Derby 2015

Peintre Celebre wrote: »

The trials have been woeful this year. It says a lot when a horse that won a handicap is favourite for the Derby. Christopermarlowe disappointing today but I'm not exactly shocked, he may have been unbeaten but they were poor races he won (though he did beat a nice horse in his maiden). Found it extremely difficult to envisage a Derby winner by Tapit

IT'S easy to be downbeat about this crop of three-year-olds. Gleneagles was undoubtedly impressive in the 2,000 Guineas and he could be a very smart miler, but further up the stamina spectrum we could be looking at 2013 all over again.

tryfix wrote: »

Well the Dante was a cracker, three well thought of horses pulling clear of good horses, but the O'Brien horses couldn't have run to their GP winning 2yo form.

Hard to figure what to make of the three of them. Jack Hobbs is 8/1 with Ladbrokes which seems a fair bet after he proved he is a top class colt today and Elm Park is the same price and definitely heading to Epsom which can't be said of the other two.

tryfix wrote: »

Well the Dante was a cracker, three well thought of horses pulling clear of good horses, but the O'Brien horses couldn't have run to their GP winning 2yo form.[/I]

Hard to figure what to make of the three of them. Jack Hobbs is 8/1 with Ladbrokes which seems a fair bet after he proved he is a top class colt today and Elm Park is the same price and definitely heading to Epsom which can't be said of the other two.

Pinesky wrote: »

Gina Harding reported AOB as being worried that there is an infection in the yard as some horses have run way below expectations.

Gringo180 wrote: »

Is Gleneagles some way related to Giants Causeway? He looks like 10f would be his limit although in saying that Giants Causeway wasnt stopping at the line in the Breeders Cup Classic in what was a blistering pace.

diomed wrote: »

Dosage Index is not up to date, and it also ignores good sires.

Galileo (1998) with an AEI (average Earnings Index) of 3.53 is not a Chef de Race. The best sire in Europe with three Derby winners (New Approach; Ruler Of The World; Australia) and one Oaks winner (Was) is not good enough to be a Chef de Race! Galileo was champion GB & Ir sire in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2012, 2014.

I decided to look at the Derby winners where the Dosage Index gave small points to the winners.
I was looking at sires in the pedigree that the Dosage Index ignores as inferior.

Henbit……………….....1st gen Hawaii 12f Group 1 win, 2nd gen Utrillo 12f Group 2 win, 2nd gen Chateaugay 10f Kentucky Derby & 12f Belmont Stakes
Sea The Stars….….…1st gen Cape Cross 8f Group 1 AEI 2.17, 3rd gen Lombard 14 Group wins (6 at 12f)
Dr Devious………......2nd gen Lorenzaccio 10f Group 1
Shergar……………......2nd gen Honeyway 10f Group 1, 3rd gen Charlottesville 12f French Derby
Oath……………….......1st gen Fairy King full sibling of Sadler's Wells, 2nd gen Troy 12f Epsom Derby, 3rd gen Alcide 12f & 14f Group 1s
Snow Knight………...2nd gen Flush Royal 11f Group 2, 2nd gen Pardal 12f Group 2
Australia………….....1st gen Galileo 12f Epsom Derby winner AEI 3.53, 2nd gen Cape Cross 8f Group 1 AEI 2.17
New Approach………1st gen Galileo 12f Epsom Derby winner AEI 3.53
High-Rise……………..2nd gen High Line 5 group 2/3 wins at 12f/13f, 3rd gen High Hat 13f Group win, 3rd gen Sea Hawk 12.5f Group 1 win
Sir Percy……….….....2nd gen Darshaan 12f French Derby; 2nd gen Blakeney 12f Epsom Derby; 3rd gen Sassafras 12f Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe; 4th gen Pinza 12f Epsom Derby

