Dosage Figures by Race Track 2009

The following table presents the Dosage figures for stakes winners at various race tracks in North America.  The data are for stakes races since 1983 through 2007 and include tracks with at least 100 total stakes races, and at least 50 stakes races each at sprint (less than one mile) and route (greater than or equal to a mile) distances.  The table displays the average winning distance, Dosage Profile (DP), Dosage Index (DI), Center of Distribution (CD) and average Dosage Profile (DP) points for the winners of all the races, followed by separate columns for the average winning distance, average DI (ADI) and average CD (ACD) of the winners in both sprints and routes.  It is apparent that the tracks vary widely in the aptitudinal types that are successful.  It is also apparent that tracks have different profiles in terms of sprint winner aptitudes versus route winner aptitudes.

The next table examines more closely the relationship between the average CD at sprint and at route distances for each track.  The last column shows the percentage decrease in average CD in going from sprints to routes.  The tracks are sorted in order of decreasing % decrease.  Those near the bottom, such as Sportsmans Park, Lone Star Park and Philadelphia Park, display relatively small differences, while those near the top, such as the Meadowlands, Saratoga and Arlington Park, display relatively large differences.  The reason for the variations in % decrease is not immediately obvious.   However, the individual % decreases are characteristic of each track.  In any case, the data tell us that sprinters at Sportsmans Park, for example, appear to have a much easier time moving up to routes than do sprinters at Saratoga, at least in terms of pedigree type.  A relationship between speed and track surface may be implicated.

Finally, below is a preliminary comparison of Dosage figures for the winners of open stakes races on tracks before and after the installation of synthetic surfaces.  The data are from AP, DMR, GG, HOL, KEE, SA, TP and WO for the years 2004 and 2007-2008 and include AWD, DP points, ADI and ACD.  In a previous study we had observed that the Dosage model (i.e., the relationship between AWD and Dosage figures) holds up on both surfaces and that winners on both types of surface have similar Dosage characteristics at comparable distances.  Here, however, we do see significant differences between the two types of surface at individual tracks.

Although the combined AWDs are similar for the years 2004 and 2007-2008, the average Dosage figures are considerably different.  For every all-weather track other than Santa Anita, the ADI and ACD are measurably lower on the new surface, suggesting that more stamina-oriented horses now have an advantage which they did not have on the previous dirt surface.  The following table compares directly the AWD, ADI and ACD for the years 2004 and 2007-2008 at the new all-weather tracks and conventional dirt tracks.  We can see significant differences at the all-weather tracks but almost no differences at the conventional tracks.