What is the Point of Churchill Downs' Point System?

  

Churchill Downs released a "point" system today to determine who will start in the Kentucky Derby.  The general result is a "tiered" set of races with increasing worth as you near the Derby.  To see how this system works I applied the point system to three prior Derbies 2008, 2010, and 2011.  I picked these years to see if Bluegrass Cat would still make the field in 2008 despite his poor form and because 2010 and 2011 were recent enough to limit the research.  The results are discussed below and indicate that while the "point system" looks dramatic, it does not appear to alter the field substantially.  The biggest impact of the point system is the omission of the Illinois Derby and fillies who have not earned points against males.  While heralded as progressive action, my fear is that this "point" system is marketing hype that may decrease the excitement of the Derby prep season without changing the composition of the field.  I plan a second post that will consider the implications going forward.

    At the outset, let me note that had the point system been in effect in these years that trainers could have selected different races for their horses as several folks on twitter pointed out.  However, if you assume that trainers generally run their horses where they can win or be competitive, then this argument should not substantially change the results.  The only instances where the point system may have forced trainers into different races appears to be Uncle Mo in 2011 choosing the "made up" Timely Writer over the Tampa Bay Derby, or when a rivalry develops between two horses on the Derby trail like Noble's Promise and Lookin at Lucky.  Here, the point system could force those two competitors apart at the cost of competitive racing.

2008 Kentucky Derby

Horses in Order of Graded Stakes Earnings (Derby Starters in Bold)	Total Points Under New System	Derby Field Under New Point System
Brother Derek	221	Brother Derek
Lawyer Ron	210	Lawyer Ron
Barbaro	110	Bob and John
Bob and John	162	Barbaro
Sinister Minister	100	Sinister Minister
Private Vow	30	AP Warrior
AP Warrior	77	Bluegrass Cat
Sweetnorthernsaint	10	Steppenwolfer
Sharp Humor	40	Point Determined
Bluegrass Cat	60	Deputy Glitters
Steppenwolfer	60	Sharp Humor
Keyed Entry	40	Keyed Entry
Showing Up	20	Jazil
Point Determined	60	Storm Treasure
Cause to Believe	10	Sacred Light
Deputy Glitters	54	Private Vow
Jazil	40	Flashy Bull
Storm Treasure	40	Seaside Retreat
Seaside Retreat	22	Red Raymond
Flashy Bull	25	Showing Up
Also Eligible		Also Eligible
Sunriver	20	Sunriver
Sacred Light	40	Strong Contender
Red Raymond	22	Sweetnorthernsaint
Malameeze	10	Cause to Believe
Strong Contender	20	Malameeze

            I selected 2008 for this experiment because I wanted to see if Bluegrass Cat would make the field as I remembered his two year old form tailing off at three until his second place finish in the Derby.  Under the point system and given the dominance of Brother Derek and Lawyer Ron in the prep races, Bluegrass Cat did not have to worry.  Brother Derek and Lawyer Ron would have earned more than 200 points apiece with Showing Up and Sunriver tying for the 20^th spot with 20 points apiece.  The 2008 Derby is interesting because the point system would have excluded Sweetnorthernsaint who made the field due to his victory in the Illinois Derby.  The exclusion of Sweetnorthernsaint is despite the fact that he was the post-time favorite in a Derby won by the dominating Barbaro.  Applying the point system to 2008 seems to suggest that a substantial number of horses that have little chance to win the Derby will still make it to the gate if two or three talented horses dominate the Derby preps.  This does not seem to be a significant change over the present system.    

