Abbreviations and numbers after them
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
-
Cheryl Roll
- Weanling
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 4:30 pm
- Location: Mapleton Depot, Pa
- Contact:
Abbreviations and numbers after them
What does DP, DI, and CD stand for and the numbers following them? Example DP 2-1-5-5-5 (8) DI=2.20 CD=.63 Is this good or bad? Thanks.
Stand quality stallions to the public.
-
Cheryl Roll
- Weanling
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 4:30 pm
- Location: Mapleton Depot, Pa
- Contact:
-
Pan Zareta
- Breeder's Cup Winner
- Posts: 2074
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:55 am
- Location: west TX boonies
Cheryl,
DP = Dosage Profile
DI = Dosage Index
CD = Centre of Distribution
Reading the dosage profile (the 5 digits) from left to right, is supposed to give you a hint as to how much speed vs stamina the horse is question has. Certain "influential" sires have been designated "chef-de-race" stallions and only their occurrences in the first 5 generations of a pedigree determine the speed vs stamina status of the offspring in terms of dosage numbers. Basically, a horse that has numbers like the example you gave, is believed to be a pretty "balanced" horse, not biased much towards speed or stamina.
A speed biased horse would be something like 10-10-5-0-0, and a stamina biased horse would be something like 0-0-5-10-10.
The dosage index (DI) is a single digit that summarises the DP. A higher number (4 or above) indicates a "sprinter" type of horse. A lower number indicates a "router".
Frankly, I forget how the CD is calculated, or what it is said to indicate.
Some people like the dosage study as a means of prediction. However, without doubt it's a fundamentally flawed system, primarily because it only takes into account certain (but not all) sires, and no dams' influences in a pedigree. That's complete bunk. Only sires that have been deemed to have exceptional influence on the breed are considered "chefs-de-race".
On the other hand, dosage doesn't claim to be a "science". It's a theory or an "index" so do with it as you please. But, scientifically speaking, it's a dangerous thing to base important decisions on........
Quoting the late Mr. Gaines (from the recent tribute in the Blood Horse): "......the astonishing stupidity of the Dosage System....."
Anyway, I think I've got it right. If not, no doubt somebody will correct me
.
DP = Dosage Profile
DI = Dosage Index
CD = Centre of Distribution
Reading the dosage profile (the 5 digits) from left to right, is supposed to give you a hint as to how much speed vs stamina the horse is question has. Certain "influential" sires have been designated "chef-de-race" stallions and only their occurrences in the first 5 generations of a pedigree determine the speed vs stamina status of the offspring in terms of dosage numbers. Basically, a horse that has numbers like the example you gave, is believed to be a pretty "balanced" horse, not biased much towards speed or stamina.
A speed biased horse would be something like 10-10-5-0-0, and a stamina biased horse would be something like 0-0-5-10-10.
The dosage index (DI) is a single digit that summarises the DP. A higher number (4 or above) indicates a "sprinter" type of horse. A lower number indicates a "router".
Frankly, I forget how the CD is calculated, or what it is said to indicate.
Some people like the dosage study as a means of prediction. However, without doubt it's a fundamentally flawed system, primarily because it only takes into account certain (but not all) sires, and no dams' influences in a pedigree. That's complete bunk. Only sires that have been deemed to have exceptional influence on the breed are considered "chefs-de-race".
On the other hand, dosage doesn't claim to be a "science". It's a theory or an "index" so do with it as you please. But, scientifically speaking, it's a dangerous thing to base important decisions on........
Quoting the late Mr. Gaines (from the recent tribute in the Blood Horse): "......the astonishing stupidity of the Dosage System....."
Anyway, I think I've got it right. If not, no doubt somebody will correct me
.
That's a great explanation Johar.
My favorite facet of the Dosage ratings is it's ability to be tweaked later on to make it do what was wanted. I remember Spend a Buck was a "non-qualifier" in every way until he won. Somewhere he ended up as a "Double Qualifier" later on. Backward engineering at it's best.
My favorite facet of the Dosage ratings is it's ability to be tweaked later on to make it do what was wanted. I remember Spend a Buck was a "non-qualifier" in every way until he won. Somewhere he ended up as a "Double Qualifier" later on. Backward engineering at it's best.