Betting Pedigrees

[King Ritchie]

Please give me your general thoughts on betting horses based on pedigree.

[46zilzal]

Please give me your general thoughts on betting horses based on pedigree.
A losing proposition: FULL brothers and sisters to Northern Dancer, Damascus, Secretariat, Ribot and Alysheba were no where.

Genetics is a crap shoot: nothing more.

Cahill Road was a good brother to Unbridled but the odds are stacked far far against the sibling being anything close so why would selections based upon anything other than, the far reaching and oft OVERPLAYED notion of turf breeding, positive.

One of the very few things I agree with D. Wayne Lukas: IT IS THE INDIVIDUAL not the blood lines.

[tleusin]

Pedeigree has been useful for me when considering a horse trying something for the first time. This is basically limited to turf, maiden and off tracks. Have many large scores from this data. After a horse has tried something twice and failed, I disregard pedigree.

[GaryG]

Note the AWD of the sire and dam's sire. If they are under 7F the horse is likely to prefer sprints. Watch for those with distance breeding (7.5F+) to do well when stretching out off a couple of sprint preps.

[stu]

Please give me your general thoughts on betting horses based on pedigree.

Take a look at Harrison et. al discussion of the Femail-Tail Line

http://thoroughbredgenetics.com/Mitochondrion%206(2006)%2053-66.pdf

The article is a scientific treatise on the impact of mitochodrial DNA on racing stamina. While betting is not discussed in any detail, the text motivates the idea that the dam's stamina is passed onto the foal.

[dutchboy]

I have read a few pedigree/breeding articles that relate the hoof size of a horse to the ability to run on turf and different types of dirt. If you know the type of hoof of the dam and sire it should give you an idea how a horse may perform on turf of different types of dirt. I think the Bloodhorse mag's website had an article before each of last years triple crown races that did pretty good eliminating horses with the wrong type of feet. But I guess anything can be written.

Might be a database project for someone with a LOT of spare time.

[njcurveball]

Please give me your general thoughts on betting horses based on pedigree.


The PED rating in HTR is a rich source of longshots and profitable in many situations. :ThmbUp:

[ranchwest]

The percentage of successful horses is very low, even among those with top bloodlines.

However, the percentage of successful horses with poor bloodlines is much lower.

[1st time lasix]

The percentage of successful horses is very low, even among those with top bloodlines.

However, the percentage of successful horses with poor bloodlines is much lower. Well said....ignore breeding in two and three year olds at your peril. Particularly in madin and allowance conditions. Generally claimers have little real quality talent or expectations from the connections.

[46zilzal]

Well said....ignore breeding in two and three year olds at your peril. Particularly in madin and allowance conditions. Generally claimers have little real quality talent or expectations from the connections.
Babies are just learning to run regardless of their pedigree. When they are ready, they will tell you by improving early speed without regard to what womb they were expelled from.

[46zilzal]

This is the same tired argument (association evaluation: what CLASS someone else thought they deserved to be in) versus what the INDIVIDUAL horse, student, athlete can do, regardless if that student went to Harvard or Alabama State.

Great athletes come from little schools and do well because there is too much cerebration going on ;"If that one is so good, what is he doing there?"

You never know until they go to the gate. My friend had a cheap young gelding (smallish and almost died as a yearling with crooked legs). Not really knowing his potential, he ran him in a 5K Maiden claimer and he won by 12. This little guy eventually ran in the biggest three year old race here and won for fun before winning all over the U.S.

The individual trumps the pedigree often.

[46zilzal]

1995 VERNON INVADER,g 5 39 14 5 3 450,212 5.10 57,948
DP = 5-9-12-0-2 DI = 2.50 CD = 0.54
THIS little guy was amazing and he almost lost him for $5,000.

[Jeff P]

Genetics is a crap shoot: nothing more.I very rarely pay attention to pedigree in my own approach. However, implying that pedigree based approaches are of little or no merit... well IMHO nothing could be further from the truth.

I have a customer whose entire approach is based on pedigree. He has spent a large amount of time (translation: work) researching out specific situations where the offspring of certain sires and dams excel. He follows one circuit... SOCAL. He specializes in horses stretching out and trying the turf early in their careers. He gets an average of just 4-5 plays in a typical race week. He really knows his stuff, has great discipline, and these are the only plays he makes. And because of that discipline he is one of the most successful bettors that I know.

Believe me when I say this: There IS something to this pedigree thing.


-jp

.

[46zilzal]

I very rarely pay attention to pedigree in my own approach. However, implying that pedigree based approaches are of little or no merit... well IMHO nothing could be further from the truth.


What is a crap shoot? It is a description of something having a wildly variable outcome, not that the outcome is bad or totally unpredictable.

It is in all the dictionaries,
crapshoot \ˈkrap-ˌshüt\
: something (as a business venture) that has an unpredictable outcome

[vegasone]

How true Jeff. Friend in SoCal also does the same. He buys all the breeding books(now available on DVD) and spends a lot of time researching breeding. Very helpful with first time starters , etc. It may not be a good standalone method for most people but is very helpful in exotics.

[46zilzal]

Ever hear of Rosselina or Romagnola?

How about Arctic Dream, Northern Native, Northern Ace, or Transatlantic?

First full siblings to one of the finest horses in Europe: Ribot and the second to the best sire of the twentieth century, Northern Dancer.

Very hard to know which genes meisosis will deliver to that sperm or egg.

Breed the best to the best and HOPE for the best. Saying wouldn't be around if it were not strongly held onto.

Mr. Prospector headed the list of sires for years and a full 25-30% of his offspring never started.....

[russowen77]

I get a lot of my profit from my pedigree work. Not only first time starters and turf either. It is especially helpful with juvies as pedigree is more important than the trainer here. Hidden turf sires can give up some big profits also first time out.

I think it really comes into its on when a horse is trying a new distance, especially with stakes horses. Just because a horse has one ONCE at a distance does not mean he is suited for it or can win at that distance if the situation is not ideal. Lawyer Ron in the BC is an example. He made the 1 1/4 once but it was a f too long for most races.

It can also really help in non first time starters in maidens. I know that I have several sires that do well for me because they normally take 3-4 races to score and you can get some nice odds often if you are used to their patterns. Point Given is a good example for me. They can win first out but usually take a few races.

If a well bred horse was sold for cheap at one of the sales you know that you know have some confirmation issues. They all do but these would be obvious. Hey, there have been some fine racehorses that one would not want to take to the shed.

I'll take a well bred animal about any day if there is any question between two similar animals. Especially at the outer reaches of the distance they can make.

[ddog]

puts me off more than I get on.
I must not have it down on the ped stuff.

I will take in a PED call on an unproven animal the higher odds unless one is really hammered down , then i will normally pass.
Other chances out there.

[Tom]

Contrary to what 46 says, the HTR pedigree ratings are extremley valuable and lead to many winners. The proof is in the pudding - do you wager off your opinions or your data?

The PPX screen shows you the horse's ped rating based on today's conditons as opposes to the last race or two, depending how many races cards you load.
A horse going 9 furlongs on the grass today might show a pred rating of 645 while last out, it was a 7 furlong dirt race and the pedigree ratins was 324.

The point is, you need to know what you are talking about before your talk about it. Pedigree to 46 is not what pedigree is to HTR users. Apples and oranges.

So King, depending on how you use pedigree, it can be very useful.

[cmoore]

Pedigree matters in mdn and turf races. In first time starter races, it helps when you can identify the top sprint sires in sprint races. Tops turf sires are Dynaformer, Giants Causeway, El Prado. Two and 3 years olds out of these 3 sires have to get the nod in a coin flip on the turf..

[ddog]

Contrary to what 46 says, the HTR pedigree ratings are extremley valuable and lead to many winners. The proof is in the pudding - do you wager off your opinions or your data?

The PPX screen shows you the horse's ped rating based on today's conditons as opposes to the last race or two, depending how many races cards you load.
A horse going 9 furlongs on the grass today might show a pred rating of 645 while last out, it was a 7 furlong dirt race and the pedigree ratins was 324.

The point is, you need to know what you are talking about before your talk about it. Pedigree to 46 is not what pedigree is to HTR users. Apples and oranges.

So King, depending on how you use pedigree, it can be very useful.

