Kentucy Derby Dosage Dilemma

[alteredegos]

Kentucky Derby by the Numbers: Dosage Dilemma

By David Schmitz
Updated: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 2:47 PM
Posted: Monday, April 27, 2009 4:53 AM
Email Print RSS <script type="text/javascript" src="http://w.sharethis.com/widget/?tabs=web%2Cpost&charset=utf-8&style=default&publisher=2f119e15-6662-4642-ba43-69a8342bf25a&headerbg=%236699cc&linkfg=%230000FF&embeds=true"></script>ShareThis
Racing fans trying to pick the winner of the May 2 Kentucky Derby Presented by Yum! Brands (gr. I) won’t get much help relying solely on the Dosage System. Eighteen of the 20 candidates ranked by graded stakes earnings qualify according to the Dosage format. In other words, the odds are overwhelmingly good that a horse boasting the right Dosage figures will win. But playing all 18 at the betting windows might not be the best way to turn a profit.
The Dosage system is a mathematical analysis of a horse’s pedigree based upon the presence and location of certain major sires (each one is called a chef-de-race) in a horse’s four-generation pedigree. Females are not included.
Chef-de-race sires are grouped in five different catogories, ranging from speed (brilliant) to extreme stamina (professional). In between are the categories intermediate, classic, and solid. The closer a chef-de-race stallion appears in a subject horse’s pedigree, the greater the influence. A chef-de race sire is assigned 16 points; second generation chef-de-race sires are assigned 8 points; third generation chef-de-race sires are assigned 4 points; and fourth generation chef-de-race sires are assigned 2 points. A formula is then used to determine a horse’s Dosage Index (DI) and a Center of Distribution (CD).
Horses with a DI higher than 4.00 and a CD above 1.25 are considered unlikely to negotiate successfully the 1 1/4 miles of the Kentucky Derby the first Saturday in May. Thus, a DI higher than 4.00 and a CD higher than 1.25 mean too much speed and not enough stamina in a horse’s pedigree.
In recent years, the Dosage system has been used in conjunction with the annual Experimental Free Handicap for 2-year-olds to help pick the Kentucky Derby winner. Under the Dosage/Experimental dual qualifier system, horses weighted within 10 pounds of the Experimental Free Handicap topweight are eligible to win the Derby, provided they have the right dosage, meaning a DI not higher than 4.00 and a CD not higher than 1.25.


Square Eddie, who ran third in the April 18 Coolmore Lexington Stakes (gr. II) at Keeneland in his final Derby prep, ranks as the top dual qualifier among the top 20 graded stakes earners. His DI (3.40) and CD (1.00) are under the guidelines. His 123-pound impost on the 2008 Experimental was three pounds less than the 126 pounds assigned topweight and champion 2-year-old male Midshipman.

Four others rank as dual qualifiers among the top 20 graded stakes earners.

Pioneerof the Nile sports a DI of 3.89, a CD of .86, and a 120-pound Experimental ranking.

The others are I Want Revenge, Chocolate Candy, and West Side Bernie.

I Want Revenge checks in with a DI of 3.00 and a .69 CD. He was weighted at 118 on the Experimental.

Both Chocolate Candy and West Side Bernie were weighted on the Experimental at 116 pounds. Chocolate Candy has a DI of 2.08 and a CD of .70 while West Side Bernie has a DI of 1.80 and a .50 CD.

