Final Furlong Forum
Final Furlong
Nov. 17, 2021 9:34pm

Final Furlong Forum - Dosage, Chef-de-Race, etc.

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 18, 2017, 01:34:38 AM

Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
Final Furlong Forum  |  Breeding  |  Lineage Questions  |  Topic: Dosage, Chef-de-Race, etc.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  All Go Down Print
Author Topic: Dosage, Chef-de-Race, etc.  (Read 6789 times)
JasonCameron
Guest
« Reply #30 on: March 25, 2005, 03:44:03 AM »

 Yeah fair enough... :) This

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

horses as possible? :) 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.
Logged
Cheq
Guest
« Reply #31 on: March 25, 2005, 03:52:31 AM »

 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

;)

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.
 
Logged
KindleHopeFarms
Guest
« Reply #32 on: March 25, 2005, 04:07:03 AM »

 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
Logged
JasonCameron
Guest
« Reply #33 on: March 25, 2005, 09:14:32 AM »

 Hehe, yeah Kerry, it's fun

to crunch numbers... Numbers of foals! ;) I'm thinking next year I'm going to try and breed

some 'specific' foals... We'll see...
Logged
Shanthi
Administrator
Kentucky Derby Winner
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,685
Stable Name: Stillwater Farms


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: March 25, 2005, 11:14:52 AM »

Quote from: Cheq
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 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
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.  

;)


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

what?
Logged
Shanthi
Administrator
Kentucky Derby Winner
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,685
Stable Name: Stillwater Farms


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: March 25, 2005, 11:21:23 AM »

Quote from: KindleHopeFarms
Yeah...  cheqs got the right idea... I think it'll

definitely help with breeding statistics... and it's fun to crunch numbers anyway!

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).

Logged
Cheq
Guest
« Reply #36 on: March 25, 2005, 01:05:36 PM »

 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.
Logged
Shanthi
Administrator
Kentucky Derby Winner
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,685
Stable Name: Stillwater Farms


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: March 25, 2005, 02:06:13 PM »

 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.
Logged
KindleHopeFarms
Guest
« Reply #38 on: March 25, 2005, 05:07:14 PM »

 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..:P)
Although, that

doesn't keep you from doing it Shanthi! :-D 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...
Logged
Shanthi
Administrator
Kentucky Derby Winner
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,685
Stable Name: Stillwater Farms


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: March 25, 2005, 05:33:51 PM »

 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).

Highland

Rogue - I/C

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

What's It Worth -

I

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

Secretariat -

I

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
Logged
Shanthi
Administrator
Kentucky Derby Winner
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,685
Stable Name: Stillwater Farms


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: March 25, 2005, 05:43:36 PM »

 For the Reines de Course, we

have:

Townsend Holly -

B/I

BRILLIANT:
49(7)-12(1)-10(1)-9(1)-4(1) -

117pts
INTERMEDIATE:
69(17)-15(2)-12(1)-12(4)-8 - 229pts
CLASSIC:
21(5)-2-5(1)-3(1)-0 -

39pts
SOLID:
3(1)-0-1-0-0 - 1pts
PROFESSIONAL:
4-1-0-1-1 - 5pts

That's

Debatable - I

BRILLIANT:
36-10-2-8-1 -

22pts
INTERMEDIATE:
45(5)-10-6(2)-7-5 - 69pts
CLASSIC:
27(5)-6-5-6(1)-1 -

33pts
SOLID:
10(2)-2-2-1-1(1) - 21pts
PROFESSIONAL:
4-0-1-0-0 -

1pts

Hollywood Queen - I/P
BRILLIANT:
46(2)-12-9(1)-6-3 -

53pts
INTERMEDIATE:
86(12)-18(2)-22(4)-15(1)-8 - 272pts
CLASSIC:
16(1)-6-2-1-2 -

31pts
SOLID:
11(4)-3-3(1)-3(2)-0 - 49pts
PROFESSIONAL:
9(6)-2(2)-0-1(1)-1(1) -

101pts

Nation's Pride - I/C
BRILLIANT:
62(3)-6-11-6(1)-11

- 39pts
INTERMEDIATE:
99(15)-13(3)-10(1)-21(6)-16(3) -

278pts
CLASSIC:
50(19)-6(3)-11(4)-11(5)-9(5) - 322pts
SOLID:
15(3)-1-3(2)-3-3 -

54pts
PROFESSIONAL:
9-2-1-0-1 - 5pts

Miss Hayday -

C

BRILLIANT:
41(2)-14(1)-4-4-4(1) -

91pts
INTERMEDIATE:
61(6)-19(1)-17(1)-5-6(1) - 158pts
CLASSIC:
23-2-4-3-4 -

11pts
SOLID:
4-0-0-2-1 - pts
PROFESSIONAL:
3-0-0-0-0 - pts
Logged
KindleHopeFarms
Guest
« Reply #41 on: March 25, 2005, 06:51:43 PM »

 Looks beautiful...  I'm

sure you've thought of this already: to save you time and energy I hope you plan to automate

it...:D  Just in case That's Debatable suddenly becomes professional when Major's Flight

wins lots and lots of REALLY LONG stakes races...;) you won't have to do it by hand....  ( I

should be dragged out into the street and shot...:P)
Kerry
Logged
Shanthi
Administrator
Kentucky Derby Winner
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,685
Stable Name: Stillwater Farms


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: March 25, 2005, 06:58:33 PM »

 Yep, this'll all be

automated eventually.

(And I think at this point, I should be

dragged out in the street and shot.  ;)  Especially since I'm finding all this random

number-crunching code rather fun...)
Logged
JasonCameron
Guest
« Reply #43 on: March 25, 2005, 07:21:17 PM »

 Yes, that's quite wierd

Shanthi... :P

Anyway, this all looks really cool. So basically, every good line in the

race seems to be intermediate right? It is quite interesting when you put it all like that.

:) I'm still a little confused, but I'm sure it will come to me sooner or later.

Another

great feature from Shanthi... When's it gonna stop?! :P
Logged
Cheq
Guest
« Reply #44 on: March 25, 2005, 08:08:03 PM »

 now you need a standard for

each classification. Just because a horse qualifies as a chef doesn't mean he's a chef in

each catagory.

I don't think you really had to weight the races, because were just

looking for distances. But I don't know that it makes any difference either. And the numbers

are about what I expected since the majority of races seem to be in the I,C area.

I think

every horse we designated a chef qualifies at his highest catagory than a set number that is

needed to qualify for a second catagory. 1500 would be my choice but that's arbitrary.  
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  All Go Up Print 
Final Furlong Forum  |  Breeding  |  Lineage Questions  |  Topic: Dosage, Chef-de-Race, etc. « previous next »
 
SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
Final Furlong Forum, Dosage, Chef-de-Race, etc. - Theme by Mustang Forums