Editing Dosage Index (section)

==Analysis==
Retroactive research conducted at the time the term "Dosage Index" first became common knowledge revealed that at that time no horse having a Dosage Index of higher than 4.00 had won the [[Kentucky Derby]] since at least 1929 (a year chosen because by then the number of available of chefs-de-race on which to base the figures was thought to have reached a critical mass), and that over the same period only one [[Belmont Stakes]] winner (Damascus in 1967) had such a Dosage figure.   It was also determined at that time that few horses with no chef-de-race influences in the two most stamina-laden groups, Solid and Professional, had won major races at distances of {{frac|1|1|4}} miles or longer even if the horse had a sufficient Classic presence in its pedigree to keep the Dosage Index from being over 4.00 (when [[Affirmed]] won the [[Triple Crown of Thoroughbred Racing|Triple Crown]] in 1978, for instance, he became the first horse with no Solid or Professional points in his Dosage Profile to win either the [[Kentucky Derby]] or the [[Belmont Stakes]] since the 1930s).  In recent years, however, several horses with no Solid or Professional chefs-de-race in the first four generations of their pedigrees—and indeed, a few with Dosage Indexes of above 4.00—have managed to win the [[Kentucky Derby]] and [[Belmont Stakes]], highlighting the issue of increasing speed and decreasing stamina in contemporary American thoroughbred pedigrees.  For example, 1999 Kentucky Derby winner [[Real Quiet]] had a Dosage Index of 6.02, while 2005 Kentucky Derby winner [[Giacomo (horse)|Giacomo]] has a Dosage Index of 4.33 ''and'' no Solid or Professional points in his Dosage Profile.  Triple Crown winner American Pharoah has a Dosage Index of 4.33.

As a result of these anomalies, the theory's usefulness has been questioned by some, at least with regard to the Kentucky Derby.  The system's defenders, however, point out that in recent times a large proportion of U.S.-bred horses with low Dosage figures have been sent to race in foreign countries where the distances of races are longer, resulting in most horses competing in the Kentucky Derby and similar American races having relatively high Dosage numbers and/or lacking Solid or Professional chef-de-race representation.  Yet the statistical foundation of Dosage remains compelling and the theory accurately differentiates Thoroughbred pedigree type for large populations of horses competitively performing over a range of distances, track surfaces and ages.  With regard to the Kentucky Derby, however, only results from 1981 onward reflect a method without retrofitting or using information unavailable at the time.  Many of the chefs-de-race who "predicted" the 1929-1981 Derby winners were made that way because of the Derby winners themselves, making the logic circular.