2011 Kentucky Derby Field

Horses in Order of Graded Stakes Earnings (Derby Starters in Bold)	Total Points Under New System	Derby Field Under New Point System
Uncle Mo (Entered Did Not Start)	40	Archarcharch
Dialed In	110	Dialed In
Archarcharch	115	Pants on Fire
Comma to the Top	57	Midnight Interlude
Pants on Fire	104	Brilliant Speed
Midnight Interlude	100	Nehro
Soldat	50	Mucho Macho Man
Brilliant Speed	100	Twinspired
Master of Hounds	40	Comma to the Top
Nehro	80	Watch Me Go
Twice the Appeal	50	Soldat
Mucho Macho Man	75	Twice the Appeal
Decisive Moment	24	Animal Kingdom
Animal Kingdom	50	Stay Thirsty
Stay Thirsty	50	Uncle Mo
Santiva	24	Master of Hounds
Watch Me Go	52	Shackleford
Shackleford	40	Norman Asbjornson
Twinspired	60	Decisive Moment
Derby Kitten	20	Santiva
Also Eligible		Also Eligible
Sway Away	10	Derby Kitten
Machen	5	Mr. Commons
Brethern	10	Dance City
Flashpoint	10	Sway Away
Mr. Commons	20	Brethern
Dance City	20	Flashpoint
Norman Asbjornson	30	Machen

    In 2011, the points system would have little impact.  Unlike 2008, the point totals for 2011 are more spread out with 115 being the highest point total and a three way tie for 20^th place with twenty points.  The only change is that Norman Asbjornson's 4th place finish in the Wood propels him to a spot in the starting gate knocking out Derby Kitten.  As a positive, race fans would get to hear the media struggle to pronounce Norman Asbjornson for the week prior to the Derby.  Unfortunately, the point system would not have forced Uncle Mo into a more aggressive 3 year old campaign as he still easily makes the field with a 3rd or even 4th in the Wood or any other final prep race. 

2010 Kentucky Derby

Horses in Order of Graded Stakes Earnings (Derby Starters in Bold)	Total Points Under New System	Rank Under New System
Lookin at Lucky	94	Sidney's Candy
Noble's Promise	36	Mission Impazible
Sidney's Candy	150	Line of David
Line of David	100	Ice Box
Mission Impazible	101	Stately Victor
Ice Box	100	Lookin at Lucky
Stately Victor	100	Awesome Act
Conveyance	40	Discreetly Mine
American Lion	7	Jackson Bend
Dublin	34	Super Saver
Super Saver	61	Setsuko
Devil May Care	0	Dean's Kitten
Discreetly Mine	64	Pleasant Prince
Dean's Kitten	50	Conveyance
Awesome Act	70	Paddy O'Prado
Paddy O'Prado	40	A Little Warm
Homeboykris	10	Caracortado
Jackson Bend	62	Noble's Promise
Backtalk	0	Dublin
Make Music for Me	2	Drosselmeyer
Also Eligible		Also Eligible
Pleasant Prince	45	Yawanna Twist
A Little Warm	40	First Dude
Setsuko	60	Homeboykris
Caracortado	40	American Lion
Yawanna Twist	20	Make Music for Me
Eightyfiveinafifty	0	Devil May Care
First Dude	20	Backtalk
Drosselmeyer	25	Eightyfiveinafifty

In 2010, implementation of the point system results in one-fourth of the field changing over as Homeboykris, American Lion, Make Music for Me, Devil May Care, and Backtalk are excluded from the field.  As a result, Setsuko, Pleasant Prince, A Little Warm, Caracortado, and Drosselmeyer all make the field.  In 2010, the point totals range from 150 for Sydney’s Candy to 25 points for Drosselmeyer in 20^th place. The exclusion of the Illinois Derby bars American Lion and Backtalk from the field while refusing to award any credit for “fillies only” races excludes Devil May Care.  Also, despite only earning 2 points under the new system, Make Music For Me did make the field and finished 4^th when they actually ran the race.  In defense of the point system, the pedigrees and subsequent race performance of horses like Drosselmeyer, Setsuko, and A Little Warm arguably “fit” the Derby better than most of those horses that were excluded; however, the fate of Noble’s Promise shows a serious flaw in the point system.

