Buckpasser got two champion sons. Norcliffe was Canadian HoY & chp. 3yo, 1976, chp. older male 1977. L'Enjoleur was Canadian HoY & chp. 3yo, 1979. Buckpasser's son Buckaroo led the NorthAm sire list in 1985. Buckaroo got Eclipse HoY & chp. 3yo Spend A Buck. Norcliffe got Eclipse 1987 chp. sprinter Groovy. Son Silver Buck got Eclipse chp. 3yo colt & HoF'er Silver Charm.
Genomic research is not in its "infancy". In human terms it's in late middle age. The equine genome has been sequenced and mapped, enabling the development a few years ago of SNP chips that 'read' variables throughout the nuclear genome. The chips are used for genome-wide association studies (GWAS) that identify the variables relevant to disease, performance, coat color & patterns, et al. In other words, equine genomic research is fully 'mature'.
If TB racing performance hasn't been the single most frequent application of equine GWAS so far, it's probably very close to the top of that list. Frankly, the x, so far, doesn't appear to be of major relevance in any GWAS including, but certainly not limited to, those for elite TB performance, maybe because it's less diverse to begin with, and even less so in a population where there are so few males v. females in the breeding population.
Your published work (pps.48-50) goes waaay beyond just saying that the x plays "an important role" in broodmare sire success. Obviously, you're free to make any specious claim you want but the facts remain that Haun's hypothesis has been disproved, the genome-based evidence contradicts any claim that the x is of major relevance to elite performance/broodmare sire success and a full and impartial review of the circumstantial evidence indicates that Buckpasser's broodmare sire success was nowhere near as x-dependent as you claim.
Secretariat and Buckpasser
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster, Lucy
-
Pan Zareta
- Breeder's Cup Winner
- Posts: 2074
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:55 am
- Location: west TX boonies
extraordinary genes
Pan Zareta wrote:
"Your published work (pp48-50) goes away beyond just saying that the X plays "an important role" in broodmare sire success.
In my published work Analyzing the Triple Crown-- I provided racing fans with an angle that uses Buckpasser in the X passing position plus a fast finish in specific major races. My stats on that angle are very good indicators for getting Derby winners along with Preakness and Belmont winners. In all three legs of the Triple Crown the angles I used regarding Buckpasser in the X passing position generated strong impact values and strong ROIs.
Perhaps I should have said the use of Buckpasser in the X passing position along with some other fundamental handicapping factors is a very important angle for selecting Derby, Preakness and Belmont winners.
Pan Zareta also wrote:"the genome based evidence contradicts any claim that the X is of major relevance to elite performance/broodmare sire success.
Could you explain how all this genome based evidence does that? So far all I hear from you is that genomic research has not found any variants on the X chromosome that play a role of importance in broodmare sire success. You have never offered any proof that supports your contention that the X chromosome at best only plays a minor role in broodmare sire success.
Buckpasser had a tremendous influence by way of his daughters and was the best broodmare sire in the last 50 years with regard to AEI.
Circumstantial evidence from his long list of outstanding progeny from his daughters and being the broodmare sire of so many sons that are leading broodmare sires backs up the idea that Buckpasser's X chromosome from Busanda was not just ordinary. That X chromosome did not just play at best a minor role in his broodmare sire success as you say it did.
"Your published work (pp48-50) goes away beyond just saying that the X plays "an important role" in broodmare sire success.
In my published work Analyzing the Triple Crown-- I provided racing fans with an angle that uses Buckpasser in the X passing position plus a fast finish in specific major races. My stats on that angle are very good indicators for getting Derby winners along with Preakness and Belmont winners. In all three legs of the Triple Crown the angles I used regarding Buckpasser in the X passing position generated strong impact values and strong ROIs.
Perhaps I should have said the use of Buckpasser in the X passing position along with some other fundamental handicapping factors is a very important angle for selecting Derby, Preakness and Belmont winners.
Pan Zareta also wrote:"the genome based evidence contradicts any claim that the X is of major relevance to elite performance/broodmare sire success.