I agree with Tom, I use the HTR PED numbers as a guide and they have helped me make more money in the right spots over the last couple of years.

Mainly in the "stay off" that horse type of bet.

[Jeff P]

Bris includes a distance pedigree rating in their $1.00 data files. The rating itself isn't earth shattering in its brilliance or anything of that nature... but it IS based on statistical studies of the ability of horses to to pass on speed and stamina to their offspring.

About a year ago, because the rating exists in the data file I added it to my program as a "grabbable" factor... giving my users the capability to run queries based on it and use it when creating UDMs in cases where they think it might be applicable.

Here is what all starters in maiden claiming races of one mile and longer look like in my Q4 2007 database...

First, all maiden claiming routers:
Data Window Settings:
Divisor = 999 Odds Cap: None
Surface: (ALL*) ROUTES
From Index File: C:\2007\Q4_2007\pL_profile.txt)
Class Descriptor: M

Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 4424.90 4629.20 4537.10
Bet -6142.00 -6142.00 -6142.00
Gain -1717.10 -1512.80 -1604.90

Wins 350 702 1044
Plays 3071 3071 3071
PCT .1140 .2286 .3400

ROI 0.7204 0.7537 0.7387
Avg Mut 12.64 6.59 4.35


Next, those same maiden claiming routers broken out by Distance-Pedigree Rating Rank with no further handicapping whatsoever:
By: DISTANCE-PEDIGREE Rating Rank

Rank Gain Bet Roi Wins Plays Pct Impact
1 -223.90 766.00 0.7077 59 383 .1540 1.3517
2 -40.00 748.00 0.9465 54 374 .1444 1.2669
3 -99.80 748.00 0.8666 49 374 .1310 1.1496
4 -353.60 778.00 0.5455 44 389 .1131 0.9925
5 -185.90 796.00 0.7665 48 398 .1206 1.0582
6 -134.00 746.00 0.8204 34 373 .0912 0.7998
7 -263.30 600.00 0.5612 28 300 .0933 0.8189
8 -168.30 366.00 0.5402 12 183 .0656 0.5754
9 -100.40 304.00 0.6697 14 152 .0921 0.8082
10 -66.20 158.00 0.5810 4 79 .0506 0.4443
11 -55.30 90.00 0.3856 3 45 .0667 0.5850
12 -14.40 30.00 0.5200 1 15 .0667 0.5850
13 -8.00 8.00 0.0000 0 4 .0000 0.0000
14 -4.00 4.00 0.0000 0 2 .0000 0.0000
15 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
16 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
17 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
18 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
19 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000

The data distribution looks kind of orderly doesn't it?... with Rank=1 horses having higher win rates than rank=2 horses... and so on and so on for each rank pretty much right down the line.

Just in case the above data sample might be a fluke I ran the exact same thing against my Q1 2008 database. Here's what that looks like:
Data Window Settings:
Divisor = 999 Odds Cap: None
Surface: (ALL*) ROUTES
From Index File: C:\2008\Q1_2008\pL_profile.txt)
Class Descriptor: M

Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 988.80 1045.90 1101.20
Bet -1570.00 -1570.00 -1570.00
Gain -581.20 -524.10 -468.80

Wins 92 186 278
Plays 785 785 785
PCT .1172 .2369 .3541

ROI 0.6298 0.6662 0.7014
Avg Mut 10.75 5.62 3.96

By: DISTANCE-PEDIGREE Rating Rank

Rank Gain Bet Roi Wins Plays Pct Impact
1 -8.20 208.00 0.9606 22 104 .2115 1.8050
2 75.20 194.00 1.3876 22 97 .2268 1.9352
3 -97.80 198.00 0.5061 11 99 .1111 0.9481
4 -121.20 194.00 0.3753 10 97 .1031 0.8797
5 -34.60 196.00 0.8235 8 98 .0816 0.6965
6 -108.70 196.00 0.4454 9 98 .0918 0.7836
7 -159.00 186.00 0.1452 4 93 .0430 0.3670
8 -101.70 142.00 0.2838 5 71 .0704 0.6009
9 -11.20 42.00 0.7333 1 21 .0476 0.4063
10 -10.00 10.00 0.0000 0 5 .0000 0.0000
11 -4.00 4.00 0.0000 0 2 .0000 0.0000
12 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
13 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
14 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
15 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
16 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
17 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
18 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
19 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000

It's easy to say or imply that pedigree is a crapshoot. But methinks the data says otherwise.


-jp

.

[cmoore]

Breedingwinners.com is where I get my pedigree information..I use the race reports and top sire sheets every day. I've also hit many longshots and have won many online contests using this information.

[ddog]

Jeff,

I think I recall a thread like this sometime ago?
Hard although I am sure not impossible to argue with those charts.
:)


I am not up to date on the Bris data, is the underlying number(?) they give you in the files a rolling 365 type?

[46zilzal]

full siblings
Lit De Justice - Colonel Collins
Grindstone - Pershing, Perception
Alysheba - Titanic
Ta Wee- Captivate, Aforethought
Damascus- Arlene Frances
Tasso - Pechita
Spend a Buck - Ocala Buck
Alydar - Hopefully
Unbridled - Cahill Road
Affirmed - Silent Fox
Conquistador Cielo - Mr. Prosperous
Nasrullah - Rivaz, Nazami II
Manila - Sister Sass
Dancing Brave - Baletta

One in this group produced one anything close to the first one?

There are many many more.

The ENTIRE process of meiosis and gene cross-overs makes it improbable to know what genetic tendencies are transfered.

[Jeff P]

I am not up to date on the Bris data, is the underlying number(?) they give you in the files a rolling 365 type?It may be... I'm not really sure. What I DO know is that the rankings/data samples I posted are based on the rating as it existed before those races were run.

If they continually adjust their pedigree ratings as races are run it doesn't change ratings previously published in old data files (upon which my post was based)...

Continually updating the rating would only affect ratings yet to be published in future data files...

Unlike dosage where they went back and re-evaluated previous KY Derby winners.


-jp

.

[DanG]

Please give me your general thoughts on betting horses based on pedigree.
The number one bomb producing factor in HTR…period.

Completely linear when grouped by ranking and / or whole rating. Extremely valuable when young horses are under new circumstances, first time starters etc… To say it’s anything but viable is naïve.

46; don’t bother…we’ve been around this bend one too many times. images/UBGX/E1.gif

[46zilzal]

A breeding that produced at Mr. Prospector also produced these memorable ones. Ever hear of any of them? Same sire and dam, very different genetics.

Search for Gold
Kentucky Gold
Certain Class
Gold Mine
Vaal Reef
Red Ryder

[njcurveball]

A breeding that produced at Mr. Prospector also produced these memorable ones. Ever hear of any of them?

Did they race? I think your thinking is more geared towards the genetic end than the betting end.

The thread is "Betting Pedigrees". Please post your results in terms of ROI.

[46zilzal]

The entire history of the thoroughbred is based on genetics unless someone changed it of late. One way or the other it all goes back to the randomness of recombinant genes. You cannot tell what pops out at the end.

[Tom]

46; don’t bother…we’ve been around this bend one too many times. images/UBGX/E1.gif

I already sent the money back. :lol::lol::lol:

[GaryG]

I already sent the money back. :lol::lol::lol:I hope you included the money that you made from workouts.....that was illegal also.

[Jeff P]

Did I mention I'm being sued by a group of disgruntled bettors for money I didn't bet last year on horses that weren't treated with lasix? :cool:

-jp

.

[46zilzal]

Did I mention I'm being sued by a group of disgruntled bettors for money I didn't bet last year on horses that weren't treated with lasix? :cool:

-jp

.
All 2% of the horses running without the med these days?

I have a trainer friend who refers to it as the lemming medication. "They all want it, helpful or not."

[Jeff P]

Hook... line... sinker... Gotcha!


-jp

.

[njcurveball]

All 2% of the horses running without the med these days?



Curious how you have NO database, but can recite percentages. Wait I know your secret!

BLINK! Ahhhhh! Two percent just like my Milk! :ThmbUp:

[Cratos]

full siblings
Lit De Justice - Colonel Collins
Grindstone - Pershing, Perception
Alysheba - Titanic
Ta Wee- Captivate, Aforethought
Damascus- Arlene Frances
Tasso - Pechita
Spend a Buck - Ocala Buck
Alydar - Hopefully
Unbridled - Cahill Road
Affirmed - Silent Fox
Conquistador Cielo - Mr. Prosperous
Nasrullah - Rivaz, Nazami II
Manila - Sister Sass
Dancing Brave - Baletta

One in this group produced one anything close to the first one?

