’s progeny – even the most successful mare may have only a small handful of offspring that make it to the racecourse in their lifetime, whereas a stallion may have more than 1,000 individuals racing over less than a decade. It is clearly unsafe to base any claim of aptitudinal prepotence on such a relatively tiny progeny sample as a mare can offer and unwise to base it on an individual’s racecourse performances.
It is both a strength and a weakness of the Dosage system that sires cannot become chefs-de-race until there is enough evidence of aptitudinal prepotence. As a means of addressing the weakness aspect of this there is a secondary list of active sires listed under five stamina characteristic categories (dominant speed, intermediate speed, balanced speed, intermediate stamina and dominant stamina), which correspond to the five chef-de-race categories of Brilliant, Intermediate, Classic, Solid and Professional. While the stallions on the secondary list are not chefs-de-race they could be promoted to the main list eventually (but not necessarily). The list is maintained as a guide to typical performance traits for the progeny of stallions and is often useful in cases where chefs-de-race do not appear close up in the pedigree. New stallions are continually considered for inclusion, but they need to show incontrovertible evidence of aptitudinal prepotence to be added. The pool must only include such qualifying stallions to be of use.
Exceptions aside for the moment, the ‘proper’ type for the Derby tends toward a Dosage Index of 1.00 and a CD of zero, which represents an ideal balance of speed with stamina. Past top performers who conform to this blueprint for 12 furlongs include last year’s Derby winner Galileo DI 1.11, CD +0.28, dual-Derby winner Montjeu (like Galileo by Sadler’s Wells) DI 0.89, CD +0.08, and Epsom Derby winners Lammtarra (by Nijinsky) DI 1.15, CD +0.30 and Generous (by Caerleon) DI 0.69, CD 0.00.
Nijinsky proved effective at a range of distances. In the case of Benny The Dip and Erhaab, both appeared not to have the credentials to compete effectively at middle distances. However, you should always temper strict interpretation of the headline figures with common sense and look at possible “off-Dosageâ€ÂÂ
Thanks for posting your findings non-vintage.
The most likely result of the race by my calculations (taking everything into consideration), is:
1) High Chaparral<br>2) Fight Your Corner (narrowly preferred to Bandari)<br>3) Moon Ballad (narrowly preferred to Naheef)
With Hawk Wing as the bird in the ointment.
Dubai Destination is almost certain to be dropped (the least likely to get the trip). Tholjanah is a doubtful starter but must be considered a strong candidate for the St Leger, along with Fight Your Corner.<br>
My Derby 1-2-3-4
1st Bandari<br>2nd Naheef<br>3rd Fight Your Corner<br>4th High Chapparal
My Oaks 1-2-3-4
1st Kazzia<br>2nd Esloob<br>3rd Islington<br>4th Shadow Dancing
Happy punting everyone!
I had a dream about a horse in white/light colours winning a big race by a very short head – Islington perhaps? (or is it just racing on the brain???!)
It’s been raining hard all day in Tooting (6 miles from Epsom).
I laid Hawk Wing quite heavily on the basis he wouldn’t even turn up on Saturday. I’ve been sweating on it a bit lately – a bit relieved my rain dance seems to be working!
Esc – you should be surprised I didn’t put Naheef in 1st!
Kazzia will win the Oaks (soft ground/trip) no problem.(Famous last words!)
WOULD Naheef go on soft ground? I don’t actually know.
Hawk Wing simply can’t win with all this rain falling now, and so High Chapparal might move up a place or two in my Derby order. I didn’t know it was raining so hard near Epsom – it’s been sunny in Cornwall for a few days now.
Hmmm Godolphin are hardly in terrible form and Imtiyaz and Shami who have recently run are not by any means their best horses (Loder is discounted here as he just has the un-ready 2yos). They won the Dante and the 1000 Guineas and some recent Group events in France. They probably have something up their sleeve as usual and the horses are pinging on the gallops. Coronation Cup: Marienbard AND Kutub will like rain, but Marienbard may not handle the track. If it’s sunny and windy watch out for sticky conditions (i.e Hawk Wing will have it all to do on the staying front!)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.