Dosage, Chef-de-Race, etc.

Breeding Lineage Questions
21

For “broodmare dams”, I also

adjusted the numbers for grandfoals, this time by 2 (so a MSW grandfoal is worth 10 points,

not 5). The “broodmare dams” top 10 list is as follows:

  1. That’s Debatable - 14

(grand)foals - 5 racers - 0 MSP - 1 SW - 2 MSWs - 26 points
2.

Townsend Holly - 28 (grand)foals - 15 racers - 1 MSP - 0 SW - 2 MSWs - [b]22

points[/b]
3. Hollywood Queen - 16 (grand)foals - 6 racers - 0 MSP - 0 SW - 2

MSWs - 20 points
4. Midnight Magic - 8 (grand)foals - 2 racers

  • 0 MSP - 0 SW - 2 MSWs - 20 points
  1. Nation’s Pride - 14

(grand)foals - 6 racers - 0 MSP - 2 SW - 0 MSWs - 12 points
6.

Doubletake - 4 (grand)foals - 1 racers - 0 MSP - 0 SW - 1 MSWs - [b]10

points[/b]
7. Lady Temperance - 5 (grand)foals - 1 racers - 0 MSP - 0 SW - 1 MSWs

  • 10 points
  1. Lymerick - 11 (grand)foals - 3 racers - 0 MSP -

0 SW - 1 MSWs - 10 points
9. Second Chance - 2 (grand)foals - 1

racers - 0 MSP - 0 SW - 1 MSWs - 10 points
10.

Ifyoucouldseemenow - 17 (grand)foals - 3 racers - 1 MSP - 1 SW - 0 MSWs - [b]8

points[/b]

22

The overall combined total

(for dam score + broodmare dam score) top 14 (which gets 20+ points) list is:

  1. Townsend

Holly - 38 (grand)foals - 24 racers - 2 MSP - 1 SW - 6 MSWs - [b]46

points[/b]
2. That’s Debatable - 23 (grand)foals - 12 racers - 0 MSP - 1 SW - 5

MSWs - 41 points
3. Hollywood Queen - 27 (grand)foals - 14

racers - 1 MSP - 1 SW - 5 MSWs - 39 points
4. Midnight Magic -

16 (grand)foals - 8 racers - 0 MSP - 0 SW - 4 MSWs - [b]30

points[/b]
5. Nation’s Pride - 25 (grand)foals - 15 racers - 2 MSP - 4 SW - 2

MSWs - 30 points
6. Seeing Starz - 22 (grand)foals - 11 racers

  • 0 MSP - 1 SW - 4 MSWs - 26 points
  1. Miss Hayday - 21

(grand)foals - 12 racers - 1 MSP - 1 SW - 4 MSWs - 25 points
8.

Evening Flame - 24 (grand)foals - 10 racers - 0 MSP - 3 SW - 2 MSWs - [b]22

points[/b]
9. Highland Sorceress - 11 (grand)foals - 6 racers - 0 MSP - 2 SW - 3

MSWs - 21 points
10. Ifyoucouldseemenow - 27 (grand)foals - 11

racers - 1 MSP - 2 SW - 2 MSWs - 21 points
11. Lymerick - 19

(grand)foals - 7 racers - 1 MSP - 0 SW - 3 MSWs - 21 points
12.

Doubletake - 13 (grand)foals - 7 racers - 0 MSP - 0 SW - 3 MSWs - [b]20

points[/b]
13. Lady Temperance - 13 (grand)foals - 6 racers - 2 MSP - 1 SW - 2

MSWs - 20 points
14. Second Chance - 10 (grand)foals - 6 racers

  • 0 MSP - 0 SW - 3 MSWs - 20 points
23

I would personally

suggest this list of sires as our initial set of chef-de-race sires. Does anyone have any

comments/alterations/suggestions to make on that list?

24

I would suggest this list as our

initial Reines de Course list, as it is the list of the mares who made the top “10” both as

dams and as dams of dams.

Again, comments/suggestions/etc?

