Final Furlong Forum
Final Furlong
Nov. 23, 2021 6:54pm

Final Furlong Forum - POLL: Re-calculate breed rankings?

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 23, 2017, 10:54:25 PM

Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
Final Furlong Forum  |  Breeding  |  General/Questions  |  Topic: POLL: Re-calculate breed rankings?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]  All Go Down Print
Poll
Question: Should breed rankings be re-calculated?
Yes
No

Author Topic: POLL: Re-calculate breed rankings?  (Read 3931 times)
Grace Littlef
Beta Testers
Race Winner
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,299
Stable Name: Iron Spur Stables


Proud Rattie Mommy!!

View Profile
« Reply #45 on: March 08, 2012, 05:00:28 PM »

Great thanks!
Logged
WHEN GOD CREATED THE HORSE,HE SPOKE TO THE MAGNIFICENT CREATURE: I HAVE MADE THEE WITHOUT EQUAL, ALL THE TREASURE OF THIS EARTH LIE BETWEEN THY EYES.

Home of,Ch. Set It OffNew in the Studbarn-guest stallion-NCh.Irish Gold,our studs- ICH.Gilded Saint, NCH.Golden Text, NCh. Black Light II
hollyh1125
Guest
« Reply #46 on: September 05, 2012, 07:07:18 PM »

Hi, I've tried to read over the entire thread again and can't find anything addressing horses racing who may not be mature yet.  Is a mare or stallion penalized by a foal who doesn't do well at 2 and 3 but starts winning at 4? 

I'm asking because as a trainer of a few late maturing horses they may not do well at 2 and 3 but show some promise by placing in a few races, because of this I continue to race them in possibly 15-20 races a year (so they gain experience) when suddenly at age 4 they are winning stakes races. 

If the horse is not a winner at 2 or 3, but was raced consistantly, does it hurt the dam or sires ranking?

Maybe only average the top 5 races in a year for each foal so that "hasbeen" and "immature" horses will not have such an impact but great horse will still have a good impact especially if their 5 top races include 5 stake wins...



« Last Edit: September 05, 2012, 07:08:53 PM by hollyh1125 » Logged
Shanthi
Administrator
Kentucky Derby Winner
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,692
Stable Name: Stillwater Farms


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: January 22, 2013, 11:26:17 AM »

Hi, I've tried to read over the entire thread again and can't find anything addressing horses racing who may not be mature yet.  Is a mare or stallion penalized by a foal who doesn't do well at 2 and 3 but starts winning at 4?

Sorry, I only just saw this now.

Yes, using this system a sire/dam would have his/her ranking points go down if you continue to race horses under the age of 5 who aren't doing well. (Age 5+ only counts for the horse point-wise so if they suck at that age it doesn't hurt the ranking average.)

Looking in the database, of the current racehorses, their average age to stop being immature is 2.88 years. So most horses will be mature by age 3, and certainly by age 4. (For exact numbers: Horses maturing sometime during their 2yo year? 6,456. 3yo year? Another 2,942. 4yo year? 571. 5yo year? 11.)

Babies don't need that much racing under their belts to get experience, so the assumption (for breed ranking purposes) is that if your foal is running badly as a 2yo (or 3yo, if you think it's still immature), you put it out to pasture to grow for a bit rather than continue to race it over and over and have it not earn any money. (Because what's the point? You get no money and, for the breeder, the parents' breed rankings suffer.)

Basically the rule of thumb is that people won't race horses that suck. ;) Whether that's because they're over-the-hill and should be retired, or they're babies and need more time to grow, the game will assume that you don't want to throw money down the drain running a horse that doesn't want to run. Obviously there are exceptions (trying out a new surface to see if that works, giving a youngster some starts to get experience, etc) but I wouldn't expect anyone to run a horse 20+ times without it earning anything at 2/3, and then have it start winning races at 4. (Feel free to prove me wrong, but I'd still wonder at the cost of those 20+ races.)

Quote
Maybe only average the top 5 races in a year for each foal so that "hasbeen" and "immature" horses will not have such an impact but great horse will still have a good impact especially if their 5 top races include 5 stake wins...

I think the entire point is to get a view of the parent's ability to throw foals who can run
Logged
hollyh1125
Guest
« Reply #48 on: January 26, 2013, 01:05:20 PM »

It makes sense. :)  With that being said would it be neat to have "crop" breed rankings for an at-a-glance purpose? For example, to have seperate breed rankings for average 2, 3, 4, & 5+, crops.  If a stud had multi gold and silver rankings then that would be awesome and not necessarily hurt him if he is bronze at 2 & 5+, but breeders would be able to decipher this studs maturity range more easily. This way different age ranges wont necessarily decrease their breed ranking but would rather make it more dimensional? Maybe? Just think out loud. :)
Logged
Shanthi
Administrator
Kentucky Derby Winner
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,692
Stable Name: Stillwater Farms


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: January 26, 2013, 01:30:09 PM »

Hm...maybe. I'm not sure how an age-based breed ranking would work. Is a crop of 10 foals that includes 9 winners and 1 unplaced more gold/platinum worthy than a crop of 10 foals with 1 MSW, 2 winners, and 7 unplaced?

I'm also not sure the best way to access/present that information (because you could want something super specific, like a sire who throws stakes winners at 2 and 3 from 8-9f turf).

I'll think about it, though. :) Plenty of scope to add things to the beta.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]  All Go Up Print 
Final Furlong Forum  |  Breeding  |  General/Questions  |  Topic: POLL: Re-calculate breed rankings? « previous next »
 
SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
Final Furlong Forum, POLL: Re-calculate breed rankings? - Theme by Mustang Forums