The basics of dosage profiling note that only a small number of stallions appear with any great frequency in pedigrees, and thus are deemed highly influential. Such stallions are labelled 'chefs-de-race', French for 'chiefs of racing'.
Chefs-de-race are then assigned characteristics from one or two of the following categories: brilliant, intermediate, classic, solid or professional, relating to the stallion's aptitude (from left to right) for speed through to endurance.
To calculate a runner's dosage profile, every stallion in the first four generations is considered.
If a chef-de-race exists in the first generation, it will add 16 points into the category to which he belongs - or eight in each if the stallion is split, such as brilliant/intermediate, or classic/solid (stallions cannot be labelled more than two categories apart).
Any chef-de-race in the second generation will add eight points (or four if split), the third generation will add four and the fourth, two. All of the points in each category are then added to generate the dosage profile; for example, the 1969 sire Halo was awarded a dosage profile of 11-6-26-1-2, reading again from left to right, brilliant (11), intermediate (6), classic (26), solid (1) and professional (2).
From the dosage profile, a horse's dosage index is then calculated by the ratio of points in the 'speed wing' (brilliant, intermediate and half the classic figure) to those in the stamina wing (half the classic, the solid and professional points). The dosage index of Halo was 1.88.
Generally a lower dosage index will denote a greater aptitude for stamina, while a figure of 1.00 indicates a balance of both speed and stamina.

Obri1 wrote: »

You gentlemen that are into the Dosage Index stuff can you explain Limato DI 0.50, Night of Thunder DI 0.82, Canford Cliffs DI 0.82, Excelebration DI 5.00,

I find that DI is something that you can put some stead in but that really there is always going to be good horses that are betrayed by there DI due to some part of their family not being seen as of high quality enough or frankly just being left out of the calculation altogether for instance i would argue that although DI is an interesting idea it should be calculated based on all the stallions that are in a pedigree as any one of those stallions can come through and be more dominant than others.

Frankly i find that it is something that can be highly obscured by the track performance of tonnes of horses every year and this is probably why i put little stock in it compared to what i have visually witnessed from the horses through a season, for instance i just took the July Cup and pulled out the DI for the last 20 winner and of those last 20 winners 11 based on DI should not be sprinters.

Slade Power DI 1.22, Dream Ahead 1.33, Marchand D'or DI 1.86, Sakhee's Secret DI 1.89, Les Arcs DI 1.60, Frizzante DI 1.67, Oasis Dream DI 1.83, Continent DI 1.77, Mozart DI 1.40, Stravinsky DI 1.81, Owington DI 1.34 in fact they should not even be milers.

To put that in perspective they have a similar DI to Azamour 1.67, Dylan Thomas 1.55, Duke of Marmalade 1.38, Swain 1.22, Daylami 1.43, Pentire 2.20, Kings Theatre 1.29 who all won the King George VI and Queen ELizabeth Stakes in the Same time period.

What i am getting at is that horses do not conform to ideas like DI. They appear to me as a nice guide but really apart from that is is of little value in comparison to which distance a horse is truly suited to, which in my opinion is best seen on the track and if that hasn't come to light for the derby horses at this stage then it never will. Yes i do get that it comes into play more so over a stiff course at 1m4f at Epsom like the Derby but to ask horses that cant compete in group company in trials to somehow when they run in the derby over i grant you an extra 2 furlongs to improve markedly is erroneous. The horse has to have a base ability and having a dosage index suited to running the race distance will not change that.

Just a little end note there is a large amount of people who breed racehorses throughout the world that do follow DI going both ways in that commercial breeders attempt to get a higher DI to put in more speed to get Two year old winners and Private Breeders try to get a lower DI (to win the Derby) and i would actually say that what should be taken into account more that general DI is that for each horse in the pedigrees race distance to be taken into account, of course this is very hard to achieve unless you have all the relevant data and at this point in time is very hard to find and apply.