25

That depends on what

counts as “qualifies himself” :wink: Once we figure that out, sure, automating it should be

pretty straightforward.

26

Those look great and the

proportion of studs to mares seems right. :slight_smile: Looks like you really got into this :wink:

27

I guess…It was mainly just

playing around with sorting in Excel. :wink:

28

So I propose the following

breakdown of distances for the chef-de-race classifications.

Brilliant - 5-6f flat, 5-7.5f

SC
Intermediate - 6.5-8.5f flat, 8-10f SC
Classic - 9-11f flat, 10.5-13f SC
Solid -

11.5-13.5f flat, 13.5-15f SC
Professional - 14f+ flat, 15.5f+ SC

Comments/suggestions?

29

Yeah I’d say those are

about right. You wouldn’t want them any longer or shorter. I’m not too sure about what the

racing divisions are over there, but if you were in Aussie they’d

be:
1000-1200m
1300-1700m
1800-2200m
2300-2700m
2800+

I think maybe the brilliant

section might be able to go up 1/2 a furlong to 6.5F/1300m.

30

I’m trying to keep each

division at a ~2f range, and I figure if one division has to get short-changed it may as well

be the Brilliant division since that one would have the fewest races anyway.

31

Yeah fair enough… :slight_smile: This

looks cool. So the idea is that we have to basically breed a foal that has as many of these

horses as possible? :slight_smile: That’d be fun… Hard, but fun. Or, we can just stick to breeding

random champions. That’s fun too. This game is just way too much fun. I’m tired.

32

The distances look fine.

It’s the SC that that’s got me. Will you have seperate chefs for SC? or just use the SC

distances, and put a percentage designation for the number of jumpers and than the brilliant,

classic etc.

Now that you’ve found the base group you might want to consider all the

horses winners. It will give you a broader base to judge by.

I believe normal dosage is

figured through 5 generations so actually this whole thing should get better with age

:wink:

Jason the idea is to be able to choose breedings that will produce certain types of

runners, or at least have an idea of your colts predisposed strengths. You still have to

judge surface, and rate of maturity by looking at the horses racing foals, and the stud’s

own record. top breeders don’t just breed a lot of horses and get lucky. they plan their

breedings to match what they want the foals to become.

33

freakin’ AWESOME

Shanthi!

Yeah… cheqs got the right idea… I think it’ll definitely help with breeding

statistics… and it’s fun to crunch numbers anyway!

ROCKING MY WORLD!

Kerry

34

Hehe, yeah Kerry, it’s fun

to crunch numbers… Numbers of foals! :wink: I’m thinking next year I’m going to try and breed

some ‘specific’ foals… We’ll see…

35

I think we’ll just have one master list of chef-de-race sires, as

that’s the case in real life as well. For example, according to <a

href=‘http://www.equiery.com/archives/Steeplechase/LeadingSires.html’

target=‘_blank’>this site, Vaguely Noble is the #5 SC sire for 1991-1995, yet on the

chef-de-race he’s just in with the others as a C/P sire, with no designation for being a

jumping sire.

Also, take a horse like Highland Rogue. No one can dispute the fact that he

throws VERY nice jumpers, and yet a ton of his horses did well on the flat, as well (Highland

Raven, anyone?).

As you told Jason, the chef-de-race classification basically tells you a

distance range to aim for, you still have to judge surface - which includes steeplechase.

:wink:

As for your second statement, what do you mean? “All the horses winners” meaning

what?

36

Hey Kerry,

Other than as a cool eye-catcher, is there any

statistical merit to having a Reine-de-Course in a horse’s pedigree? (i.e. something like a

Dosage figure but incorporating the females as well) I haven’t seen one anywhere (other

than the GSV, which purposefully leaves out females because they’re too hard to calculate).

37

What I meant was not just

stakes winners/placers, but at least allowance winners. I’m willing to bet that our chef’s

will be predominately I or C or both just because that’s where most of the big money races

are. Start throwing in other winners you’ll get a better picture of where his foals run

best. With as small a pool of horses as we have I think broading the base might give a

clearer picture. I would love to have something besides the GOT ro judge my horses by.

