Dancing Rain ‘Not Guilty’ in Oaks Win
by Roger Lyons
If the expression “stole the race” is worth using at all, then it needs to be used less often than it is. First of all, stealing a race must involve an element of guile. A horse goes off at 20-1–kind of like Dancing Rain (Danehill Dancer-Rain Flower, by Indian Ridge, by Ahonoora) in the 12-furlong Epsom Oaks (G1)–and gets an easy lead. The soon-to-be losing jockeys are not that concerned, even though they’d prefer an “honest pace,” because they think she’ll be finished in any event by the time they’re coming off the turn. The soon-to-be winning jockey knows better, and that’s the con.
But, as W.C. Fields said, “you can’t cheat an honest man,” which in this context means that Dancing Rain could have stolen the Epsom Oaks only if there had been another filly (a mark) in the race better than she was. If the best horse wins, it’s not stealing, no matter how the race is run.
Anyone who thinks, as the T.V. analysts do, that there are just two kinds of horses, the front-runners and the closers, might well think Dancing Rain stole the Oaks. Because two horses were running more or less side by side in the lead during the early fractions of the Preakness, lots of people thought it was a speed duel. They entirely missed the point that one of those two horses–namely, Shackleford–is a stayer. Apparently, the concept of a horse that stays, that controls the pace and carries its speed around two turns, is too complex for network coverage.
Dancing Rain’s ability to show speed that stays is easy to figure out. The offspring of both Danehill Dancer (her sire) and Indian Ridge (her broodmare sire) have a mode (most frequently occurring) stakes-winning distance of eight furlongs, and in both cases it’s a strong mode. Dancing Rain’s speed carries because her second dam is by Alleged, the mode stakes-winning distance of whose offspring is, by a very large margin, 12 furlongs.
Not just any speed and stamina can combine effectively to yield a stayer, but this does. Danehill Dancer has a superior-runner strike rate of 7/42 with mares that have Alleged in their ancestries, and he has a strike rate of 6/28 when Alleged descends through a daughter, as in this case.
That daughter, Rose of Jericho, figures in the ancestry of another stakes winner by Danehill Dancer and in a revealing way. Dual-listed stakes winner Deauville Vision is out of a mare by Epsom Derby winner, Dr Devious. Like Indian Ridge, Dr Devious is by Ahonoora, but his dam is Rose of Jericho. So, Dancing Rain’s dam is a three-quarters sister to Deauville Vision’s broodmare sire. It’s the Ahonoora-Alleged sire-line cross through the same daughter of Alleged. Deauville Vision won listed stakes in Ireland at eight furlongs and 10 furlongs, at ages four and six, respectively.
Her pedigree says Dancing Rain is a stayer, and stayers don’t steal races. What could be more honest than a horse that goes to the front and stays there?
Posted by Roger Lyons on Saturday, June 4, 2011 at 11:03 am.
Exception Proves the Rule
Just to clear up two questions that might arise from my last post on Galileo’s conditions of possible effectiveness (let’s call it CPE) with mares that have Sharpen Up in their ancestries.
First, that post established that Galileo’s probability of siring superior runners out of mares that descend from Sharpen Up through either Kris or Diesis is at least .28. Doubly Sure, the dam of Kris and Diesis, seems to be the key factor, especially considering that Cape Blanco (G1) is out of a daughter of Doubly Sure sired by Presidium, by General Assembly rather than Sharpen Up. That leaves open the question how well Galileo might handle mares in descent of Doubly Sure through her daughters, and I would have mentioned it except that Galileo has had only one such mare.
Second, I mentioned that Galileo had sired a superior runner out of only one mare of the 29 that descended in some way from Sharpen Up, but not through Kris or Diesis. So, the problem is, if descent through Kris or Diesis is a CPE governing Galileo’s relation to Sharpen Up, how can 16.5-f Marathon S. (Sandown, 2010) winner King of Wands (Galileo ex Maid to Treasure, by Rainbow Quest and an image in the Tarot, I believe) be explained? His third dam is by Sharpen Up.
The answer is that, even if a mare fails to fulfill a CPE relating to one of her ancestors, she may still fulfill other CPEs that control a sire’s potential. Now, Galileo doesn’t have a great strike rate with Rainbow Quest–only 4/24–and his record with Blushing Groom is 9/75. What is more likely decisive in the ancestry of King of Wands’ dam is her broodmare sire Indian Ridge, with which Galileo has a strike rate of 4/11. Moreover, his overall record with Indian Ridge’s sire Ahonoora is 6/18. That’s a superior-runner probability of at least .33.
It’s clear, then, that Galileo’s CPE relating to Indian Ridge and Ahonoora, whatever it might be, is far less stringent than his CPE relating to Sharpen Up. Furthermore, because of Sharpen Up’s generational distance in this case, his normal negative effect on foals by Galileo (when not descending through Kris or Diesis) is much less likely to be expressed than the highly favorable effect associated with Indian Ridge.
Discovering the conditions of possible effectiveness is a critical function of pedigree interpretation, and, while it can only yield probabilities comparable to those of, say, short-term weather forecasts, those probabilities are a lot more reliable than reading tea leaves, questioning the Ouija, or trusting in the make-believe deficit reduction in Paul Ryan’s budget proposal.
UPDATE: In the Tarot, the King of Wands denotes the ability to persevere toward a goal, overcoming all obstacles by exceptional means. Seems appropriately named.
Posted by Roger Lyons on Monday, April 18, 2011 at 8:18 am.