Tags

, ,

[This is the fourth part of the in-depth statistical analysis of the Rasmussen Factor that has been ongoing at this blog for the past couple of weeks. The statistically infirm are urged to take a glass of whiskey before entering the lists.]

Patterns

OK, the statistically challenged may now rejoin the discussion, if they feel so inclined.

Chapter 12 of Racehorse Breeding Theories also discusses two particular patterns of RF: the Formula One Pattern and the Delta Pattern. The example of the former it shows is Quiet American, who is inbred 4×3 to Cequillo, who is the third dam of the sire of Quiet
American, Fappiano, and the third dam of Quiet American himself. The duplication must be in the direct female line to both the sire and the dam of the foal to qualify for this pattern.

The example of the latter it shows is Roving Boy, 1982 champion 2-year-old colt (not 1980, as the chapter incorrectly states). Roving Boy was inbred 3×3 to the full siblings War Relic and War Kilt (both by Man o’ War out of Friar’s Carse). War Relic was the sire of Relic, the sire of
Olden Times, the sire of Roving Boy. War Kilt was the third dam of Roving Boy. So this pattern involves duplications of a male on top in the direct male line to a female on bottom in the direct female line who are full siblings.

What these two patterns have in common is duplicating second, third, fourth, or fifth dams of a foal. The chapter implies that these two patterns are even better than the garden varieties of RF. I thought that actually made some sense because mares such as Cequillo and War Kilt are usually pretty good on their own in the first place. Duplicating them through the sire above might actually produce some good results. I decided to find out.

Table 6 lists the 542 foals (13.95 percent of all 3,886 RF qualifiers) who have duplications of their second, third, fourth, or fifth dams (regardless of where the other duplication through the sire occurs). It has the same format as Tables 1-4. It differs from Tables 1-4 in that it is not dominated by names such as Almahmoud and Somethingroyal. The name that appears most often is probably Raise You, the dam of Raise a Native and of nine fillies, most of whom still appear in pedigrees, including Aces Swinging, Queens Full, My Sister Kate, and others. But for the most part, Table 6 has a much wider variety of names than Tables 1-5 did because it is not dominated by names associated with dominant sires.

Nineteen of those 542 foals were stakes winners. That is 3.51 percent, which is lower than the overall result of 3.76 percent and the overall RF result of 3.71 percent. Those 19 stakes winners earned 12,700 Performance Points, an average of 668 per stakes winner. That 668 is better than the overall number of 627 and the overall RF number of 621. So they had fewer stakes winners but better stakes winners. Taking both factors into account, their overall rating (PPI, Performance Point Index) was 0.994, which is indeed slightly better than the PPI of 0.9754 for all RF qualifiers. The only problem is that it is still a tad below average (1.00).

Those 542 foals with duplications of their second, third, fourth, or fifth dams sold for a gross of $43,908,042, an average of $81,011, and a maverage of 183.14. Their prices were considerably higher than the overall numbers of $48,313 (average) and 149.82 (maverage). So somebody expected foals with this pedigree characteristic to be above-average performers. In reality, they were just a tad below average. About the only good thing you can say about this group is that they brought their consignors more money than they should have.

Of these 542 foals, 184 fit either the Formula One or Delta Patterns. I have denoted them in Table 6 by listing them in all caps. I did not differentiate whether they were Formula One or Delta. If you really want to know, look them up yourself.

Seven of these 184 foals were stakes winners. That is 3.8 percent, which is indeed slightly higher than the overall number of 3.76 percent. The only problem is that they were not particularly good stakes winners. They earned a total of 3,547 Performance Points, which is an average of only 507, which is well below the overall average of 627. Taking both of these factors, quantity and quality, into account, their overall rating (PPI) was an abysmal 0.818.

These 184 foals sold for a gross of $14,051,097, an average of $76,365, and a maverage of 178.89. Their prices were somewhat lower than for all 542 foals (although still considerably higher than for all 54,244 foals), but so were their results.

Once you get below 1,000 foals, results should be taken with a grain of salt. These smaller groups (542 or 184 foals) could actually be better than the numbers show. They also could actually be worse.

Similarly, you might look only at the 1999 stakes winners in Table 5 and conclude that RF is really not very good. Or look at the 2002 stakes winners in Table 5 and conclude that RF is really good. Taking all four years into account, the results are pretty reliable and show that RF qualifiers sold for slightly more than they should have and performed slightly worse than they should have. They were very close to the norms for all 54,244 foals on both counts. If the Formula One or Delta Patterns actually do yield good results, you cannot prove it by this large group of sales foals. Ditto for inbreeding to the second, third, fourth, or fifth dams of foals in general.

Advertisements