38

Ah, yes. My basic plan for

figuring out chef-de-race classifications is to take every race their foals have run at and

probably weight them (so an allowance would be worth so much, a G1 stakes would be worth so

much, etc), and then figure out which classification(s) has the highest weighting. Earnings

will likely have nothing to do with it, since you have races that are the same

distance/grade, but have wildly different purses.

39

Reines De Course

unfortunately doesn’t have any merit in dosage, I think largely because the industry is so

“stallion-oriented”… It could also be due to the fact that mares normally have a maximum

of 9-14 offspring in their entire lives, whereas stallions have hundreds if not thousands…

People can become more familiar with a stallion simply by shear quantity of high quality

offspring… mares have a much harder time with that… obviously… :lol: In Dr. Roman’s

jargon, I think that defeats what he’s trying to accomplish in a way too, the familiarity

aspect: How many superstar broodmares can you name in comparison to stallions? Or better

yet… broodmares know for producing runners not stallions… ( so mares like Terlingua,

Gold Digger, Sharp Queen are really important, but only in terms of mothering fabulous

stallions (Storm Cat, Mr.Prospector, Kris.S respectively), so they ‘don’t count’) People

aren’t as familiar with them… ( and Somethingroyal is too easy…:stuck_out_tongue:)
Although, that

doesn’t keep you from doing it Shanthi! :smiley: My suggestion would be to treat them similarly

to stallions: classify them with the dosage system based on their offspring (it might not be

as accurate as a stallions would obviously)… the only issue is if you run across a Reines

De Course mare that is sired by a Chef De Race; it might give you screwy numbers… I’m only

speculating though, I don’t know for sure… I think the way they do it right now, is simply

that the more Reines De Course mares you have in a pedigree, the better bred the horse is…

It’s not a numerical system at all…

40

So here are the results, and

my tentative classifications, for our 4 chef-de-race stallions. I used the same point system

that we use for racing (broken down by maiden/allowance/stakes).

[b]Highland

Rogue - I/C[/b]
BRILLIANT:
367(27)-84(4)-58(4)-45(6)-41(4) -

627pts
INTERMEDIATE:
587(117)-120(14)-75(13)-79(10)-81(18) -

1598pts
CLASSIC:
278(113)-63(21)-43(12)-31(12)-41(15) -

1577pts
SOLID:
110(24)-21(1)-17(2)-15(2)-13(4) - 314pts
PROFESSIONAL:
39(5)-10-5-6-2 -

31pts

Seattle Slew - I
BRILLIANT:
65(3)-7-8(1)-8(1)-8 -

52pts
INTERMEDIATE:
87(19)-14(3)-11(3)-16(4)-17(6) -

362pts
CLASSIC:
34(7)-10(1)-8(3)-3(1)-2(1) - 177pts
SOLID:
22(6)-7-2(1)-6(4)-5(1) -

91pts
PROFESSIONAL:
13(2)-2-3(1)-1-0 - 27pts

[b]What’s It Worth -

I[/b]
BRILLIANT:
268(51)-56(10)-44(9)-43(4)-17(2) -

884pts
INTERMEDIATE:
432(127)-99(21)-62(17)-71(22)-52(18) -

2071pts
CLASSIC:
170(79)-43(14)-21(9)-31(19)-19(9) -

1210pts
SOLID:
88(25)-20(6)-19(6)-14(4)-13(3) -

519pts
PROFESSIONAL:
47(16)-11(5)-10(3)-6(1)-7(2) - 327pts

[b]Secretariat -

I[/b]
BRILLIANT:
95(10)-14(1)-17(2)-15(2)-12(1) -

169pts
INTERMEDIATE:
150(24)-18(3)-31(8)-23(2)-22(3) -

450pts
CLASSIC:
69(22)-9(1)-8(2)-14(3)-10(7) - 221pts
SOLID:
22(1)-2-4-1-4 -

20pts
PROFESSIONAL:
5-3-0-1-0 - 6pts