Obri1 wrote: »

Now Bear with me i know this is long and im probably waffling away to beat the band (I should be studying currently instead )

And thanks for coming back to me on it i really appreciate it and i find it a really interesting discussion.

So the great influences for speed that are in a large number of pedigrees these days are ignored - Danehill, Green Desert etc,

Also ive noticed when your coming back with a lot of this analysis your having to adapt the DI for most of these horses based on other factors that DI is not accounting for ie what the mothers DI is or being by a speed sire. If they are a speed sire then surely they should be included as a Chef de race on the Brilliant level (or another group added (Cheap Speed)) and thereby have a weight towards what the DI of an individual should be and this is what i was getting at, if you ignore a horse in a pedigree such as a Danehill or a Green Desert are you not just ignoring a major genetic component of what is going in to the make up of the individual horse based on them not being on Dr Romans Chef de race list.

Also what if Dr Romans has got it wrong on certain Chef de Race in that they are actually capable of getting horses over a multitude of distances which has been shown by for instance Cape Cross in modern day (probably never going to be a Chef de race). Also by ignoring certain lesser stallions that appear in pedigrees throughout the course of breeding history your also ignoring the genetic influence that they are having on the stock for instance i know from looking at pedigrees that a horse like Sing or Absalom are a major influence for increasing the speed in a horse but because they do not show up in a large number of pedigrees they are ignored as having no influence on what is coming about from a mating.

The other problem i have which you seem to include for yourself when your explaining why certain horses appear to run in a particular way is that the female genetic influence exerted by dams throughout the pedigree of theses horses is ignored - and yes i know that Dr Romans says that they are accounted for by including Chef de races that appear on the the dam side but it does ignore the aspect that the mares may have ran over a different distance or that a specific dam line family is more orientated towards speed or stamina in difference to the dams sires own DI and ideal difference, also this as you have illustrated above completely changes what the progeny of a certain mare run over in comparison to the runners own personal DI.

When dosage appears to not suit the horses known track ability and distance of running it appears to be adapted by having to add in extra data like such and such a horse was by a sire who was a 2.86 DI so thats why they didnt stay or their mother had a DI of X figure greater that 3 because it was by an american sire, well that frankly just seems to me as revisionist the system either works or it doesnt, it either accounts for what has been seen on the racetrack or it doesnt, it cant just be a case of well that horse there changed the pedigree so thats why its DI is screwed up, DI is supposed to have accounted already for that horse and yet the calculation is messed up - then the system doesnt really work.

For instance from a pedigree point of view its quite clear why those sprinters were sprinters and why those stamina horses were stamina horses based on the sires they were by and the mares they were out of (even though alot of them are not on the chef de race list) with out taking into regard their DI, and to bring it back to the derby its quite clear why they are derby horses they show stamina in their work at home and on the racetrack. For instance the Derby Field -

I had this horse down where he is normally in the betting but really i think he shows why im not a fan of DI and the problems with it

Moheet - High Chaparral ex Abunai (Pivotal) - DI 0.68 - More than likely the entire dam side is being ignored by the Chef de Race list which will orientate the DI to out and out staying, i would from a pedigree standpoint hazard a guess that he might be more orientated towards speed, in fact from a DI perspective the calculation will only take into account Sadlers Wells (Classic/Staying), Shirley Heights (Classic/Professional), Nureyev (Classic) and Northern Dancer (Brilliance/Classic) and ignore Neartic, Bold Reason, Kris, Cozzene, Known Fact, Lomond, Warning, Polar Falcon, Darshaan and Pivotal, and this i suppose highlights the issue with DI that i have, this is an outstanding bunch of sires that have influenced pedigrees for years and all of them have been ignored as they are not on the Chef de Race list. Infact i find it interesting that Neartic the sire of Northern Dancer isnt on the Chef List but his son is even though every single pedigree that northern dancer is in so also is Neartic.

