Can anyone tell me what ...

[LemonSoupKid]

Barbaro's dosage is? Hmm, maybe this'll facilitate discussion.

LSK

[Tee]

DP = 10-4-21-2-1 (38) DI = 1.81

[LemonSoupKid]

dosage is a fraud

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by LemonSoupKid

dosage is a fraud

Where do you draw the line? Where do you fit the data?

Horses with dosage under 4.00 are supposed to be well suited to win the Derby. OK. Here is your list of horses under 4.00:

A.P. Warrior
Barbaro
Bluegrass Cat
Bob and John
Brother Derek
Cause to Believe
Deputy Glitters
Flashy Bull
Jazil
Keyed Entry
Point Determined
Private Vow
Seaside Retreat
Sharp Humor
Showing Up
Steppenwolfer
Storm Treasure
Sweetnorthernsaint

....some system, eh? Big flat bet loss on Saturday.

Oh, how about the "dual qualifier" system? Only two horses qualify this time:

Brother Derek
Private Vow

....again, no winner.

I guess you could say "Bet the 4 lowest Dosage Indexes" and then you would have had yourself a winning system, as Barbaro was ranked 4th in that category.

[Tom]

It is not a system, and you can't use it like one. With 18 out of 20 horses meeting the guideline, of course it would show a flat bet loss.

Back in the years when there were only 3-4 horses, and they kept winning, then was the time to be betting it. The power of dossage lay in the ability to summarily dismiss unqualified favorites and low priced horses ( which was just about everything Lukas used to show up with throughout the 80's). I think it is a testiment to it's predictive power that so many horses now qualify.

It did eliminate Lawyer Ron for me, who would have been my top bet but for that.

Dual Qulaifiers had to eventually prove nonsense because you were mixing two unrelated things, one of them mad-made by opinion.

[46zilzal]

Originally Posted by LemonSoupKid

dosage is a fraud

no. It needs an update in basic structure. With the proliferation of 2 year old racing, the increased carding with huge purses, the breeder's reactive move to breed speedier and more precosious off spring AND the LACK of graded stakes opportunities for real marathons, there has been a huge influx of sires on the speed side of the dosage without a corresponding influx on the stamina (solid, professional) side ON DIRT. The base numbers need to be recalculated to represent these disparities.

[PaceAdvantage]

Pssst.....46.....LemonSoupKid was being sarcastic.....pass it on!

[LemonSoupKid]

Originally Posted by Tom

It is not a system, and you can't use it like one. With 18 out of 20 horses meeting the guideline, of course it would show a flat bet loss.

Back in the years when there were only 3-4 horses, and they kept winning, then was the time to be betting it. The power of dossage lay in the ability to summarily dismiss unqualified favorites and low priced horses ( which was just about everything Lukas used to show up with throughout the 80's). I think it is a testiment to it's predictive power that so many horses now qualify.

It did eliminate Lawyer Ron for me, who would have been my top bet but for that.

Dual Qulaifiers had to eventually prove nonsense because you were mixing two unrelated things, one of them mad-made by opinion.

Thank you. Finally someone who is explaining for those that don't see what it's aim/goal is. It's what they call in science a sensitive vs. specific test. DRF made it some kind of system, terribly simplifying it as if it were created to predict winners. That was never its role. I'm here to inform people to use it properly, which means not dismiss it due to simplicity of human thought and basically, laziness.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by LemonSoupKid

That was never its role. I'm here to inform people to use it properly, which means not dismiss it due to simplicity of human thought and basically, laziness.

Not to be rude, but did dosage play a roll in this recent post of yours? If so, I rest my case:

I did a whole write-up on this derby, which if you care to see I can post or send it to you. The gist of it however, is that these horses are the only ones that fit the profile of recent derby winners (I 'cap them in order):

Sweetnorthernsaint
Showing Up
Brother Derek
Pt. Determined
Bob and John

My two long shots are Jazil and Deputy Glitters. I'm playing the above 5 in an exacta box, the top 3 in a tri box, and a small win bet on Showing Up. A large win bet frontlines for me with Sweetnorthernsaint. I always bet more sparingly on this race however, then I drill the Preakness and Belmont (have won those 5 years going now - always a profit and substantial).