There are many many more.

The ENTIRE process of meiosis and gene cross-overs makes it improbable to know what genetic tendencies are transfered.

Did you conveniently overlook Ta Wee’s big brother, Dr. Fager? Yes there are volumes of statistics that will show that the siblings of many great horses didn’t turnout like the great horse.

However I don’t think that is the question under discussion or least I read the question to mean the impact of pedigree on winning and to that end pedigree has a vital impact.

Pedigree relates to distance, speed, surface type and many other variables that affect performance. Therefore there are distance sires, speed sires, etc.

This is not to say every Mr. Prospector progeny would have been a speedster or every Alydar progeny would have been a router, but it does say that pedigree influences those traits that are sired by Mr. Prospector and Alydar.

[46zilzal]

One was by Rough N' Tumble the other Intentionally. This was limited to full siblings so that's why that very quick half brother is not there.

[Cratos]

One was by Rough N' Tumble the other Intentionally. This was limited to full siblings so that's why that very quick half brother is not there.


No you are wrong, this discussion was prompt by the poster’s following statement: “Please give me your general thoughts on betting horses based on pedigree.”

Therefore it shouldn’t make any difference whether they were full or half siblings.

[46zilzal]

No you are wrong, this discussion was prompt by the poster’s following statement: “Please give me your general thoughts on betting horses based on pedigree.”

Therefore it shouldn’t make any difference whether they were full or half siblings.
Okay the list has two exceptions out of 17 listed.

[RXB]

Pedigree can be important within context, just like any other piece of handicapping information. Isolated, it doesn't mean much-- just like any other...

[46zilzal]

Pedigree can be important within context, just like any other piece of handicapping information. Isolated, it doesn't mean much-- just like any other...
well stated....

[46zilzal]

Pedigree can be important within context, just like any other piece of handicapping information. Isolated, it doesn't mean much-- just like any other...
Don't tell The Green Monkey's connections will you?

[russowen77]

There are a little over 1300 breeding stallions in the US. How many were represented in this years BC. Maybe 50. To think breeding doesn't matter is inane in my opinion. I have found some nice scores based on the broodamare sire and the female family line. It pays to upgrade any firster that is well bred along an established nick.

I also question some of the figs I have seen posted here. Let me give you a few of Mr Ps sons for example. based on total results to 06.

Not for Love-86% starters 67% winners
Mutakddim--90% starters 68% winners
Petionville--92% starters 79% winners
Seeking the Gold-- 82% starters 57% winners

The list goes on.

[46zilzal]

There are a little over 1300 breeding stallions in the US. How many were represented in this years BC. Maybe 50. To think breeding doesn't matter is inane in my opinion. I have found some nice scores based on the broodamare sire and the female family line. It pays to upgrade any firster that is well bred along an established nick.

I also question some of the figs I have seen posted here. Let me give you a few of Mr Ps sons for example. based on total results to 06.

Not for Love-86% starters 67% winners
Mutakddim--90% starters 68% winners
Petionville--92% starters 79% winners
Seeking the Gold-- 82% starters 57% winners

The list goes on.
Yes but in TODAY'S CONTEST right in front of you, the individuals are the competitors, not the genetic averages.

Of course better bred horses do better than marginally bred ones ON THE WHOLE, but there are many Danzig's and Mr. Prospector's who couldn't beat a fat man down a hill and who regularly get trounced by those not bred to the purple.

[mudnturf]

Note the AWD of the sire and dam's sire. If they are under 7F the horse is likely to prefer sprints. Watch for those with distance breeding (7.5F+) to do well when stretching out off a couple of sprint preps.

I always had a mental problem with Average Winning Distance (AWD).
Hypothetical --- If a stallion sires 50 winners at 6f, and 50 winners at 10f, can we then expect his offspring to do well at 8f...his average winning distance?

[46zilzal]

I always had a mental problem with Average Winning Distance (AWD).
Hypothetical --- If a stallion sires 50 winners at 6f, and 50 winners at 10f, can we then expect his offspring to do well at 8f...his average winning distance?
Or if most the offspring NEVER even run a longer route, the data gets skewed the wrong way: shorter.

Dilution of understanding by looking at an average and not the individual in front of you.

[Tom]

If wishes were horses, beggers would ride!
All that extraneous malarkey is addressed in the data that telss you how good or bad your rating is. Would, coulda, shoulda take a backseat to data.

[russowen77]

Yes but in TODAY'S CONTEST right in front of you, the individuals are the competitors, not the genetic averages.

Of course better bred horses do better than marginally bred ones ON THE WHOLE, but there are many Danzig's and Mr. Prospector's who couldn't beat a fat man down a hill and who regularly get trounced by those not bred to the purple .

Whoa,

First I would like you to show me any son's or daughters of Danzig or Mr P that are getting regularly waxed by the say the Cinammon Creeks of the world.

I don't understand your point about making an example of the exceptions to the general rule. This game, handicapping and breeding in my case, is all about %s. The more data the better in my opinion.

Horses are bred for a lot of reasons and winning at the races is just one of them even in the racing industry. Their is a lot of broodstock bred just for the sales. If you don't think so just look and see how many brand new stallions are represented in them. It helps sales if the new prospective owners recognize the names on the stallions and many the investors buying shares are new to the game. The days of hearing "she will make a beautiful broodmare if she doesn't run" are long gone.

In handicapping I want to know all I can and breeding is a major player in this game whether people want to admit it or not. I am admitedly a novice handicapper, even though thanks to many here ,including you, that is changing rapidly, but I was dang close just with being a breeding and class handicapper before. Well, it has gone from 0.956 to 1.012 recently. Much thanks to HTR there. If one wants to back cheap stock on a consistent basis against better bred animals then I humbly suggest one has very deep pockets.

AWD-- folks just remember that how they ran and how they breed can be two totally different things. The young stallion that is blowing my mind right now is Include. He is throwing sprinters but he sure wasn't.

[ranchwest]

The entire history of the thoroughbred is based on genetics unless someone changed it of late. One way or the other it all goes back to the randomness of recombinant genes. You cannot tell what pops out at the end.

Yeah, I just love all those nags that folks bought in front of the Mayberry drug store that won the Kentucky Derby. It's a great game, eh?

[ranchwest]

Okay the list has two exceptions out of 17 listed.

:lol:

Of course it does. It's your list!

[mudnturf]

If wishes were horses, beggers would ride!
All that extraneous malarkey is addressed in the data that telss you how good or bad your rating is. Would, coulda, shoulda take a backseat to data.

Tom
I would love for you to elaborate on this. I don't understand what you mean.
I understand the meaning of a good rating or a bad rating, but what if no such rating has been established?
Or am I missing your point?

[RXB]

Yeah, I just love all those nags that folks bought in front of the Mayberry drug store that won the Kentucky Derby. It's a great game, eh?

Lil E Tee was sold for $2,000 as a yearling. Seattle Slew went for 17k (probably the greatest bargain in racing history). Sunday Silence didn't meet his 17k reserve price and thus didn't sell at auction. Carry Back was a cheaply bred horse. It's happened more often than you might think.

[ranchwest]

Lil E Tee was sold for $2,000 as a yearling. Seattle Slew went for 17k (probably the greatest bargain in racing history). Sunday Silence didn't meet his 17k reserve price and thus didn't sell at auction. Carry Back was a cheaply bred horse. It's happened more often than you might think.

Please bet every horse you find that is poorly bred. Please.

Most of the horses that sell cheap and run big still had the pedigree. They sold low from conformation. Most Derby winners are strong on Chef-de-sires bloodlines.

Losing happens to all bloodlines. Winning happens more with horses with good pedigrees.

[RXB]

You can trace some quality somewhere in most horses' pedigrees. But there are lots of sons/grandsons of Mr. Prospector who stand for $1,000, and for good reason.

Brigadier Gerard was the greatest grass miler in history and if Queen's Hussar sired another good horse, I'm not aware of it. Same goes for At The Threshold, who was Lil E Tee's sire.