After that the horses this is the rest of them in the betting from coral - by sires statistical winning distance of Progeny Skip them all if you find it unimportant

Golden Horn - Cape Cross ex Fleche D'Or (Dubai Destination) DI 1.75 - Sire has 101 winners at 5-6F, 299 winners 7-9F, 127 winners 10-11f and 127 winners 12-13F so Cape Cross can get horses at a multitude of distances.

Zawraq - Shamardal ex Sundis (Sadlers Wells) - DI 1.24 - Sire has 82 winners 5-6F, 157 winners 7-9F, 48 winners 10-11F, 16 winners 12-13F Can get horses at a multitude of distances but more orientated towards speed despite Zawraqs DI and his own of 1.72.

Jack Hobbs - Halling ex Swains Gold (Swain) - DI 1.18 - Sire has 25 winners at 5-6F, 124 winners at 7-9F, 97 winners at 10-11F, 72 winners at 12-13F, Def more towards Staying but still capable of getting a 5-6F winner which just shows the madness of DI as if Halling (DI 0.71) who i would consider an out and out staying sire can get winners over the shortest distances anything can happen.

Elm Park - Phoenix Reach ex Lady Brora (Dashing Blade) - DI 1.18 - Sire has 3 winners 5-6F, 8 winners 7-9F, 4 winners 10-11F, 4 winners 12-13F, More towards milers but capable of all distances despite DI 3.00.

Giovanni Canaletto - Galileo (Derby Winner) ex Love Me True (Kingmambo) - DI 1.05 - Sire has 8 winners at 5-6F, 253 winners at 7-9F, 225 winners at 10-11F, 171 winners at 12-13F, def milers to stayers but im interested that their slightly more orientated to less that 12F,

Hans Holbein - Montjeu (Irish and French Derby winner) ex Lila (Shirley Heights) - DI 0.48 - Sire has 3 winners at 5-6F, 130 winners at 7-9F, 148 winners at 10-11F, 108 winners at 12-13F, Sire cant get speed horses but even spread of winners from 7 - 13F, i would consider him an out and out staying sire myself so interesting the 130 winners at miler distances. The First true stayer in the race in my opinion but if its good ground may get caught for a kick but could grind it out on pedigree.

Highland Reel - Galileo ex Hveger (Danehill) - DI 1.20 - Sire see above. Adding Danehill in would orientate it more towards speed but up to dam i suppose.

Kilimanjaro - High Chaparral (Derby Winner) ex Middle Persia (Dalakhani) - DI .71 - Sire has 9 winners at 5-6F, 83 winners at 7-9F, 61 winners at 10-11F, 43 winners at 12-13F, Orientated more towards Milers and 10F horses which is interesting for a son of Sadlers wells less prolific at 12f so although the i would say that the sire must have a speed influence coming in from somewhere that is being passed to his progeny although the Dalakhani should allow him to stay like a tank.

Skipping Grey Lion and Sir Isaac Newton as both are same as Highland Reel Galileo ex on Danehill.

Best of Times - Dubawi ex Nabati (Rahy) - DI 1.67 - Sire has 60 5-6F winners, 160 7-9F winners, 52 10-11F winners, 37 12-13F winners, Sire more towards milers and interesting even spread over the rest although poor for true staying, my opinion top class sire who's horses can win at 12f by class rather than staying ability which is how i view the derby the last while horses with class win it rather than true stayers.

Christophermarlowe - Tapit ex Dress Rehearsal (Galileo) - DI 2.20 - First american sire and straightaway messed up DI, winning distance 50 percent 7-9F, 25 percent 9-10F, 15 percent 5-6F, 10 percent 12-13F, Definite more middle distance but even then capable of getting speed horses and staying horses.

Consort - Lope De Vega (French Derby) ex Mundus Novus (Unbridled's Song) - DI 2.33 - Sire has 10 winners at 5-6F, 11 winners 8-9F, 1 winner 10-11F, no winners higher. He was first season last year so the stats are all over the place at the minute till his 3 year olds show their distances.