Could you explain how all this genome based evidence does that? So far all I hear from you is that genomic research has not found any variants on the X chromosome that play a role of importance in broodmare sire success. You have never offered any proof that supports your contention that the X chromosome at best only plays a minor role in broodmare sire success.
Buckpasser had a tremendous influence by way of his daughters and was the best broodmare sire in the last 50 years with regard to AEI.
Circumstantial evidence from his long list of outstanding progeny from his daughters and being the broodmare sire of so many sons that are leading broodmare sires backs up the idea that Buckpasser's X chromosome from Busanda was not just ordinary. That X chromosome did not just play at best a minor role in his broodmare sire success as you say it did.
sunland derby
Three of the first four horses to finish in the Sunland Derby carried Buckpasser in the X passing position:
Chitu, the winner has AP Indy as his broodmare sire and therefore carries Buckpasser in the X. He earned $480,000 for his win.
Commissioner, the show horse has Touch Gold as his broodmare sire and therefore carries Buckpasser in the X. He earned $80,000 for being 3rd.
Rebranded the fourth place finisher has AP Indy as his broodmare sire and thus has Buckpasser in the X. He earned $40,000 for being fourth.
In the top tier of racing , that is stakes race results thru the year we continually see Buckpasser in the X passing position and that is why broodmare sires like AP Indy, Touch Gold, Miswaki, Woodman and Seeking the Gold and Unbridled have been found among the top 20 broodmare sires very frequently over the last 6 years. It might just be a trend over the last 6 years but it also bodes well for the short term future. Eventually that frequency may fade but I would say for the next decade at least it is showing no signs of declining yet.
Some other horses that won Derby prep races this year that carry Buckpasser in the X passing position are as follows:
Vicars in Trouble who won the Lecomte.
Tamarando who won the El Camino Real Derby.
Tapiture who won the Southwest.
Wildcat Red who won the Fountain of Youth.
California Chrome who won the San Felipe.
Chitu, the winner has AP Indy as his broodmare sire and therefore carries Buckpasser in the X. He earned $480,000 for his win.
Commissioner, the show horse has Touch Gold as his broodmare sire and therefore carries Buckpasser in the X. He earned $80,000 for being 3rd.
Rebranded the fourth place finisher has AP Indy as his broodmare sire and thus has Buckpasser in the X. He earned $40,000 for being fourth.
In the top tier of racing , that is stakes race results thru the year we continually see Buckpasser in the X passing position and that is why broodmare sires like AP Indy, Touch Gold, Miswaki, Woodman and Seeking the Gold and Unbridled have been found among the top 20 broodmare sires very frequently over the last 6 years. It might just be a trend over the last 6 years but it also bodes well for the short term future. Eventually that frequency may fade but I would say for the next decade at least it is showing no signs of declining yet.
Some other horses that won Derby prep races this year that carry Buckpasser in the X passing position are as follows:
Vicars in Trouble who won the Lecomte.
Tamarando who won the El Camino Real Derby.
Tapiture who won the Southwest.
Wildcat Red who won the Fountain of Youth.
California Chrome who won the San Felipe.
Vicars In Trouble in 6th gen. via daughter Sex Appeal. Secretariat lies in 5th gen.
Tamarando in 5th via daughter Alluvial. Secretariat lies in 4th gen.
Tapiture in 5th via daughter Numbered Account
Wildcat Red in 6th via daughter Numbered Account
California Chrome 5x5 via daughter Numbered Account
Rebranded in 5th via Lassie Dear. Secretariat 4x5
Commissioner in 4th via daughter Passing Mood
Chitu in 5th via daughter Lassie Dear. Secretariat in 4th gen.
As can be seen, Secretariat lies closer than Buckpasser in 4 out of 8 cases. Seven out of 8 horses mentioned carry Buckpasser back 5 or 6 generations.
Tamarando in 5th via daughter Alluvial. Secretariat lies in 4th gen.
Tapiture in 5th via daughter Numbered Account
Wildcat Red in 6th via daughter Numbered Account
California Chrome 5x5 via daughter Numbered Account
Rebranded in 5th via Lassie Dear. Secretariat 4x5
Commissioner in 4th via daughter Passing Mood
Chitu in 5th via daughter Lassie Dear. Secretariat in 4th gen.
