I’ve always thought that the dosage index was a pretty underrated tool for handicapping a derby horse, but when Bruno de Julio started singing its praises I began to pay even more attention to the dosage index. The following is a highly unscientific study. In order to meet the standards of a scientific study, I would’ve have had to take on the type of research that takes at least 6 months to complete.

For those who do not know, the dosage index is a numerical point system that categorizes a horse’s male ancestors. I won’t get into the specifics, but basically there are 5 categories: Brilliant, Intermediate, Classic, Solid and Professional. In order to even be included on the list, a sire had to have excelled at the highest levels of racing, but the distances he excelled at are what make the difference. If he excelled at 6 furlongs he was “brilliant.” If he excelled at 14 furlongs he was considered “professional.” If he truly demonstrated the ideal combination of speed and stamina he was considered “classic.”

For quite some time people have looked at the ratio of the points in the first two categories and the classic category and divided them by the last two categories and the classic category. This is the wrong way to read dosage indexes. Take a look at the chart below and tell me if you notice a pattern.

The first five horses delivered-in my opinion- the best Kentucky Derby performances of the modern era. The bottom chart shows five horses that were talented enough to compete in the Breeder’s Cup Sprint, but with the exception of Secret Circle, could not stay 6 furlongs on a speed-favoring track.

Throughout history, we have looked at the dosage index in terms of ratio’s. We took the points on the left in relation to the points on the right. Well, what if we looked at the dosage index as a weighted point system? What if we multiplied the numbers in the Brilliant and Intermediate categories by one, the number in the Classic category by two and the numbers in the Solid and Professional Categories by four then added all five values together?

Does this new chart show that the dosage points are the be-all end-all of everything? Absolutely not. What this chart does show is that a weighted point system gives a fairly accurate representation of the potential of each horse. This system shows that the dosage system had the right idea with the wrong execution. For the statistics geeks out there, I would imagine the correlation between a horse’s dosage index and his ability to get ten furlongs to be .1 or so. I would imagine the correlation between a horses dosage points on my weighted points system and its ability to get ten furlongs to be .6 or so; maybe not the greatest handicapping tool ever created, but a great tool to add to the arsenal. For our next test, we will look at the 2007 Kentucky Derby. I did not choose this race for any other reason other than I am a huge fan of Street Sense. If you want to apply my weighted point system to another Kentucky Derby feel free.

These are the un-weighted points. When weighing the categories appropriately, Hard Spun and Tiago dominate the field. Now, we didn’t get our derby winner did we? The point of all of this was not necessarily to get a Derby winner but rather to have an educated guess on which horses to throw out and which horses to pay attention to.

The biggest part of handicapping races is knowing when to bet against the favorite, and a poor distance pedigree is a huge red flag. In the next couple of blog posts we will be focusing on the Triple Crown trail and figuring out how to play the next round of the Kentucky Derby future book. You have been warned!