Aloft - Galileo ex Dietrich (Storm Cat) - DI 1.22 - see the above Galileo stats.

Others that arent by sires ive already gone through that are interesting (ie not Galileo and High Chaparral and Shamardal) are

Nafaqa - Sir Percy (Derby Winner) ex Maghya (Mujahid) - DI 1.86 - Sire has 15 winners 5-6F, 42 at 7-9F, 32 at 10-11F, 23 at 12-13f. More towards milers but capable at all distances.

Intilaaq - Dynaformer ex Torrestrella (Orpen) - DI 1.55 - Sire has 40 percent 11-13F, 25 percent 9-10F, 25 percent 7-8F, 8 percent 14F plus, 2 percent 5-6F,
True Staying sire one of the first along with Montjeu despite this horses DI.

Peterhof - Dansili ex Spinning Queen (Spinning World) - DI 2.00 - Sire has 89 5-6f winners, 233 7-9F, 108 10-11F, 74 12-13F winners, spread across all distances with a bias towards 7-9F winners. Top class sire at all distances.

Epicuris - Rail Link ex Argumentative (Observatory) - DI 2.20 - Sire has 4 5-6F winners, 20 7-9F winners, 12 10-11F winners, 18 12-13F winners even spread but more to milers and 12F horses.

Storm the Stars - Sea the Stars ex Love me Only (Sadlers Wells) - DI 1.11, Sire has 1 5-6F winner, 28 7-9F winners, 15 10-11F winner, 13 12-13 furlong winners. Staying sire in my mind although he does has a bias towards 7-9F when views statistically.

Anyhow there ends all my bull**** and yeah i can see that there is some value to DI but that it is def an incomplete way of viewing a horses pedigree. I just found it interesting that despite the DI most of the sires of theses horses get horses over all distances with the bias being more towards 7-9F (the increase in commercial breeding relative to private breeding increasing the need for speed), but i would hazard a guess that nearly all of these will stay the required distance or at least be capable of doing it at a level and if that is the case and its a good ground track i wouldnt be shocked that its not one of the out and out stayers but more so the horse with pure class (Golden Horn )

tryfix wrote: »

Dosage Index Of Derby winners.

2014 1st Australia DI 1.00, 2nd Kingston Hill DI 0.90, 3rd Romsdal DI 0.74.

2013 1st Ruler Of The World DI 1.05, 2nd Libertarian DI 0.65, 3rd Galileo Rock DI 0.78.

2012 1st Camelot DI 0.68, 2nd Main Sequence DI 2.20, 3rd Astrology DI 1.00.

2011 1st Pour Moi DI 0.57, 2nd Treasure Beach DI 0.89, 3rd Carlton House DI 1.00.

2010 1st Workforce DI 1.00, 2nd At First Sight DI 1.00, 3rd Rewilding DI 1.33.

2009 1st Sea The Stars DI 3.00, 2nd Fame And Glory DI 0.52, 3rd Masterofthehorse DI 0.77.

2008 1st New Approach DI 0.89, 2nd Tartan Bearer DI 0.60, 3rd Casual Conquest DI 0.68.

2007 1st Authorized DI 0.62, 2nd Eagle Mountain DI 1.12, 3rd Aqaleem DI 1.09.

2006 1st Sir Percy DI 0.54, 2nd Dragon Dancer DI 0.74, 3rd Dylan Thomas DI 1,55.

2005 1st Motivator DI 1.04, 2nd Walk In The Park DI 0.62, 3rd Dubawi DI 1.20.

Obri1 wrote: »

Just out of interest if i had to nail you down to picking a derby winner for this year who are you on.

supremenovice wrote: »

Racingpost app article stating Found has been added to Ladrokes' Investec Derby antepost market. THats unbelievable - surely they wont throw a filly in there.
Nb Ive no link from my phone.