As can be seen, Secretariat lies closer than Buckpasser in 4 out of 8 cases. Seven out of 8 horses mentioned carry Buckpasser back 5 or 6 generations.
Stan
It is apparent to me that the main reason you continue to claim that the X chromosome carried and passed by Buckpasser was special and a primary factor in his success as a broodmare sire is self-serving because of the information discussed in your recent book. A book I might add that does highlight the fact that the Kentucky Derby is seldom won by the favorite but ignores the two primary reasons for this, namely post position and trip. I have no idea what your admission that there probably are no genes located on the X going to heart size and function does to your position about Buckpasser in an X passing position, but to me it sounds like a clear cut contradiction to the statements in the book. There is one fact I am sure of and that is there will never be enough copies of the book printed or sold for you to be concerned about the points discussed and presented to the public.
DDT
It is apparent to me that the main reason you continue to claim that the X chromosome carried and passed by Buckpasser was special and a primary factor in his success as a broodmare sire is self-serving because of the information discussed in your recent book. A book I might add that does highlight the fact that the Kentucky Derby is seldom won by the favorite but ignores the two primary reasons for this, namely post position and trip. I have no idea what your admission that there probably are no genes located on the X going to heart size and function does to your position about Buckpasser in an X passing position, but to me it sounds like a clear cut contradiction to the statements in the book. There is one fact I am sure of and that is there will never be enough copies of the book printed or sold for you to be concerned about the points discussed and presented to the public.
DDT
DDT
DDT wrote: "It is apparent to me that the main reason you continue to claim that the X Chromosome carried and passed by Buckpasser was special and a primary factor in his success as a broodmare sire is self serving because of the information discussed in your recent book."
What may be apparent to you is certainly not my view.
The reason I claim that Buckpasser in the X passing position is important to his success as a Broodmare sire is related to statements made by Byron Rogers and also the statistical evidence I have presented throughout this thread and also in my book.
Mr. Rogers said that there are variants on the X chromosome that relate to elite performance but they are not vital to the overall success of a racehorse. He also called these variants, "important alleles."
It stands to reason that if they are important, they are vital to the overall success of a racehorse. If they are important, they play more than a minor role in broodmare sire success.
Buckpasser (in relationship to AEI--3.23 average earnings index) was the absolute best broodmare sire over the last half century. No other broodmare sire has an AEI as high as Buckpasser's 3.23.
Since a broodmare sire transmits his X chromosome to all his daughters and NONE of his sons, it follows that the X played an important role in his placement on top of the broodmare sire cumulative list. After all, he transmits nearly 100% of that X to all his daughters and they in turn transmit on the average 50% of that X to all their progeny. And it is the earnings of these progeny that place Buckpasser on top of that list.
Buckpasser has a tremendous influence on the breed by way of his daughters as evidenced in the Blood Horse article by Anne Peters- Feb 15, 2014. Three of his daughters became Broodmares of the Year.
Buckpasser's daughters also produced three broodmare sires that are frequently found among the list of leading broodmare sires: Seeking the Gold , Miswaki, and Woodman. Northern Guest, who was the leading broodmare sire in South Africa for 10 years is a maternal grandson of Buckpasser. Frankel, Horse of the Year, in Europe in 2011 and 2012 has Buckpasser as his third damsire. Danehill, the leading broodmare sire in North America in 2011 has Buckpasser as his second damsire.
Do you honestly think that the X chromosome at best plays only a minor role in broodmare sire success?
You yourself said that having Buckpasser in the X is a plus. That was one of your quotes in this thread.
What may be apparent to you is certainly not my view.
The reason I claim that Buckpasser in the X passing position is important to his success as a Broodmare sire is related to statements made by Byron Rogers and also the statistical evidence I have presented throughout this thread and also in my book.
Mr. Rogers said that there are variants on the X chromosome that relate to elite performance but they are not vital to the overall success of a racehorse. He also called these variants, "important alleles."