  Despite his numerous races and significant earnings, the point total of Noble’s Promise suggests that the system can be distorted by “wins” which obscures the central question of who the best 20 horses are.  Despite being second on the graded stakes earnings list, Noble’s Promise is eighteenth on the point system essentially because he ran in tough races and lost to Lookin’ at Lucky three times.  Noble’s Promise was second to Lookin at Lucky in two races (Cashcall Futurity and Rebel Stakes) and ran third to Lucky and Vale of York in the Breeders Cup Juvenile; however, his off the board finish in the Arkansas Derby would have made for some nervous nights for his connections under the point system.  If the system is modified to give some credit to the Illinois Derby (as I think it will be), then Noble’s Promise would likely have been excluded or been the last horse in.  Unfortunately for racing fans, the point system rewards wins and not rigorous campaigns that allow fans and bettors to know a horse.  For trainers like Todd Pletcher keeping Derby prospects separate until the last minute will become even more essential, and the first Saturday in May will become more of a guessing game than it already is. 

            It is hard to draw conclusions from only three years of retroactive application, but it appears that between 20 to 25 points will be the minimum to make the field in most years.  Unfortunately, a horse only needs to finish in the money in two lower tier races or hit the board in one of the Grade 1 preps to achieve this goal.  The fact that a talented, game horse like Noble’s Promise might be excluded from the Derby field is equally troubling.  The systems emphasis on “winning” without regard for who you raced seems to reward trainers who protect their horses from competition until absolutely necessary.  Stakes races with small field or hopelessly outmatched runners are bad for the sport.  This situation is unlikely to improve as horses race less and foal crops are smaller. 

Similarly, the exclusion of the Illinois Derby while treating the UAE Derby as the equivalent of the Arkansas Derby lacks justification and common sense.  While no one waits to pick their Derby horse until after they run the Illinois Derby, this exclusion seems more a result of corporate strategy or snobbery than anything else.  If you are only looking at performance in the Kentucky Derby, then horses exiting the Illinois Derby along with their counterparts from the Louisiana Derby and Bluegrass Stakes rarely appear among the top three finishers of the Kentucky Derby. 

As I hope to discuss in the next post, this “point” system smacks more of marketing and television than any real effort to improve the field quality.  It is overly complex and picks and chooses “favorite” races to reward with higher points.  A simpler and fairer system might have been to (i) exclude all graded earnings from races at less than a mile, (ii) exclude graded earnings from turf races, and (iii) discount graded earnings from the two-year old campaign by half. 

Looking at Mr. Prospector in the American Classics

         Ed DeRosa’s recent blog post about Mr. Prospector’s dominance in the Belmont Stakes in recent history made me wonder if the success of his progeny in the Belmont was significant or just the result of the popularity of his male offspring at stud.  After all, every year the University of Kentucky has won a NCAA basketball championship, the Yankees have won the World Series.  We will see how 2012 turns out for the Yankees.  There is no direct connection here – just that both teams have been good over a long period of time.  I wondered if something similar was true for descendants of Mr. Prospector (“Mr. P.”) in the Belmont. 

           

            First things first, go read Ed’s post if you haven’t already – it’s great.  I will wait.  To me, the post has two very interesting points:  the success of Mr. P in the Belmont has come from a variety of different sons and grandsons and that the success of Mr. P in the Belmont may be somewhat of an illusion.  Let me explain. 

           

            First, as Ed notes “descendants of Mr. Prospector have won 13 of the past 17 Belmont Stakes, including 11 of the past 14, seven of the last nine, and each of the past three.”  But, this success has been through the offspring of seven different sons – “Afleet, Fappiano, Forty Niner, Fusaichi Pegasus, Gone West, Gulch, Kingmambo, and Seeking the Gold.”  I wondered if this level of success was any different than Mr. P in the other two Triple Crown races.    

