The Path, the Mix and the Star Ratings

Brant - Zendan Racing

It doesn't matter how well-bred a colt is for the Kentucky Derby,

if he is placed on the incorrect path, he won't make it.

It's been very quiet here at the Dirty Horse Club but that doesn't mean that things have been just as silent behind the scenes. Work never ends, it just goes deeper and deeper.

Nothing stays idle when it comes to the Kentucky Derby at this website. Things evolve and become more and more inspiring with one basis in mind - and that is based on common sense.

I spent the last 2 months diving deeper than I ever have when it comes to the Dirty Horse Club's way of tackling a chart, combining Dr. Roman's theories with Federico Tesio's beliefs and I have come full circle with those findings.

My goal was to figure out how and why (over the years) certain horses fit the 5 star rating prior to Pool One of the Derby Futures Betting and why some went on to fulfilling that rating, while others did not. In many cases, these early 5 star rated colts fulfilled that promise way after the Triple Crown series while others were erased from memory.

I did conduct a deep dive into the last 7 years with regards to the yearly Part One and Part Two Derby Prep Winner's Analysis posted consistently over the years. I researched every horse again and I looked into one certain aspect - which we will get into momentarily. I also researched every previous Derby Winner going back 3 decades. One can never have enough information to make confident decisions!

In most every case throughout the DHC's tenure to date, the one to three star ratings held, as their numbers and combinations followed no adherence to history, making them the easiest to assess. The four and five star rated colts, early on, were mixed. Some years perfection, while other years, some not even making a gate.

It took 2 months of careful study into these colts and the results boiled down to one simple and easy conclusion. Common sense is severely underrated and sometimes the answer is blatantly staring you right in the face.

Based on my thinking now and moving forward, our beloved Star Rating System will get a slight revamp for the 2026 Derby Prep winners.

A condensed version of these findings and what will change moving forward follows here.

---

First and foremost, you cannot rewrite history. A certain well-bred horse will win the Kentucky Derby and those that are bred incorrectly will not. Nothing changes in that regard, although the assessment of the mare's contribution will be slightly tweaked going forward. Nothing major to report with this, all systems are go.

Everything that we look at here will remain the same as dictated by history and no matter how hard I tried to see fault with the combinations - I kept coming up empty handed. This is not a testament to the DHC, it is a testament to Dr. Roman, the inclusion of the mare's contribution and a steady stream of historical perfection.

So where did the problem lie? What was missed?

Alas, this common sense aspect was actually consulted, discussed and dissected - however, NEVER ADDED IN!!

The shame of it!

As we know, a two year old colt may be easily read to be bred impeccably for the 10f+ Kentucky Derby. He matches everything correctly - a perfectly balanced scale, display of speed, a will to win, and alliance with a Spring Churchill track.

On the flip side, a colt may not be holding the perfect configurations (rare, but it happens) but he exhibits something far beyond his numbers - outriding his numbers - making him a standout.

These two separate entities are often discussed here, but the star ratings always exclusively revolve around the BREEDING and the COMBINATIONS. This is where the changes need to be pursued and these additions need to be made moving forward.

---

THE PATH TAKEN

I'll get right to the point here.

1. A horse may be built like a brick house for the Kentucky Derby but if he takes the incorrect path along the Prep Trail, he could have a 5-Star Breeding all day long, he simply will not make it.

   
   

2. A horse may NOT have the "perfect Derby combinations" but he exhibits himself as a BEAST on tracks and biases that do not align with his combinations. He is running through his breeding regardless of index, not just the 2.00 category.

   
   

For ease of illustration, we'll use the following obvious examples:

Point # 1

Both Getaway Car and Rodriquez were built like TITANS for the Kentucky Derby. Both given 5 star ratings for that breeding and as we discussed extensively over the Prep Year, both were not only ridden incorrectly in terms of style, they were on the incorrect path to get there as well.

Getaway Car

DP = 5-5-8-0-0 (18) DI = 3.50   CD = 0.83

Mare Profile = 8-3-1-8-10   Speed = 11   Stamina = 18   Index = 0.69   Triads = 12-12-19

Rodriguez

DP = 1-1-2-0-0 (4) DI = 3.00   CD = 0.75

Mare Profile = 4-5-8-12-2   Speed = 9   Stamina = 14   Index = 0.88   Triads = 17-25-22

Based on the history of what wins specific Derby preps along the trail and based on their specific breeding, both of these horses were entered into the incorrect Derby Preps and therefore they were both forced to run against the grain of their inheritance. Neither one was on a 5-star path from the beginning.

