I don’t know about the widow’s peak thing, but my guess is that it’s irrelevant. I do know however that the gene assosciated with male pattern baldness is X-linked recessive.
This means that if you are male you can only get the gene from your mom’s side (you get the Y chromosome from your dad). So, do you have it? Is your mom bald? If so, then she has both copies of the gene and your screwed. Is your maternal grandfather bald? If so then you have better that a fifty percent chance of getting the gene. Anybody on your dad’s side is irrelevant to you (for this one particular gene) as you don’t get the chromosome in question from him.
As far as the hairline at birth, I’m not sure, but I don’t think it matters. I know it has nothing to do with male pattern baldness, but that ain’t the only kind.
If you are losing your hair, just remember that a receding hairline is probably better than an encroaching hairline.
“The ships hung in the sky in much the same way that bricks don’t.”
Through personal anectdotal evidence, I can tell you that having a “widow’s peak” hairline does not ensure protection from male-pattern baldness.
My Eastern European heritage had given me a hairline like Bela Lugosi. The sides of the peak are receding steadily, and the crown is thinning. With the stuff that’s left going greyer, I am looking more distinguished every day…
Wrong. Although the correlation is more pronounced on the maternal line, the tendency toward premature baldness can be passed on by one’s father’s line, as well.
Birth-given hairline is irrelevant.
Not to worry anyway. Scientists are isolating the second of two key enzymes believed responsible for MPB. Within maybe 10 years, the tendency toward premature baldness will be fully treatable in most cases, researchers believe.