The two Derby candidates among the top 20 graded stakes earners that check in over the limit by Dosage Index are Win Willy and Mine That Bird. The former sports a DI of 5.00, and the latter has a DI of 5.40.
Another candidate, Musket Man, checks in right at 4.00 with his DI. His CD is 1.10
Since Fusaichi Pegasus opened the decade with a victory in the 2000 Kentucky Derby, only one Derby winner has sported a DI above the cutoff. Giacomo , the 2005 winner, checked in with a DI of 4.33.
Following are the Dosage Indexes and Centers of Distribution for all the Derby winners this decade:
Big Brown (2008) 1.67 and .36
Street Sense (2007) 2.14 and .68
Barbaro (2006) 2.41 and .70
Giacomo (2005) 4.33 and .94
Smarty Jones (2004) 3.40 and 1.00
Funny Cide (2003) 1.53 and .46
War Emblem(2002) 3.40 and .95
Monarchos (2001) 1.40 and .28
Fusaichi Pegasus (2000) 3.67 and .96
Following are the Dosage Indexes and Centers of Distribution for the top 20 leaders by graded stakes earnings for this year’s Run for the Roses:
Advice (by Chapel Royal ) 3.80 and .83
Chocolate Candy (Candy Ride ) 2.08 and .70
Desert Party (Street Cry ) 3.80 and 1.00
Dunkirk (Unbridled's Song ) 3.00 and .68
Flying Private (Fusaichi Pegasus) 3.67 and .88
Friesan Fire (A.P. Indy ) 3.00 and .65
General Quarters (Sky Mesa ) 2.69 and .67
Hold Me Back (Giant's Causeway ) 3.44 and .80
I Want Revenge (Stephen Got Even ) 3.00 and .69
Mine That Bird (Birdstone ) 5.40 and 1.19
Musket Man (Yonaguska ) 4.00 and 1.1
Mr. Hot Stuff (Tiznow ) 2.11 and .64
Papa Clem (Smart Strike ) 3.36 and .92
Pioneerof the Nile (Empire Maker ) 3.89 and .86
Quality Road (Elusive Quality ) 2.38 and .73
Regal Ransom (Distorted Humor ) 2.00 and .54
Square Eddie (Smart Strike) 3.40 and 1.00
Summer Bird (Birdstone) 2.56 and .69
West Side Bernie (Bernstein ) 1.80 and .50
Win Willy (Monarchos) 5.00 and 1.13

 

[Labeeb]

Given that Roman has changed dosage info ex post many times to make things fit, dosage has been shown to be laughable at best. The fact that The BloodHorse is printing such garbage is sad.

 

[alteredegos]

Given that Roman has changed dosage info ex post many times to make things fit, dosage has been shown to be laughable at best. The fact that The BloodHorse is printing such garbage is sad.

While it's true that the author of dosage has changed the rules of his formula many times, I believe he has had little choice in the matter, he has to keep up with the ever changing sport of racing.
I believe that there is no static formula or system that can accurately predict the outcome of any race on any given day. There are those that attempt to sell to others systems that are reported to be static and usable in any situation, of course we know this can not be true because if it were we would all be winners all the time, a secret system of this nature could never be kept secret for very long.

I digress, to get back to point I would say that because the sport is ever changing the dosage formula must change too, I'm not saying that everyone should jump on the dosage bandwagon, a more simplistic view would be that knowledge is power and there may be some knowledge to be gained through the use of dosage.

 

[Labeeb]

I guess we disagree as to the reason why the change was made. You believe it was done to keep up with the game, I believe it was done to make the pieces of a puzzle fit nicely for convenience sake. Perhaps I'll have to revisit it myself.

 

[alteredegos]

Although I don't know you I can see from reading your posts that you appear to be well informed and very astute with regards to horse racing, I enjoyed your replies both here and in other threads and I look forward to speaking with you again, good luck to you and everyone here in their attempt to solve one of the biggest and best puzzles in racing.

 

[BillyKidd]

I've been a follower of Dr. Roman's dosage theory for about 25 or 30 years. The only change that I know he has made is to add chef-de-race horses occasionally. Its a sound theory and works very well for graded stakes races of 1 1/4 mile or longer. I try to only bet triple qualifiers on the KD race. Dual qualifiers as noted above with the added requirement of must have placed in a grade 1 stakes races at 1 1/8m. In any system there will be an exception, but I would not bet a horse that does not have the dosage for the KD. Good luck all.