As both of their assessments would have easily pointed out, even before their debut, the path to the Kentucky Derby would have been completely opposite of what actually occurred. I have done 100's of analysis' for pre-maiden 2 year olds over the years for many people and I can assure you, nothing was correct with either one of them. Conducive Breeding for the Derby does not change that fact and therefore, neither one should have sat with those ratings over the season.

Based on the severe stamina that both of them received and based on the beautiful speed that they displayed early on, (especially Getaway Car) forcing that issue on the incorrect speedy biases of Santa Anita, DelMar and Los Alamitos was counter-intuitive to their breeding. They belonged on longer tracks, at facilities like Aqueduct or Fairgrounds, contesting races like the Remsen, the Gotham and the Risen Star.

The one and only race that Rodriguez was entered in that aligned perfectly with his breeding was the Wood Memorial held at Aqueduct. He won that race because he was built for a 9f bias that caters to stamina - NOT SPEED.

In addition, neither built to be forced to have a lead running style. Based on the win by Rodriguez on the Aqueduct track in the Wood Memorial travelling gate to wire showed exactly what a quality horse he was but doomed in spite of it. The Rating System did not take their Path into consideration.

Point # 2

This portion slides us in the opposite direction when it comes to path, other considerations and/or running style. While we do address these things over and over again, sometimes they are not lumped into the ratings system. Again, the ratings were established based on breeding and configurations and not the sum of the whole in all cases.

Let's look at Dornoch, Sovereignty and Journalism.

Dornoch

DP = 2-4-8-0-0 (14) DI = 2.50   CD = 0.57

Mare Profile = 7-8-2-9-8   Speed = 15   Stamina = 17   Index = 0.89   Triads = 17-19-19

Sovereignty

DP = 2-3-3-0-0 (8) DI = 4.33   CD = 0.88

Mare Profile = 3-10-5-7-4   Speed = 13   Stamina = 11   Index = 1.05   Triads = 18-22-16

Journalism

DP = 4-5-7-0-0 (16) DI = 3.57   CD = 0.81

Mare Profile = 6-5-4-7-7   Speed = 11   Stamina = 14   Index = 0.84   Triads = 15-16-18

Dornoch was given 5 stars prior to any Prep Debut.

Sovereignty went from 5 stars at first, down to 4 stars, and then back up again to 5 stars prior to Pool Four.

Journalism was kept at 3 stars straight through.

With these 3 horses, we have a complete inconsistency on my end in terms of reading their breeding in alliance to their prep wins. I see the fault easily in hindsight.

Not one of those 3 colts had the "proper Derby configurations" based on history.

Dornoch with his 2.50 index, Sovereignty with a negative two in his speed/stamina balance, and Journalism with subpar triads.

In spite of this, Dornoch still received 5 stars prior to even winning his maiden based on his running style and display of raw speed which was counterintuitive to his exact breeding. He also went on to win on the favorable bias at Aqueduct as well as winning on a disadvantaged Gulfstream bias (to his breeding, not his style) in the Fountain of Youth. Dornoch was read correctly along the way, utilizing his opposing configurations but aligning them with the biases he was conquering and his killer running style which went against the grain of his breeding.

Dornoch may have had a hard time in the Derby, but he came back in the 10f Belmont Stakes and showed us exactly why he was deserving of his 5 stars prior to winning his maiden.

With Sovereignty, there was no need to sway from the 5 stars, dropping to 4 and then coming back up again. Based on the "improper" mare speed/stamina scale, his running style was counter - which depicted allegiance to stamina - which downplays the configurations into favorable.

In addition, the simple fact that the magnificently run maiden attempt on the Aqueduct bias also showed high quality counter to his configurations, should have kept him at 5 stars throughout.

Now we get to Journalism and the inconsistency with reading the horse "in spite of" the configurations.

Even though the proper assessment may have been correct in terms of the 10f, (Journalism lost both 10f races) he was still a giant and extremely competitive. The horse absolutely should have been earmarked with 5 stars along the way.

How his breeding aligned with the races he was running and the tracks that he was winning on were neglected in favor of the absurdness of the low amount of entries he faced in those races.

With the balance between his .81 CD and low .84 mare index, and 3 point spread leaning to stamina, the biases that he conquered early on mimic the adverse biases found with Dornoch and Sovereignty. It is easy to look at this when a horse is sporting a 2.50 index, but to be honest, never really factored in when dealing with the speed driven horses to the full extent.