Obviously you'll notice who is left out. We'll see if I'm right.

LemonSoupKid

ps - did you see that Lemons Forever? I always bet any horse with Lemon in the name. 47-1! haha! Nice.

Just to add something extra, I'm sick and tired of seeing guys write off dosage as a "fraud" (Beyer said that, I like the guy, but that is a dumb comment). It was never meant to be a single handicapping utility. It supplements other aspects of the race and MOST IMPORTANTLY it points out the horses who are going to run towards historical quality in a classic race like the Derby. Simply put, the best races of all time have been run by horses with dosage profiles from 1-3, NOT 4 or above. No one ever said they couldn't win, but it takes unlikely circumstances for these horses to triumph (ie last year race falling apart and no one else running). If you doubt, look it up and check out the most dominating performances, and you'll see that those horses dosage is very classic. I just wanted to set this straight for people who write it off as being useless. It's no more useless than what one thinks about a horse who can "rate" or any other subjective measure that the pundits throw out there, and it actually can be tested. Cheers.

I don't see Barbaro mentioned anywhere. Yet you'll smugly sit there and accuse folks of being lazy, and to "inform us TO USE IT PROPERLY" when you yourself don't have the winner listed in your TOP 5?

You're right, I don't get it....

[hurrikane]

Originally Posted by 46zilzal

no. It needs an update in basic structure. With the proliferation of 2 year old racing, the increased carding with huge purses, the breeder's reactive move to breed speedier and more precosious off spring AND the LACK of graded stakes opportunities for real marathons, there has been a huge influx of sires on the speed side of the dosage without a corresponding influx on the stamina (solid, professional) side ON DIRT. The base numbers need to be recalculated to represent these disparities.

wasn't it backfitted, I mean updated, last time it wasn't working?

[witchdoctor]

For what it is worth. Here is how GSV did in the Derby.
George has a tendency to toot his own horn but he did pretty well.


http://www.pedigreequery.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9661

[cj]

Originally Posted by witchdoctor

For what it is worth. Here is how GSV did in the Derby.
George has a tendency to toot his own horn but he did pretty well.


http://www.pedigreequery.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9661

Who is George? Is that relevant to this thread?

[witchdoctor]

George is George Smith a pedigree consultant who also bets a little. I put up his GSV as a pedigree number that seems to be more relavant than dosage and any of that stuff Stitch puts out. I guess I saw this thread as a pedigree thread rather than a dosage thread..

As a pedigree consultant, he seems to have a good track record. If you look at his website, he puts up the names of the horses that he put the pedigrees together including the winners and the losers
http://www.members.shaw.ca/thematchmaker/

[cj]

Gotcha, I was wondering if there was a connection to the thread starter, that is all.

[LemonSoupKid]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Not to be rude, but did dosage play a roll in this recent post of yours? If so, I rest my case:



I don't see Barbaro mentioned anywhere. Yet you'll smugly sit there and accuse folks of being lazy, and to "inform us TO USE IT PROPERLY" when you yourself don't have the winner listed in your TOP 5?

You're right, I don't get it....

I'm always ready to entertain thoughts and/or criticism; no worries. Did I mention that I threw Barbaro out because of dosage? Did I even mention using dosage as a handicapping factor in that write up? No. Did I use it? Yes. It happens that my top choices are all under 4 in dosage , and I stayed away from Lawyer Ron (4.14) due to many things, one of which was dosage. I just didn't like Barbaro as much as I liked SNS (1.3) and BD (2.3), and Showing up was a stab at a horse who might have run his butt off for no reason (Bluegrass Cat).

The derby is unlike other races due to the 20 starters. Barbaro is classy, but is he as classy as some think already? I'm not sold yet.

I'll be back in the Preakness and Belmont. And I'll run my mouth at those times, because my history is wonderful in those races. I don't in the Derby because it's just a crazy race. Still, it's fun to bet on. Peace.

LSK