|
|
Post by bobtailnag on Apr 18, 2022 22:39:04 GMT -5
Remember him? No self respecting horse player would ever bet on the Derby without first visiting Dr Steve Roman's dosage numbers. And why? Roman discobvered that no horse witrh a Dosage index over 4.0 has ever won a Kentucky Derby.
I had the time so I ran the 20 horses currently on the list of runners for the Derby and none have a DI over 4.0 - but two are right on the edge at 4.0.
That held true until 1998 when a horse named Real Quiet won the Derby with a DI of 5.3. Mine That Bird won the Derby with a DI of 4.3. I had the time so I ran the dosage numbers for the current 20 horses for this years race. None of them have a DI over 4.0 but 2 have 4.0s and that is close enough to make you worry. Epicenter has the lowest at 0.60 and has a strange array that makes up his index numbers. Brilliant - 0, Intermediate - 0, Classic - 9, Solid - 1, and Professional - 2. I've never seen a dosage index with zeros in the first two categories.
Roman began by using Varola's categories which divided "chefs de race" into five types, according to the natures of the offspring they sired:
Brilliant--Horses with speed and precocity, but no distance-running ability.
Intermediate--Horses with speed and early maturity who sometimes can handle classic distances.
Classic--Horses with a balance of speed and stamina. ("These are the foundation of the breed," Roman said. Stallions like Northern Dancer, Exclusive Native and Nijinsky appear in this category.)
Solid--Horses with less speed who mature late.
Professional--Plodders with no speed and great endurance.
Roman looked at a horse's pedigree for the last four generations and assigned points for each "chef de race" in it. If the horse's sire was a "chef" he counted 16 points. If his grandsire was a "chef," 8 points. A "chef" who appeared in the third generation back was worth 4 points, and one in the fourth generation 2 points.
|
|
|
|
Post by elkurzhal on Apr 19, 2022 10:10:01 GMT -5
Many of the long time members of this group came the the forum hosted by bloodhorse. Like upinclass they had a couple different sections, one of them was a dosage forum. Dr. Roman was active there for a time. It was a pretty contentious place, it eventually went away. It kind of felt like that spilled over to the general tone of the main forum a lot of the time, and maybe led in part to bloodhorse shutting in it down altogether. There were some great posters that were lost along the way unfortunately. Wish I could recall the names... Murloc maybe was one?
|
|
|
|
Post by UpInClass on Apr 19, 2022 10:42:50 GMT -5
|
|
docd
UpInClass Member
"Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, and more money." -Tom T Hall
Posts: 1,955
|
Post by docd on Apr 19, 2022 13:51:04 GMT -5
Many of the long time members of this group came the the forum hosted by bloodhorse. Like upinclass they had a couple different sections, one of them was a dosage forum. Dr. Roman was active there for a time. It was a pretty contentious place, it eventually went away. It kind of felt like that spilled over to the general tone of the main forum a lot of the time, and maybe led in part to bloodhorse shutting in it down altogether. There were some great posters that were lost along the way unfortunately. Wish I could recall the names... Murloc maybe was one? King Mambo  Most of all I miss Dr. I.M.Kookie. |
|
|
|
Post by elkurzhal on Apr 19, 2022 14:20:50 GMT -5
Me too Doc me too..  |
|
1hooper
UpInClass Steward
Posts: 7,449
|
Post by 1hooper on Apr 19, 2022 14:59:17 GMT -5
Archer, Erno, Modac X, Merse and Keith Davie. Actually met the first 4.
|
|
shoes
UpInClass Steward
Posts: 2,383
|
Post by shoes on Apr 19, 2022 15:12:23 GMT -5
I came in on the last couple of years of the blood horse forum. Many did come over here though we have lost some of those over the years.
|
|
|
|
Post by mysaladdays on Apr 20, 2022 6:10:34 GMT -5
Combined with Bill Lathrop's Modern Conduit Mares, chef-de-race worked well. As you know, Bill developed an aptitudinal index based on the female family, and published both a handicapping and a breeding edition to his system. Horses with less than 10 dosage points on sire side, you would have to go over and look at the mare side to see what you need to see. Wish those 2 had "formally" teamed up at some point, but by the time baffert had horses running contrary to Roman's chef de race system, Bill was quite elderly and his site disappeared. But I always thought that just doing the sire-side workup really only showed one side of the equation. Anything a horse didn't get from his sire side could be found on the mare side. I am still of the belief that prepotent sires and mares are, as a predictor of a horse's likely performance at 10F, 11F, 12F and even 14F, is in the breeding, not just the conditioning, and needs to "be there to begin with", so I'm not of the belief that these systems were "voodoo handicapping". (certainly no more than Beyer's somewhat subjective system...which was exposed to me when he arrograntly left Zenyatta off the ticket ENTIRELY for the Breeders Cup Classic. His dislike for Z's connections became apparent at that moment, and after that, I never could take his figures as objective). Yet, ironically, he and the DRF guys were intent on *embarassing* Roman over the long string of dosage non-qualifiers winning the derby---- after such an embarassingly subjective episode of beyer's Zenyatta decision, combined with at the time Andy Beyer's dreadful history of actually picking the correct KY Derby winner. But note: not taking anything away from BSF, saving people all the math, given taht every track plays differently, along with weather, surface, wind, etc. and sluicing that down to a figure, is handy and brilliant. What didn't happen, which needed to happen, is that Roman stopped short of actually naming the DRUGS and other concerns that many of us had (and still have) that are being used on the horses. And what is does once it enters the breeding cycle. And, prophetically, with the indictments and bru-ha-ha that has come after Roman left the sport, to me is like having the last word. Nobody can handicap drugs, esp. the ones that can't be detected and may not be injected but are in the feed. The chemists have always been one step ahead of the testing technology, which is why we should be saving blood samples for at least 5 years until tech catches up in every instance. Anyway, I actually enjoyed Dr. Roman's "energy" data on the horses the most. To me that really told the whole story. I forgot what he called that part of his analysis. So.......that's my opinionated opionion.  My gut instinct which has always served me well, is the ol' FOLLOW THE MONEY meme. Who has the most reason to keep the status quo...........Dr. Roman's work was, as you know, free to all. He did not monetize it. |
|
|
|
Post by elkurzhal on Apr 20, 2022 6:51:54 GMT -5
Archer, Erno, Modac X, Merse and Keith Davie. Actually met the first 4. All-star team right there. Hope they are all well. |
|
shoes
UpInClass Steward
Posts: 2,383
|
Post by shoes on Apr 20, 2022 7:27:18 GMT -5
Good stuff salad!
|
|
1hooper
UpInClass Steward
Posts: 7,449
|
Post by 1hooper on Apr 20, 2022 9:18:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mysaladdays on Apr 21, 2022 17:18:53 GMT -5
My suggesting that blood samples should be frozen and kept for at least 5 years is actually less strict than the USADA. As a signatory of the World Anti-Doping Agency, the USADA routinely freezes samples for 10 years. I suspect this was an area of impasse that suspended negotiations between HISA and USDA. (which IMHO, is unfortunate, and not to our benefit nor the horses' benefit.) |
|
|
|
Post by oriolegirl on Apr 26, 2022 13:14:32 GMT -5
Oh yeah Dr. Roman!! Those were the days!! I don't know how long ago the Bloodhorse Forum started but I think I've been on at least 23 years going back to Lemon Drop Kid! Is that possible??
Steve
|
|