The horse, regardless of his breeding and configurations layout, was posting exceptional Equibase and Beyer figures on the speedy biases of the West Coast, regardless of the number of starters in that gate. He was running against the grain of his inheritance.

This inconsistency of adding in outside factors, doing it with one but not the other, is wholly incorrect.

---

One can easily assess the best and most advantageous race placements for a specific horse. The configurations will tell you what track bias is best suited for the horse based on his chart. The configurations will tell you his optimum running style. If that race placement does not coincide with his breeding it does not matter how well bred he is for the Derby - he won't make it.

On the flip side, any colt, regardless of what his configurations say he should favor - if he ignores it and is successful - he is on the path to greatness. Horse like Shared Belief, Gun Runner, Flightline, Orb, etc. all ran against the way they were built early on and it didn't make a difference if they only fell in that 2.00 to 2.99 Mid-range disadvantaged category.

In order to be successful with an analysis of a 2 year old and early 3 year old horse - one must not have tunnel vision on configurations alone.

Are they on the correct path to begin with in order to even stake claim on a gate?

Are they successfully running counter-intuitive to their stated configurations?

Are they tackling biases that go against their breeding regardless of where they fall on the speed/stamina scale?

Therefore, moving forward on the Road to the 2026 Kentucky Derby, based on accessing the full past performances of every single horse who entered a gate in the Kentucky Derby over the last 30 years, along with those who started on the road and did not make it - a change is coming.

I have studied the incorrect paths - I have seen the standout qualities running against the grain - I have aligned their configurations to the prep races they were entered into - I understand exactly what needs to be added.

Going forward for the 2025-2026 Prep Season, there will be three separate Star Ratings categories for each horse. These star ratings will evolve over the course of the Prep season depending on race placement and the bias they conquered.

1. Breeding for the 10f Kentucky Derby.

2. Standout Quality over Adverse Bias regardless of "inferior" Derby configurations

3. Race Placement, incorrect or rational

---

Quick and Easy Example of a new 2 year old in training:

The video at the top of this article is a 2 year old in training with Bob Baffert owned by Zendan Racing.

The workout was beautiful and of course, eagerly awaiting his debut. I love his name too as I have a nephew with the same.

Normally, I would easily and quicky dismiss this horse as a Derby Player based solely on his configurations:

BRANT Gun Runner - Tynan (Liam's Map)

DP = 1-5-4-0-0 (10) DI = 4.00   CD = 0.70 ANZ = 6.00

Mare Profile = 5-6-4-7-6   Speed = 11   Stamina = 13   Index = 0.87   Triads = 15-17-17

Initial reaction would easily be 2 stars for the Kentucky Derby as these configurations are obviously not correct for that race.

Based on the Baffert location, he will most likely be entered at Santa Anita, DelMar and Los Alamitos. He already appears to be a beast for the BC Juvenile held at DelMar this year. This would not be an "adverse bias" for him, nor would the distance.

He'd been running on a conducive bias for his breeding so there could be no 'upgrade" for that point. His breeding states that he belongs on race tracks like Santa Anita and DelMar. He'll smoke his maiden and his preps but we would need to see evidence of something over and above this for possibility of outrunning his numbers.

He would be in a "rational" race placement for his breeding on the West Coast tracks, again, leaving no reason for upgrade for running against the grain. No evidence procured to see that horse is transcending his inferior Derby numbers.

Now, let's fantasize that Baffert uncharacteristically decides to try his hand in the Withers Stakes at Aqueduct with him as opposed to the Robert B. Lewis run on the same weekend.

Winning the Robert B. Lewis would not be counter-intuitive to his breeding and therefore he would still find an easy advantage there with his breeding and nothing could or would show evidence that he is running through his inheritance. A rational path, yes indeed, but changes nothing in the outlook. He would be running in line with his breeding, which is not correct for the Derby.

Winning the Withers Stakes on the other hand, would change the complexion of the analysis entirely. Brant would be displaying something over and above what he inherited. Regardless of Derby configurations and just like Journalism, we would have tangible evidence of something special. In this case - his star rating would rise substantially.

Let's say he loses the Wither's Stakes on that bias in grand fashion. The two stars would remain without hesitation as the colt would be running directly in line with his numbers.

Let's say he loses the Robert B. Lewis, then his 2 stars would be dropped to 1 star as the horse wouldn't even be running to his inheritance.

Race Placement and direct correlation of his breeding to the bias will now be assessed with star ratings for every horse after each Derby Prep, evolving from one race to the next.