                       

	Kentucky Derby Winners (2012 to 1995)
Year	Horse	Sire Line
2012	I'll Have Another	Mr. P
2011	Animal Kingdom	Blushing Groom
2010	Super Saver	Wavering Monarch
2009	Mine That Bird	Mr. P
2008	Big Brown	N. Dancer
2007	Street Sense	Mr. P
2006	Barbaro	Roberto
2005	Giacomo	Holly Bull
2004	Smarty Jones	Mr. P
2003	Funny Cide	Mr. P
2002	War Emblem	Mr. P
2001	Monarchos	Wavering Monarch
2000	Fu. Pegasus	Mr. P
1999	Charismatic	N. Dancer
1998	Real Quiet	Mr. P
1997	Silver Charm	Buckpasser
1996	Grindstone	Mr. P
1995	Thunder Gulch	Mr. P

           

            As for the first point, descendants of Mr. P have won 10 of the past 18 Kentucky Derbies, including 6 of the past 14, 4 of the last 9, and 1 of the past 3.  Thus, over the past 18 years, male descendants of Mr. P have won the Kentucky Derby approximately 56 percent of the time while they have won the Belmont approximately 76 percent of the time.  This twenty percent difference in win rate appears significant but given the 20 horse field of the Derby and the relative small sample this difference may not persist. 

           

	Preakness Stakes Winners (2012 to 1995)
Year	Winner	Sire Line
2012	I'll Have Another	Mr. P
2011	Shackleford	N. Dancer
2010	Lookin' at Lucky	Mr. P
2009	Rachel Alexandra	N. Dancer
2008	Big Brown	N. Dancer
2007	Curlin	Mr. P
2006	Bernardini	S. Slew
2005	Afleet Alex	Mr. P
2004	Smarty Jones	Mr. P
2003	Funny Cide	Mr. P
2002	War Emblem	Mr. P
2001	Point Given	Mr. P
2000	Red Bullet	Mr. P
1999	Charismatic	N. Dancer
1998	Real Quiet	Mr. P
1997	Silver Charm	Buckpasser
1996	Louis Quatorze	N. Dancer
1995	Timber Country	Mr. P

            In the Preakness, male descendants of Mr. P have won 11 of the past 18 Preakness Stakes, including 10 of the last 14, 6 of the last 9, and 2 of the past 3.  Amazingly, a male descendant of Mr. P won the Preakness from 2000 to 2005.   Boosted by this six year stretch, male descendants of Mr. P have won the Preakness approximately 61 percent of the time.   While this figure is higher than the Derby, it still does not approach the 76% win rate of the Belmont.   The higher success rate of Mr. P male descendants in the Belmont is probably best explained in Ed’s piece in a quote from Anne Peters

The Gulch and Fappiano branches are your main ones and show how the Mr. Prospector line is diverging away from the speed that it was known for. He was so brilliant, that breeders tend to keep piling on the stamina with him, and it’s worked.

            I found this quote really interesting because it suggests that the success of Mr. P line stallions in the Belmont is not necessarily attributable to Mr. P himself, but to the stamina heavy mares that were bred to him to temper his natural speed.  Given the domestic bias towards speed, the only way these stamina genes survived in our horses was to be bred to a sprinter like Mr. P.  A review of the pedigrees of the 15 Belmont winners descended from Mr. P supports this conclusion as only one (Ruler on Ice) is inbred to Mr. P.  Oddly enough, Ruler on Ice is only inbred to Mr. P because his sire Roman Ruler was inbred to Mr. P.  While Drosselmeyer and Summer Bird were sons of Mr. P line stallions, they each carried three different lines of Northern Dancer in their pedigrees making Northern Dancer much more influential to their genetic makeup than Mr. P who only appeared once.  As in all things, it is not just as simple as picking out the horses who are male descendants of Mr. P in classic races like the Belmont.  After all from 2011 to 2008, there were 44 starters in the Belmont, 15 of those were male descendants of Mr. P, and their average result was 5.6.  Thus, the stamina influences of the mares in those pedigrees must be given equal weight. 

Postscript

            Of course, Union Rags, the winner of the 2012 Belmont, promptly undercut this post on Saturday afternoon as he is a Northern Dancer line stallion, but one who is inbred to Mr. P (3 by 4).  He is also inbred to Northern Dancer and has significant stamina influences throughout his female family. Atigun finished third, which was the best finish for a male descendant of Mr. P in the 2012 Belmont