It stands to reason that if they are important, they are vital to the overall success of a racehorse. If they are important, they play more than a minor role in broodmare sire success.
Buckpasser (in relationship to AEI--3.23 average earnings index) was the absolute best broodmare sire over the last half century. No other broodmare sire has an AEI as high as Buckpasser's 3.23.
Since a broodmare sire transmits his X chromosome to all his daughters and NONE of his sons, it follows that the X played an important role in his placement on top of the broodmare sire cumulative list. After all, he transmits nearly 100% of that X to all his daughters and they in turn transmit on the average 50% of that X to all their progeny. And it is the earnings of these progeny that place Buckpasser on top of that list.
Buckpasser has a tremendous influence on the breed by way of his daughters as evidenced in the Blood Horse article by Anne Peters- Feb 15, 2014. Three of his daughters became Broodmares of the Year.
Buckpasser's daughters also produced three broodmare sires that are frequently found among the list of leading broodmare sires: Seeking the Gold , Miswaki, and Woodman. Northern Guest, who was the leading broodmare sire in South Africa for 10 years is a maternal grandson of Buckpasser. Frankel, Horse of the Year, in Europe in 2011 and 2012 has Buckpasser as his third damsire. Danehill, the leading broodmare sire in North America in 2011 has Buckpasser as his second damsire.
Do you honestly think that the X chromosome at best plays only a minor role in broodmare sire success?
You yourself said that having Buckpasser in the X is a plus. That was one of your quotes in this thread.
are you coloring the facts
Pan Zareta: Did Rogers say that there are variants on the X chromosome that relate to elite performance? or did he not say that?
Did Rogers call these variants important alleles or did he not say that?
Did Rogers say that these variants are not vital to the overall success of a racehorse? or did he not say that?
All I am saying is that the X chromosome is important to broodmare sire success? If you think thats overstating the importance of the X chromosome thats your problem.
It's ridiculous to hold to the contention that at best the X chromosome of a broodmare sire plays only a minor role in his success. Yet, you continually cling to that glittering generality as if it were a known fact by all.
Did Rogers call these variants important alleles or did he not say that?
Did Rogers say that these variants are not vital to the overall success of a racehorse? or did he not say that?
All I am saying is that the X chromosome is important to broodmare sire success? If you think thats overstating the importance of the X chromosome thats your problem.
It's ridiculous to hold to the contention that at best the X chromosome of a broodmare sire plays only a minor role in his success. Yet, you continually cling to that glittering generality as if it were a known fact by all.
-
Pan Zareta
- Breeder's Cup Winner
- Posts: 2074
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:55 am
- Location: west TX boonies
Stan, it seems obvious to me that you're far more interested in winning an argument than making any serious and impartial inquiry into the various factors, genetic and environmental, that are relevant to broodmare sire success. So I see no further reason to waste time replying other than to spell it out for you that when you quote Byron Rogers' statement that there are "important alleles" on the x, but contradict his statement that they are "far from vital to the overall success of a racehorse", and ignore the fact that he also told you that there are many variants elsewhere in the genome that are far more important to elite performance than the x variants, only one of which reached statistical significance, you are grossly misrepresenting his remarks.
agree to disagree
Lets just agree to disagree.
-
Pan Zareta
- Breeder's Cup Winner
- Posts: 2074
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:55 am
- Location: west TX boonies
Stan
Yes, I do believe that having Buckpasser in an X passing position is a plus but not because the genes carried on his X chromosome were a primary factor in that success but because of all of the genes he passed along and the genes supplied by the stallions covering those successful daughters. You continue to mention the broodmare sire success of Miswaki, Woodman and Seeking the Gold but never mention the fact that all three of these successful broodmare sires have Mr. Prospector as their sire. You continue to act like this fact is a coincidence.
DDT
Yes, I do believe that having Buckpasser in an X passing position is a plus but not because the genes carried on his X chromosome were a primary factor in that success but because of all of the genes he passed along and the genes supplied by the stallions covering those successful daughters. You continue to mention the broodmare sire success of Miswaki, Woodman and Seeking the Gold but never mention the fact that all three of these successful broodmare sires have Mr. Prospector as their sire. You continue to act like this fact is a coincidence.