P.S., I don't bet Zippy Chippy bloodlines. I do just fine with the pedigree side of things, thanks.

[Tom]

Tom
I would love for you to elaborate on this. I don't understand what you mean.
I understand the meaning of a good rating or a bad rating, but what if no such rating has been established?
Or am I missing your point?

Talking about the HTR rating, the fact that it statistically shows good performance and profits negates everyting 46 threw up as reasons why pedigree handicapping won't work. I can't speak for ther programs and how they handle pedifgree, I just know that the one I use can be shown to be profotable, no matter what argument 46 throws out there.

[1st time lasix]

Monday {MLK day} at Gulfstream a first time starter sired by Mr Greeley with two solid works won at 10-1. The breeding alerted me to the possibility and the horse contributed to a handsome exotic. {both vertically and horizontally} Being aware of pedigree is an important factor in some races just like early pace, ,,,distance,.... surface,... training angles,.... speed.... or layoffs might be the important variable in another race. Recognition of what may be important with the race at hand is skill set that seperates the great handicapping "selectors" from the average ones in my opinion. Of course actual ticket structure and wagering decisions turn those selectors into winners. It is worth studying pedigree and using Tomlinsons or other ratings in your handicapping arsenal. It might help a few times a day in the simulcast era. Particularly if you "see" something your wagering competetion does not.

[classhandicapper]

I very rarely pay attention to pedigree in my own approach. However, implying that pedigree based approaches are of little or no merit... well IMHO nothing could be further from the truth.

I have a customer whose entire approach is based on pedigree. He has spent a large amount of time (translation: work) researching out specific situations where the offspring of certain sires and dams excel. He follows one circuit... SOCAL. He specializes in horses stretching out and trying the turf early in their careers. He gets an average of just 4-5 plays in a typical race week. He really knows his stuff, has great discipline, and these are the only plays he makes. And because of that discipline he is one of the most successful bettors that I know.

Believe me when I say this: There IS something to this pedigree thing.


-jp

.


I don't know much about pedigrees. As a result, I tend to avoid races with a lot of "first time turf" horses, horses stretching out, and other circumstances where pedigree is clearly more of a factor.

I think your friend is "spot on".

If I had the inclination, I would do exactly what he is doing. My guess is that there's a ton of value in pedigree information because it's not something that is static. It can't be studied once and then you are done. It's constantly changing over time as horses die off and new ones take their place etc....

The upside is also the downside.

You aren't going to get many plays each week and you are going to have to keep your records up to date constantly to stay on top of the changes.

In a way, it's like finding trainer plays. You have to stay on top of things to find good value.

[GaryG]

IIn a way, it's like finding trainer plays. You have to stay on top of things to find good value.That is a good topic for another thread. Trainer specialties change with the seasons of course, but also from year to year. For a couple of years Ronnie Allen was winning everything in sight with his Michigan shippers in the 1st few weeks of the Tampa meet. Not this year though. Now his horses are running better with recency. Round and round.

[Blind Pursuit]

I always had a mental problem with Average Winning Distance (AWD).
Hypothetical --- If a stallion sires 50 winners at 6f, and 50 winners at 10f, can we then expect his offspring to do well at 8f...his average winning distance?

Not necessarily, of course. But try thinking of AWD not as a predictor some precise "optimum" distance, but rather as a sliding scale, with higher AWDs implying that a sire gets horses with more distance ability and lower AWD implying a more sprint-oriented pedigree.

An AWD of 8.0 is actually near the high end of the scale for North American sires, thus implying a good distance sire. In your hypothetical, if you're telling me a horse has an AWD of 8.0, I'm not surprised that he's getting a lot of winners at 10f.

(What surprises me is that there were 50 10f races for his offspring to run in. What decade are we talking about again? :D )

[Stevie Belmont]

It's very important. The game is all about breeding. It all started with the Darley Arabian, Gondolphin Stud and the Byerly Turk to where we are today.

The very concept of breeding was and is to create a fast, strong and durable race horse that will continue to breed the best horse possible.

Paying attention to breeding is certainly something one should always take a look at and consider.

Some young sires do particulary well with thier firsters....

And some dams are very good with their firsters...

First time grass is something that particular sires do well to. Either a first time starter or a horse trying the grass for the first time. Pedigree counts for something here.

So as for the breeding and pedigree capping, it's like any other tool one would use to cap the races. It's there. It should be looked at, but should not be used as a single factor. For horses that have been running for years their pedigree won't really matter much.

Maiden races, horses stretching out , off tracks and first time grass are areas pedigree knowledge helps. And making selections based on pedigree in these spots is not only smart, but can be essential.

Pedigree analysis is fascinating and what racing is. And one can never stop learning in this department.



Please give me your general thoughts on betting horses based on pedigree.

[mudnturf]

Not necessarily, of course. But try thinking of AWD not as a predictor some precise "optimum" distance, but rather as a sliding scale, with higher AWDs implying that a sire gets horses with more distance ability and lower AWD implying a more sprint-oriented pedigree.

An AWD of 8.0 is actually near the high end of the scale for North American sires, thus implying a good distance sire. In your hypothetical, if you're telling me a horse has an AWD of 8.0, I'm not surprised that he's getting a lot of winners at 10f.

(What surprises me is that there were 50 10f races for his offspring to run in. What decade are we talking about again? :D )


B.P.
Surely you jest. I prefaced my example with the word "Hypothetical" in order to make a point.

[russowen77]

In this country the stallions with an AWD of 8f or more are few and far between. I am to lazy to research tonight- well actually we are iced in here and I have had too much Jim Beam - but off the top of my head there is not much more than AP INdy, Kingmambo, Giant's Causeway, Pleasant Tap, Cozenne, Dynaformer, ans Sky Classic. It is an incomplete list but the point is it is not very long.

If the AWD is 8 they can win at 12 imo, 10 is prime for them.

The horses with that Awd have to have some serious slow twitch musles in relation to fast.

[mudnturf]

In this country the stallions with an AWD of 8f or more are few and far between. I am to lazy to research tonight- well actually we are iced in here and I have had too much Jim Beam - but off the top of my head there is not much more than AP INdy, Kingmambo, Giant's Causeway, Pleasant Tap, Cozenne, Dynaformer, ans Sky Classic. It is an incomplete list but the point is it is not very long.

If the AWD is 8 they can win at 12 imo, 10 is prime for them.

The horses with that Awd have to have some serious slow twitch musles in relation to fast.

Russ, When you get a chance I'd love to know the AWD of this short list......
Badger Land, Bet Twice, Blushing Groom, Codex, Exclusive Native, Hagley, Lord Avie, Lost Code, Nijinsky II, Nonoalco, Northern Baby, Roberto.
Curious. Thanks!

[GaryG]

Thest are the only ones I have at present. When I get a chance I will dig up the others.

Badger Land 7.5
Lord Avie 7.6
Lost Code 6.9
Northern Baby 9.1

[russowen77]

Thest are the only ones I have at present. When I get a chance I will dig up the others.

Badger Land 7.5
Lord Avie 7.6
Lost Code 6.9
Northern Baby 9.1
I see we use some of the same reference data. :)

The only Add at this time I can give is Nijinsky at 9.4

You got me interestred in Roberto. His best son, Dynaformer, was 8.3

[mudnturf]

I see we use some of the same reference data. :)

The only Add at this time I can give is Nijinsky at 9.4

You got me interestred in Roberto. His best son, Dynaformer, was 8.3

Since the Europeans run many more long routes than we do (10f and up), I would expect those stallions whose offspring raced abroad will generally show a higher AWD than those stallions whose offspring raced mostly in the U.S.

[GaryG]

Since the Europeans run many more long routes than we do (10f and up), I would expect those stallions whose offspring raced abroad will generally show a higher AWD than those stallions whose offspring raced mostly in the U.S.To be sure...Rainbow Quest is 11.9.

[russowen77]

Since the Europeans run many more long routes than we do (10f and up), I would expect those stallions whose offspring raced abroad will generally show a higher AWD than those stallions whose offspring raced mostly in the U.S.
They breed for their races like we do for ours imo. The broodmares sure have a different look for the most part.

