Theories on the lessening superiority of top class males VS 2yo's, claimers,& females

[Calzone Lord]

The ability gap between the superiority of older males has shrunk VS virtually every single type of horse. Anyone who has a bunch of result charts from a bunch of different time periods in history can see this.

I'm wondering why this is.

Why have top 2-year-olds become closer in ability to top older males? I'm guessing because of an emphsis on breeding for speed and precocity and the popularity of 2yo in training sales over the last 15 years.

Why have claiming horses become closer in ability to top older males? I'm guessing because of slots tracks and the fact that claiming races are often dominated by high percentage training wizards. If the Juan Carlos G's, Jamie Ness's, Jeff Mullins', Rick Dutrow's, Beattie's, etc. all were removed from the game -- perhaps you would see the bridge in ability between the type of horses winning claiming races and winning top class races for males widen.

Also - slots tracks. Those rich purses and oppertunities for claiming horses weren't there before.

Here's a tougher one, though. How have top class females bridged the gap so well between top class males? There has to be more to it than 'the males just all suck' I would think.

Over the past few years -- have we seen advancements in terms of products that help fillies and mares with sexual health and organization to keep them in peak shape and from going out of condition when the times and climate aren't right?

Something like that could explain a bridging between top females and top males -- but it would also have to be reflected at all different class levels.

When I get some time -- I'm going to look over the last ten decades or so -- and compare males with females class for class -- from the highest class races to comparable lower class racing and look to see how the ability spreads have changed.