DDT
-
da hossman
- Allowance Winner
- Posts: 412
- Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:08 am
- Location: KY
Let me first admit that I have just read the last 2 pages of this thread...however it is stunning to me that seemingly knowledgeable people will argue the x chromosome and Buckpasser without any mention of La Troienne?
Perhaps La Troienne was mentioned in the first 6 pages of this thread, however it continues to amaze me that people choose to overemphasize the stallion's importance in breeding and genetics. The mare is more important than the stallion, the family is more important than the stallion.
The Nicks brainwashing has apparently worked - why does every stallion farm offer free nicking to their stallions? Because every 2nd grader knows an "A" is better than a "C" - it takes no knowledge to make a decision based upon a program generated grade. The stallion farm sells more seasons when more of their horses get "A" ratings. The Bloodhorse is a part owner of True Nicks which is why the True Nick rating is provided in the pedigrees of stakes winners, it is not provided because there is any proven truth to the rating.
If you look at the great historical breeders (Tesio, Olin Gentry, Bull Hancock) they all focused on the female side of the pedigree. The "world-renowned Seattle Slew/Mr. Prospector nick" is actually linebreeding to the mare Myrtlewood. Because nicks are stallion based, nicks consider 50% of the pedigree at best, but as most nicks are based upon grandsires the reality is that most nicks consider much less than 50% of the pedigree. Nicks are poppycock.
Perhaps La Troienne was mentioned in the first 6 pages of this thread, however it continues to amaze me that people choose to overemphasize the stallion's importance in breeding and genetics. The mare is more important than the stallion, the family is more important than the stallion.
The Nicks brainwashing has apparently worked - why does every stallion farm offer free nicking to their stallions? Because every 2nd grader knows an "A" is better than a "C" - it takes no knowledge to make a decision based upon a program generated grade. The stallion farm sells more seasons when more of their horses get "A" ratings. The Bloodhorse is a part owner of True Nicks which is why the True Nick rating is provided in the pedigrees of stakes winners, it is not provided because there is any proven truth to the rating.
If you look at the great historical breeders (Tesio, Olin Gentry, Bull Hancock) they all focused on the female side of the pedigree. The "world-renowned Seattle Slew/Mr. Prospector nick" is actually linebreeding to the mare Myrtlewood. Because nicks are stallion based, nicks consider 50% of the pedigree at best, but as most nicks are based upon grandsires the reality is that most nicks consider much less than 50% of the pedigree. Nicks are poppycock.
A difference of opinion is what makes horse racing and missionaries.
Will Rogers
Will Rogers
da hossman
I understand that it looks like this discussion is about nicking but it is about whether or not the genes carried on the X chromosome are a primary factor in broodmare sire success. I agree that mares are more important in any breeding scheme, however, I disagree with the statement that genes carried on the X chromosome are a primary factor for broodmare sire success.
DDT
I understand that it looks like this discussion is about nicking but it is about whether or not the genes carried on the X chromosome are a primary factor in broodmare sire success. I agree that mares are more important in any breeding scheme, however, I disagree with the statement that genes carried on the X chromosome are a primary factor for broodmare sire success.
DDT
-
da hossman
- Allowance Winner
- Posts: 412
- Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:08 am
- Location: KY
Got it, my apologies for the rant but it is a sore topic for me.
I have several clients for whom I do matings and I must hold my tongue and diplomatically work through comments like "but it is only a B nick" while trying to educate them. When dealing with this I do not argue against nicks, but say "they are a mating tool but probably the least effective tool" and then discuss the ineffective realities of any theory which ignores the females in the pedigree.
I have several clients for whom I do matings and I must hold my tongue and diplomatically work through comments like "but it is only a B nick" while trying to educate them. When dealing with this I do not argue against nicks, but say "they are a mating tool but probably the least effective tool" and then discuss the ineffective realities of any theory which ignores the females in the pedigree.
A difference of opinion is what makes horse racing and missionaries.
Will Rogers
Will Rogers