[mudnturf]

[QUOTE=russowen77]They breed for their races like we do for ours imo. /QUOTE]

With the emphasis on speed in our country, it is no wonder that so many of our graded stakes are run at a distance of 8f or less. Hence, it's hard to come up with high AWDs for our stallions. And then people are shocked when some of our Kentucky Derby winners of late had such low Average Winning Distances. It's because their offspring ran so many of their races at short to intermediate distances.
Here are a few interesting examples:

WAR EMBLEM - His sire (Our Emblem)not only never won a graded stake but he never ran in a stake longer than 8f.

FUNNY CIDE - His sire (Distorted Humor) never ran in a stake race longer than 8f.

AFLEET ALEX - His sire (Northern Afleet) never competed in a stake race longer than 9f.

SMARTY JONES - His sire (Elusive Quality) never ran in a stake race longer than 8f.

So what's my point? I guess it's just that I believe AWD is a worthless piece of information for most U.S. based stallions.

[Tee]

With the emphasis on speed in our country, it is no wonder that so many of our graded stakes are run at a distance of 8f or less. Hence, it's hard to come up with high AWDs for our stallions. And then people are shocked when some of our Kentucky Derby winners of late had such low Average Winning Distances. It's because their offspring ran so many of their races at short to intermediate distances.
Here are a few interesting examples:

WAR EMBLEM - His sire (Our Emblem)not only never won a graded stake but he never ran in a stake longer than 8f.

FUNNY CIDE - His sire (Distorted Humor) never ran in a stake race longer than 8f.

AFLEET ALEX - His sire (Northern Afleet) never competed in a stake race longer than 9f.

SMARTY JONES - His sire (Elusive Quality) never ran in a stake race longer than 8f.

So what's my point? I guess it's just that I believe AWD is a worthless piece of information for most U.S. based stallions.

Distorted Humor was a competitor in the Fayette & Kentucky Cup Classic - both races ran at 9 furlongs no?

Out of the four derby winners & their sires mentioned above, 3 imo had very strong dam side stamina influences.

Now this may be ultra moto, but pedigree & AWD for that matter isn't all about the stallion.

[russowen77]

[QUOTE=russowen77]They breed for their races like we do for ours imo. /QUOTE]

With the emphasis on speed in our country, it is no wonder that so many of our graded stakes are run at a distance of 8f or less. Hence, it's hard to come up with high AWDs for our stallions. And then people are shocked when some of our Kentucky Derby winners of late had such low Average Winning Distances. It's because their offspring ran so many of their races at short to intermediate distances.
Here are a few interesting examples:

WAR EMBLEM - His sire (Our Emblem)not only never won a graded stake but he never ran in a stake longer than 8f.

FUNNY CIDE - His sire (Distorted Humor) never ran in a stake race longer than 8f.

AFLEET ALEX - His sire (Northern Afleet) never competed in a stake race longer than 9f.

SMARTY JONES - His sire (Elusive Quality) never ran in a stake race longer than 8f.

So what's my point? I guess it's just that I believe AWD is a worthless piece of information for most U.S. based stallions.
I don't understand why folks always want to bring up the exceptions. They happen. It is not what we can work with. Today the book on almost all the consistently good patterns is over 75. Matings are not only tracked with pedigree but with bio metric data with the expensive ones. Breeders get good data. AWD is a very good indicator of the normal spawn. As much as anything it tells you about the mares being bred to him.

They can also change over time when older runners start to influence the numbers. I fully expect Include-one of my favs- to climb but we will see.

BTW, Class comes mainly from momma imho. Afleet Alex has a dosage index of 2.11 meaning he was bred to go long. Smarty Jones , bless his heart, came damn close to seriously outrunning his breeding in the Belmont on heart. It is racing , it happens.

Also, many of the best stallions were not great racehorses. Some were and some weren't and some of the best runners couldn't deliever in the shed.

[46zilzal]

Lauren Stitch on pedigrees: The 2004 Derby victor, Smarty Jones, who was the most dominant winner of this trio, had the most unlikely Derby pedigree of the three. Smarty Jones is by Elusive Quality, a very talented miler who was brilliant on dirt and turf. Smarty Jones remains an aberration - the only runner by Elusive Quality to perform at racing's highest level at classic distances. Elusive Quality is a solid source of high speed, and his progeny are sprinter-milers.

http://www.vegasinsider.com/horse-racing/story.cfm/story/504842/

[46zilzal]

The Golden Post, by Patrick Robinson

EPILOGUE
"There is in fact another route which may take you to fame and fortune in the world of the thoroughbred racehorse. On the opposite page is a picture by Richard Stone Reeves of the grumpy little gelding John Henry, shorty before he set off to win the inaugural running of the Arlington Million. By the end of 1984, he had won for his owners, Mr and Mrs. Sam Rubin of New York, well over $6 million - which reflected very favorably to the $1,100 he once had cost as a yearling. Those wishing to take this less arduous and less expensive route to the pinnacle of horse racing success should avoid the major summer yearling sales. They should also IGNORE all of the previous 210 pages of this book."

[DanG]

[QUOTE=mudnturf]
I don't understand why folks always want to bring up the exceptions. They happen. It is not what we can work with.
http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f287/KSMarksPsych/bingo.jpg

[DrugS]

Smarty Jones remains an aberration - the only runner by Elusive Quality to perform at racing's highest level at classic distances.

The dam of Smarty Jones was 9-3-3-3 in dirt routes with six figures in career earnings.

He was the best horse Elusive Quality ever sired by a wide margin at any distance...short or long.

[russowen77]

The dam of Smarty Jones was 9-3-3-3 in dirt routes with six figures in career earnings.

He was the best horse Elusive Quality ever sired by a wide margin at any distance...short or long.
It was sure a strange breeding on the dam. Her dam was a decent mare with a DI of 1 and was bred to go lone. They breed her to a speed ball. It worked.

I sure agree about he was the best Elusive Quality colt ever.

[classhandicapper]

The dam of Smarty Jones was 9-3-3-3 in dirt routes with six figures in career earnings.

He was the best horse Elusive Quality ever sired by a wide margin at any distance...short or long.

I think Smarty may have been the one hyped horse that was worth the hype. I still believe his Belmont was a huge effort (just look at the chart and see where all the other speeds finished). In addition, if you look at that crop, a lot of them developed into really nice horses.

[mudnturf]

Distorted Humor was a competitor in the Fayette & Kentucky Cup Classic - both races ran at 9 furlongs no?

I stand corrected. Distorted Humor was 2nd in the Fayette @ 9f, 2nd in the Ky Cup Classic @ 9f, and 3rd in the Iselin @ 8.5f.
Thanks for pointing that out.

[juanepstein]

quarterhorses

STOLI - in the slop.

[King Ritchie]

Are there any website dealing in betting pedigrees?

Also, none of the PP's give anything about breeding - where can I get info for betting, especially first time starters?

[russowen77]

I really like the Mazur book on debut starters. It is only for the last 3 years and the data is broken down and easy to use.

There are several publications about bettting maidens but none of them stand out in my mind as being particualarly exceptional -good or bad and most give decent advice.

I also buy Sire Stats from TSN every year and it is helpful also, and more than just maidens.

[46zilzal]

Why do folks talk about exceptions to breeding? Because breeding is fraught with RANDOMNESS at the genetic level.

On the plus side are many good sources but they have distinct limitations, i.e. Tessio's theory that "magnetism" was at work as he described walking a mare through a stable of stallions and then observing her response to each and basing a breeding on that evidence........Strange but true.

There are many a good reputable, as far as that is possible, sources:
http://www.amazon.com/Racehorse-Breeding-Theories-Frank-Mitchell/dp/0929346750
Breeding theories.
http://www.amazon.com/Great-Breeders-Their-Methods-Hancocks/dp/0929346785/ref=pd_sim_b_title_6/002-2690329-1573605
Bull Hancock
http://www.amazon.com/Tesio-His-Own-Words-Federico/dp/0929346769/ref=pd_sim_b_img_4
Tessio
http://www.amazon.com/Dosage-Pedigree-Performance-Steven-Roman/dp/0929346734/ref=pd_sim_b_title_4/002-2690329-1573605
Roman
http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Power-Factor-Patterns-Performance/dp/0929346688/ref=pd_sim_b_img_5
X-factor
http://www.amazon.com/Blood-Horse-Authoritative-Guide-Breeding-Thoroughbreds/dp/1581501382/ref=pd_sim_b_img_2
Blood Horse nicking factors.

[46zilzal]

When cells, destined to become a gamete, undergo meiosis there is a change from their diploid (full) to haploid (half the chromosomes).

During this heritable reduction, significant gene cross over and recombination (randomly) occur shifting the genetic payload considerably. So even before the genetic material is isolated to a reproductive cell, it has the potential of being changed at an unknown rate.

Once this cell fuses with a paternal cell the genome returns to diploid and a new individual begins to eventually form.

We get half the info from the maternal (M) source, half from the male (P), but it is not always the same since with EACH inheritable characteristic, there is a "coin flip" of sorts.

If there were 10 chromosomes the possibilities in permutations from the two sources would be very large.

So you could easily have:

MPMPMPMPMP OR
MMMMPPPPPP OR
MMMPPPMMM etc etc

Randomness level ONE.

[46zilzal]

There is a belief that the mitochondrial DNA from the maternal side has some influence on the environment the nuclear material is in at the outset. This has not been proven but has been suggested.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

Once genes are inheirited in an individual, that same individual gets a differing variety of operator or regulatory genes. Two individuals could have almost identical DNA with a different regulatory hierarchy leading to widely divergent gene expression.
http://www.mun.ca/biology/scarr/Jacob_&_Monod_(1961)_presentation.pdf (operon)

Along those same lines, the new field of epigenetics is emerging to note the widely variable expression of proteins from similar genomes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

[46zilzal]

When Mendel did his original work on Sweet Peas he was "lucky" to pick phenotypical traits that were expressed with almost 100% penetrance. Penetrance dictates how often a trait is expressed when the gene(s) FOR THAT EXPRESSION are in the genome of the individual. Many traits have only variable penetrance, so one does not know the outcome of the selectively breed indivual JUST by knowing the gross genetic make-up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penetrance

Linked genes. Sometimes several genes are necessary to have been inherited TOGETHER before their expression is found. If gene 2,4,6 are required for a trait to show in an offspring, fine, but if (2,4) (2,6) (4,6) (2) (4) or (6) are transfered, that trait will not be expressed.

It is well known that many genetic lines have a precocious development. These lines (usually speedy types) express their abilities at a very young age while stamina types (remember a thoroughbred in only an adult at 5 years old), require a longer time to mature to potential. Skew the entire database toward shorter distances, shorter careers and the AWD gets rounded DOWNWARD to give a false idea of the true genetic expression. No stage (no marathons at graded stakes level) and fewer and fewer individuals even having those traits still in training at the time they would be expressed, skews the inferences.

[46zilzal]

Birth order. Every ova in a mare is only slightly younger than the individual and migrate to the ovaries during gestation. Over the years these latent ova (not mature) are subject to free radical exposure and genetic damage.

If you review the vast majority of broodmare records you will usually see a similar trend: best foals in the first 4 or 5.

As the mare ages, of course just like in humans, the apparatus to hold the fetus stable and with good nutrition and oxygenated blood becomes compromised.

Same genetics, later birth order, chance for far "less" an individual than an earlier sibling.

Another level of randomness.

HENCE the old watch words: "Breed the best to the best and HOPE FOR THE BEST" (the expectation of randomness is built into the expression).

[Tom]

Do you have any idea how foolish you look posting 5 in row telling people that are successfully using pedgiree in their handicapping that it won't work? :lol::lol::lol:

[46zilzal]

Do you have any idea how foolish you look posting 5 in row telling people that are successfully using pedgiree in their handicapping that it won't work?

Not at all surprised that someone who never uses science to draw a conclusion would find that type of solid research both confusing and irrelevant.

[nobeyerspls]

Birth order. Every ova in a mare is only slightly younger than the individual and migrate to the ovaries during gestation. Over the years these latent ova (not mature) are subject to free radical exposure and genetic damage.

Another level of randomness.

HENCE the old watch words: "Breed the best to the best and HOPE FOR THE BEST" (the expectation of randomness is built into the expression).

Thanks for the last five posts on breeding. Some questions & comments:
I think Tesio also held that breeding an unraced mare was better than breeding one that raced because she "saved her energy" for reproduction. I found that strange.
Did you leave Woodman/Chromite out of your examples of full brothers or have I got them wrong?
I'm not sure where Willie Mays was in the birth order but he had quite a few brothers and sisters and he was the only one that could hit a curveball.
Was Secretariat foaled after his momma dropped several others?
Does the "science" of nicking take away any of the randomness?
One year at the September sales at Keeneland I sat with an oldtimer and discussed breeding. He agreed that one should first find well conformed individuals and then try to get one with the best paper you could afford. The great unknown for him was the six inches between the ears and that part seems to be the most random of all.

[46zilzal]

Copyright Bloodstock Research Information Services, Inc., 2002

PLAYMATE, 1975, Buckpasser- Intriguing by Swaps.
YRS ST WN PL SH EARNED SSI
1979 Not Covered Previous Year
1980 Lahab,c,The Minstrel 1 12 0 1 1 14,100 1.30
IN UNITED KINGDOM 3 21 1 5 0 6,270
DP = 7-5-18-0-0 DI = 2.33 CD = 0.63
At 5 3rd (Q) (30,000) (HOL)
1981 SINGLE THREAD,c,Damascus 3 18 4 2 3 29,901 1.89
DP = 6-14-20-0-0 DI = 3.00 CD = 0.65
At 5 Won Caliente Mile Handicap (R) (O) (15,000), 3rd Independence
Handicap (R) (O) (20,000)
1982 Barren
1983 WOODMAN,c,Mr. Prospector
IN UNITED KINGDOM 2 5 3 0 1 30,130
DP = 20-10-26-0-0 DI = 3.31 CD = 0.89
At 2 Won Ballsbridge-Tattersalls Anglesey S. -G3 (IRE), Ferrans Futurity
-G3 (IRE)
At 3 3rd Mill Ridge S. (IRE)
1984 Accompanist,c,The Minstrel
IN UNITED KINGDOM 2 11 3 1 1 35,945
DP = 7-5-18-0-0 DI = 2.33 CD = 0.63
1985 Do Me,c,Conquistador Cielo 5 47 8 6 4 84,725 1.64
North America 2 YO Record 2 0 1 0 3,000
North America Turf Record 5 1 0 0 7,700
North America Dirt Sprints 8 2 0 0 13,375
North America Dirt Routes 34 6 5 4 63,650
North America Muddy/Sloppy 1 1 0 0 9,350
DP = 12-8-18-0-0 DI = 3.22 CD = 0.84
1986 Chromite,c,Mr. Prospector 1 2 1 0 0 14,400 4.84
North America 2 YO Record * 2 1 0 0 14,400
North America Dirt Sprints 2 1 0 0 14,400
North America Muddy/Sloppy 1 0 0 0 0
DP = 20-10-26-0-0 DI = 3.31 CD = 0.89
Sold at Hip # Sales Price Sire Avg Rank Stud Fee
KEEJUL 1987 40 $700,000 $496,818 ylg ( 5/22) NA
1987 Gadabout,c,Mr. Prospector
IN UNITED KINGDOM 1 6 1 0 1 7,784
DP = 20-10-26-0-0 DI = 3.31 CD = 0.89
Sold at Hip # Sales Price Sire Avg Rank Stud Fee
JONES 1987 70 $350,000 $473,750 wlg ( 4/ 4) NA
1988 Rehaan,c,Storm Bird
IN UNITED KINGDOM 1 4 1 1 1 7,094
DP = 7-5-18-0-0 DI = 2.33 CD = 0.63
Sold at Hip # Sales Price Sire Avg Rank Stud Fee
KEEJUL 1989 275 $700,000 $161,227 ylg ( 2/22) NA
1989 Barren
1990 Crown Forest,f,Chief's Crown
IN JAPAN 1 8 1 1 0 85,839
DP = 5-11-20-0-0 DI = 2.60 CD = 0.58
Sold at Hip # Sales Price Sire Avg Rank Stud Fee
KEEJUL 1991 168 $500,000 $113,750 ylg ( 1/16) $100,000
1991 Shinko Crown,c,Chief's Crown
IN JAPAN 1 2 1 0 0 51,735
DP = 5-11-20-0-0 DI = 2.60 CD = 0.58
1992 Slipped
1994 Unnamed,f,Real Shadai
DP = 6-7-27-0-0 DI = 1.96 CD = 0.47
1995 =Lord Vintage (Jpn),c,Northern Taste
IN JAPAN 1 3 0 0 0 0
DP = 8-5-19-0-0 DI = 2.37 CD = 0.66
1996 =Lord Praise (Jpn),c,=Fuji Kiseki (Jpn)
IN JAPAN 1 2 0 0 0 0
DP = 5-4-17-0-6 DI = 1.21 CD = 0.06

[46zilzal]

4th foal Sir Gaylord (by Turn to) stakes winner
7th foal First Family (by First Landing) stakes winner
9th foal Grand Coulee (by First Landing) stakes winner
10th foal Syrian Sea (by Bold Ruler) stakes winner
13th (how apropos) The Bride (by Bold Ruler) nonwinner
14th Secretariat (by Bold Ruler) IMMORTAL
15th Capital Asset (by First Landing) stakes winner
16th Somethingfabulous (by Northern Dancer) stakes winner
17th season barren
18th slipped
19th Straight Flush (by Riva Ridge)
20th Queen's Colour (by Reviewer)
21st Roscinni (by Restless Wind)

This one was an exceptional broodmare who produced one of the most exception horses of all time. She was barren in 1968 but lost no foals until her 18th season.


NICK'S are statistically significant bloodlines which produced results above the average.

[46zilzal]

An alternative approach to nicking.
http://www.thoroughbredinfo.com/nicks.htm

All this has been made possible by the development of the computer--not so much the powers of the computer as the mystique of the computer. Consumers of the nicking products believe that if it comes from a computer, it must be right.
Forgotten is the cautionary phrase of the early days of computer development: garbage in, garbage out. Forgotten, too, are some of the most basic rules of traditional statistical research, especially those that demand adequate sample size and control of variables.
Perhaps most important, basic principles of genetics have been disregarded.
But the methodology of the nicking gurus is neither revealed nor examined. Their customers demand answers, not explanations; "it came out of the computer" is explanation enough.

Much akin to the concept of redboarding which has NO counterpart at the track, as I was ever able to find in questioning many with over 40 years of experience in the parimutuels.

[46zilzal]

Another aspect of randomness is simply the will to race.

Anyone who has seen The Green Monkey can attest that, so far, this well bred baby has little interest in the contests he has been in.

[46zilzal]

http://www.chef-de-race.com/articles/breeding_theories_and_statistics.htm

The concept of two bloodlines or individuals having a unique compatibility is quite appealing because the decision-making process is that much easier. The fundamental problem with individual nicking patterns, however, is that only rarely are there enough examples to provide a statistically significant sample size. By statistically significant we are referring to the established statistical criteria affording a meaningful confidence level where the observed pattern has only a small probability of being a random event. For example, suppose sire A is bred to mares by sire B and ten foals are produced. If two of these, or 20%, become listed stakes winners and sire A gets 10% overall stakes winners, i.e., regardless of his mares' bloodlines, then this A/B cross surpasses sire A's overall stakes winner production by two to one, which some would consider evidence of a positive nick. On the other hand, suppose that none of the ten foals (0%) won any stakes but three placed in Grade I's. zero stakes winners from ten foals is a red flag. But here the truth may be that the Grade I stakes-placed runners are far superior to the two listed stakes winners in the first case. Do 20% stakes winners represent a positive nick while 0% stakes winners represent a negative nick? Probably not.

[46zilzal]

nicks are not solid gold.

[PaceAdvantage]

46, you have some unresolved issues. One of them is most definitely the LOST art of being concise.

[46zilzal]

46, you have some unresolved issues. One of them is most definitely the LOST art of being concise.
No .....

When one considers the hidden detractors within a concept, each one requires consideration on it's merit, OTHERWISE I get the "carryovers" from OFF TOPIC yelling that it is all opinion without a basis in fact.

Genetics is a field of endeavor without much common knowledge, surprisingly. Once you delve into it and find the myriad of variations, proven ones, you begin to understand how very difficult selective breeding becomes. Before folks swallow it hook, line and sinker, they should be made aware of it's unknowns.

[PaceAdvantage]

OTHERWISE I get the "carryovers" from OFF TOPIC yelling that it is all opinion without a basis in fact.Add "Persecution Complex" to the list....

[46zilzal]

Add "Persecution Complex" to the list....
I received several PM's noting that very fact of cross over postings. Even got one today.

It does not go unnoticed.

The latest one, and I quote: "My impression is that people will shit on everything you say because they know you disagree with them politically. Just my impression from the threads. Ignore em."

[ranchwest]

Okay, pedigree cappers, give the money back!!

[PaceAdvantage]

I received several PM's noting that very fact of cross over postings. Even got one today.

It does not go unnoticed.

The latest one, and I quote: "My impression is that people will shit on everything you say because they know you disagree with them politically. Just my impression from the threads. Ignore em."This might hold water if everyone giving you flak was also an adversary in off-topic, but this simply is not the case.

You are getting complaints publicly (and I am receiving them PRIVATELY) from folks who NEVER post in off-topic, about whom we know NOTHING about their political persuasions.

You simply have a knack for pissing people off and taking threads off topic, and or stomping on threads with really nothing much to offer.

On the other hand, there are many times when you DO have something to offer. You must find a balance, or with too much bad outweighing the good, you become expendable to the community at large here at paceadvantage.

[Tom]

Science, 46?
We are talking about using a factor to bet races. Not breeding horses. The fact that the pedigree factor can be objectively put into a number and has proven profitable over the years is all that matters. Nothing in your "science posts" matters - only the performance of the statistic. Does you energy ditribution factor hit every race? Of course not. Maybe what, 25-28%. This means your precious E/L graph is wrong better than two thirds of the time.
Of course pedigree rating do not pick every winner - nothing does. The bottom line is the roi - and it can be positive.
For someone who calls others musterbators, you sure have a closed mind. You cannot judge pedigree effectiveness in handicapping by citing stats not related to that venue. You do not even have a clue how people are using pedigree. Hint: it is not as a stand alone factor. Tomlinson turf numbers have been throwing off profits when combines with a couple of common sense guidleines for years. Many as boxcar prices, and many no surprise at all. The HTR ped rating is very powerful when used inteligently, getting races your velocity approach has no shot at all of getting.

[nobeyerspls]

Another aspect of randomness is simply the will to race.

Anyone who has seen The Green Monkey can attest that, so far, this well bred baby has little interest in the contests he has been in.

I have some limited experience with this. I owned a Sovereign Dancer filly whose half-sister was stakes place in England. Mine was good at biting and kicking other horses in the morning but did not want to race. Another one of mine with lower quality paper would run through a brick wall if asked.
The guy who started this asked about using breeding for betting. Some of your responses would help people who attend the yearling sales but not bettors. An exception would be a first time starter who is a full or a half to a decent horse. One could conclude from your posts that you should pass at the sale and ignore the breeding when handicapping the race.
You need to acknowledge the frustration of others who have used breeding successfully in their handicapping only to be told that it has little value. The same was true on the thread about workouts. My three largest scores this year were based heavily on recent workouts and I continue to make them part of my handicapping. Those who cash tickets based on breeding will not change either.

[46zilzal]

Find the words wrong, of little value etc. These posts only pointed out the inherent randomness in genetics, nothing more.

It was promoted for people to draw their own conclusions.

[pedigreeman]

The manager of one of America's top Thoroughbred farms discussed
selection
of breeding stock at a CTBA seminar


Pedigree, Performance and Conformation.

"Any discussion of breeding stock comes down to those three
ingredients,"
noted Dan Rosenberg, manager of Three Chimneys Farm in Midway, Ky.,
one of
America's most successful Thoroughbred nurseries. 'What we're always
trying
to do in selecting mares, stallions or matings is to try to balance
these
elements."

Rosenberg was the keynote speaker at a seminar on Selection of
Breeding
Stock held at Harris Farms in Coalinga, Calif., on Sept. 28. The
seminar
was sponsored by the California Thoroughbred Breeders Association,
with
funding assistance from the Oak Tree Racing Association.

Of course, everyone wants as much pedigree, performance and
conformation as
possible in breeding stock, but Rosenberg noted that the few mares
who are
strong in all three areas cost too much for most breeders to afford
them.

"The problem is to get the most bang for your buck," he
suggested. "Always
buy as much pedigree, as much performance and as good conformation as
you
can possibly afford." In considering pedigrees, Rosenberg believes in
the
adage, "The family is stronger than the individual."

"Good families sometimes go quiet for a couple of generations," he
said,
"but they always seem to come back. If I have to sacrifice a strong
family
close up, I do want the mare to trace back to a very strong
foundation
broodmare. When the first and second dams are a little weak, it is
also
important to me to look at the broodmare sires of these first two
dams.

"I'm not particularly interested in a mare by an unsuccessful
stallion out
of an unsuccessful mare who is by an unsuccessful stallion, no matter
who
the third or fourth dam is. This is not necessarily a matter of a
family
having gone quiet, but possibly a matter of a family having been
poisoned."

While he will go back a few generations to find strong family
connections,
Rosenberg doesn't want to have to search too far back to find top
racing
performance. He wants performance "up as close as I can possibly
afford."
He advises avoiding mares and stallions who had a lot of chances and
couldn't win.

'What we have selected for in Thoroughbred breeding for 250 years is
not
speed or a physical type," he reasoned. "It is an innate desire to
win, and
it is competitiveness and courage and grit. A horse with plenty of
opportunities to win that doesn't win maybe didn't want to win badly
enough.

"If I can't buy a mare with top performance, I want to find a mare
who
showed some real ability," he said.

Rosenberg told breeders and potential breeders in his audience to do
their
homework in studying a horse's racing record. For example, find out
how
many starts the horse had and against what kind of company and where.
If
possible, talk to the owner, trainer and jockey about the horse.

"Pretty is as pretty does," Rosenberg offered, as he turned his
attention
to conformation. "I have to like a winner of a good race, no matter
what
the horse looks like."

He told a story about the Tartan Farms dispersal several years ago,
when
"the smartest people in the world" were shopping and saying, "Have
you ever
seen such a bunch of crooked mares?"

"The fact is every one of those mares ran a hole in the wind and
every one
of those mares produced stakes winners," Rosenberg said. 'to me,
that's the
model."

But Rosenberg does look for some conformation traits when selecting
broodmares. He likes a "big and roomy mare" who can carry a big foal,
because he feels a small mare cannot develop a good foal in utero.

"I do think a good shoulder and balance are important," he
continued. "I
don't mind if the knees are a liffle offset or the legs toe in or toe
out
to some degree, within reason. I do not want mares who are back at
the
knees or with bad feet. I have found that bad feet are highly
inheritable."

Rosenberg says another important consideration is the age of the
mare. In
an older mare, there is additional information available ‹ her
produce
record. 'That's probably the best measure," he said.

However, he noted there is a bias in the marketplace against foals of
older
mares, because statistics show older mares produce a lower percentage
of
superior runners than younger mares do. Rosenberg believes those
statistics
are skewed.

"I find, in general, that young mares are bred to proven stallions to
get
them off to a good start, and older mares are bred to unproven
stallions to
get the stallions off to a good start," he said. "Since most unproven
stallions don't make the grade, younger mares have a far greater
opportunity to come up with a good racehorse than older mares.

"It's hard for me to imagine a mare's genetic potential can change
with
age," he continued. "Fertility is another story. There is ample
evidence
that once a mare gets past 17 or 18 years of age, her fertility
declines
dramatically."

Rosenberg noted that people looking to get a big bang for their buck
sometimes purchase an older mare and hope they get a filly. He thinks
that
can be a good way to go, but cautions that the breeder may not get
many
chances with an older mare.

The Three Chimneys manager also recommends "ruthless culling" as part
of
the on-going selection process.

"It is important to look at your broodmares every year and determine
which
ones are performing up to expectations and which ones are not," he
advised.
"As breeders, we are constantly trying to move the bottom out and
raise the
level."

That is another reason Rosenberg likes to breed young mares to proven
sires.

"If I have bred my mare to an unproven stallion and the first two or
three
foals don't run, I don't know if I want to get rid of this mare or
not," he
noted. "If I breed her to a horse I know gets runners and she still
can't
get a runner, it does tell me something about her."

Rosenberg said the same principles he applies to selecting mares
apply to
selecting stallions, although he puts some added emphasis on
pedigree. "A
stallion with a great race record and a very weak pedigree has far
less
chance of siring good racehorses consistently than a good racehorse
with a
great pedigree," he said. "I would prefer a stallion be a graded
stakes
winner, but if not, I would want to have a very good idea of what
kind of
ability he had. A royally bred full brother to a champion that ran 10
times
and couldn't win does not interest me. A fulL brother to a champion
who
broke his maiden his first time out and never ran again might
interest me."

Rosenberg also considers a stallion's 2-year-old record.

"It does seem to be important that he at least was precocious enough
to get
to the racetrack at 2 and to win," he maintained.

Another thing he considers when selecting a stallion is the number of
mares
mated to the stud, which he feels is particularly important from his
position as a market breeder.

"I need to have enough foals by that stallion out on the racetrack
competing to give him an opportunity to come up with a good one and
for him
to be in the public eye," Rosenberg said. 'VVith stallions that have
very
small books, you are fighting an uphill battle as a breeder."

As with mares, Rosenberg tends to play down minor conformation flaws
in
stallions and feels the importance of a stallion's conformation
relates
more to planning which mares will be bred to him than whether he
likes him.

"If he can get runners, I like him," he said. "Once a horse is a
proven
sire, buyers tend to forgive conformation flaws that they expect to
see by
that sire."

He recalled an instance at a Keeneland sale when a prominent
California
owner and trainer were looking at a Mr. Prospector colt.

"You know, I've looked at every Mr. Prospector in this sale, and
they're
all crooked," the owner said.

"Yeah, but they limp fast," the trainer responded.

In planning matings, Rosenberg recommends breeding strength to
strength and
avoiding breeding a weakness to a weakness.

"This pertains not only to conformation traits but to racing
characteristics and temperament," he said. He feels breeders make a
fundamental mistake when they try to compensate for a characteristic
of a
horse by breeding it to a horse with an opposite characteristic.

"I remember in high school biology learning about Gregor Mendel, the
father
of genetics," Rosenberg said. "He bred tall peas to short peas, and
he
didn't get any medium peas. You either get tall or short; that's the
way
genetics works.

"But I find people who have a great big mare and breed her to a tiny
horse
thinking they are going to get an average size foal, or they've got
this
tiny mare and want to breed her to a stallion 17 hands to breed some
size
into her," he said, carrying the pea analogy to horse breeding. "I
don't
find it works that way at all.

"The same with speed and stamina. You have a mare that was really
quick at
five furlongs and breed her to a horse that could run a mile and a
half,
and you think you will get a horse that can run a mile. I think what
you
get is something that can't run at all."

Rosenberg also points out that mating two horses with similar
conformation
characteristics will produce more consistent conformation results.

"You have a mare who presumably is a model of what you are trying to
accomplish," he said. "If you breed her to a widely divergent type of
horse, sometimes you are going to get what he looks like, sometimes
you are
going to get what she looks like. It's always a guessing game and the
odds
are always against you, but if you breed like to like, you narrow
that
range and are more likely to get what you are looking for."

Rosenberg says there are rare stallions and mares who are strong
enough to
overcome and improve whatever they are bred to, but pointed
out, "Both
parents contribute 50 percent of the genetic material. Putting too
much
emphasis on either the sire or the dam is probably a mistake."

In the end, Rosenberg notes, no matter how careful and selective a
breeder
is, the odds are against making a profit in the marketplace or making
the
grade on the racetrack.

"We just hope that one day we can breed one or sell one or race one
that
makes up for all the others," he concluded. "But this is a wonderful
challenge. It is a great combination of art and science. You have to
control all the factors you can, and in the end, you just go with you
gut
feeling and hope you have guessed right enough of the time to get a
little
bit lucky.

"You have to love this to do it. You have to be at least half crazy,
and
probably all the way crazy helps, to persevere.

[zoobird]

He was the best horse Elusive Quality ever sired by a wide margin at any distance...short or long.

Exclusive Quality would have been awfully tough at about 7F. In his four races, he set one track record, and defeated Bernardini, Diabolical, Songster, and In Summation.