American Thoroughbred not good enough?!

[Fred]

[QUOTE=EventerAJ;8874546]
There is a possible difference in type, based on the preference for racing surface and distance. European racing is largely on turf, and frequently at a mile or more. US racing is most often on dirt, and many common races a mile or less. This could produce the notion that “American bred” horses are all dirt sprinter types with downhill chunky bodies. But that isn’t true. There is a lot of variation, on both sides of the pond, but the bloodlines are global. War Front is in high demand both here and Europe. Galileo, sire of this year’s top 3 Arc finishers, is by American-bred Sadlers Wells (by Canadian bred Northern Dancer). Sadlers Wells is also pretty influential in jump racing.

Thoroughbred breeding is a big melting pot worldwide. Stallions are shuttled north to south. Mares are sold overseas or shipped internationally to breed. You have to judge the individual in front of you, not what country he came from.[/QUOTE]

Thank you, AJ.
I was going to respond to Velvet’s comment, but you have done it very well.
This is old ground, and we have been over it before.

My quibble is not with you, OP, but with the term ‘American Thoroughbred’.
But if we are going to go into the discussion about Thoroughbreds bred in NA vs Thoroughbreds bred in Europe then, what Eventer AJ said.
To prove the point, just have a look at A Fine Romance’s pedigree:
He was a Canadian bred, which just means country foaled in, but all those ancestors crossed and recrossed the Atlantic numerous times - Irish, English, French, Italian, and American.
http://www.pedigreequery.com/a+fine+romance

An ‘American’ Thoroughbred is simply a Thoroughbred foaled in USA.

I just realized I typed “was”.

[Xanthoria]

I think any negativity directed towards TBs in general comes from the fact that there are a lot of legitimately downhill TBs in the world, and many of the sprinters are seen publicly as babies who aren’t always the most balanced. Distance horses tend to be a tad older…

I personally have seen more downhill TBs in the US than the UK (having spent half my life in each place) but again that might just be a sprinter vs distance build. My personal feeling is that QH breeding has influenced the look - very downhill, massive butts, short necks etc are seemingly admired in the QH world, and that can’t help but influence other sprinters in the nation.

To comment on one point though, being downhill isn’t about withers lower than croup. And in a breed with tall withers, they can deceptively make a horse appear taller in front.

Downhill horses are built so that their stifles are higher than their elbows - the front legs are shorter than the hinds. Usually this is in combination with a croup that is higher than the withers and a neck that comes out low.

Another definition is the line from LS joint to widest part of the neck. Again, line drawn between the two points gives uphill, level or downhill build. Here’s a pic of the latter line in yellow, and wither/croup in red.

Obviously these horses are even more on their forehands than the average horse, making collection even more difficult. So you can see why WB breeders want to stay away from that.

Strangely if you do a Google image search for “American thoroughbred stallion” up come a bunch of downhill horses, many standing uphill on a slope… even many of those listed above this post!

At the end of the day, athletic expression, talent and longevity are not all predicted by conformation.

[beowulf]

[QUOTE=Xanthoria;8875714]
I think any negativity directed towards TBs in general comes from the fact that there are a lot of legitimately downhill TBs in the world, and many of the sprinters are seen publicly as babies who aren’t always the most balanced. Distance horses tend to be a tad older…

I personally have seen more downhill TBs in the US than the UK (having spent half my life in each place) but again that might just be a sprinter vs distance build. My personal feeling is that QH breeding has influenced the look - very downhill, massive butts, short necks etc are seemingly admired in the QH world, and that can’t help but influence other sprinters in the nation.

To comment on one point though, being downhill isn’t about withers lower than croup. And in a breed with tall withers, they can deceptively make a horse appear taller in front.

Downhill horses are built so that their stifles are higher than their elbows - the front legs are shorter than the hinds. Usually this is in combination with a croup that is higher than the withers and a neck that comes out low.

Another definition is the line from LS joint to widest part of the neck. Again, line drawn between the two points gives uphill, level or downhill build. Here’s a pic of the latter line in yellow, and wither/croup in red.

Obviously these horses are even more on their forehands than the average horse, making collection even more difficult. So you can see why WB breeders want to stay away from that.

Strangely if you do a Google image search for “American thoroughbred stallion” up come a bunch of downhill horses, many standing uphill on a slope… even many of those listed above this post!

At the end of the day, athletic expression, talent and longevity are not all predicted by conformation.[/QUOTE]
While I agree that there are downhill TBs out there (such is the nature of specializing for speed) they are not limited to just the US and are by no means the only representative of TBs in the US. None of the TBs I mentioned are downhill. EventerAJ’s post is worth repeating - these stallions shuttle all over the world and cover very wide mare bases.

I don’t think the QH influenced the TB look at all. Specializing for speed did, though.

There is a definite difference in dirt/sprint vs turf/stayer types - Europe happens to have more of the latter, and US the former, though the two are quite interspersed.

[Bayhawk]

[QUOTE=beowulf;8875160]
Ironic, because almost all of the TBs used in sport horse breeding today are directly from or descend from American running lines… Elusive Emir is one of them.

Sea Accounts
Sea Lion
A Fine Romance (CAN)
Saddlers Wells
Coconut Grove
Salute The Truth
Triple Twist
Roven
Innkeeper
Comet Shine

That was just off of the top of my head and by no means exhaustive…

I have to say that the breeders who are actively trying to breed sport TBs are doing quite well given the market, it’s just that they (the sport bred TBs) are bred in much, much smaller numbers than the commercial WB chain and yet still, seem to pop up often in sport. The breeders that have AIMED for the sport-horse type have done quite well, thank you.

The problem is that it is EXPENSIVE to breed, raise, and market a stallion and many people in the US/America do not have that resource, or would rather back it with a WB that would command more money.

I have nothing to add re: TB vs WB, just wanted to clear up that there are American TBs out there that are making a positive impact on sport-horse lines.[/QUOTE]

And besides eventing…you see the influence of these horses basically nowhere. ok…maybe in the speedbump hunter and jumper classes.

Most breeders don’t want them and most of the market doesn’t want them because most have a shorter front leg , a higher croup and really low neck sets that render them incapable of top sport or producing for top sport.

I go to many shows around the world each year. I watch online most shows around the world. I study sporthorse rankings ,sire rankings and mare family rankings. These horses you speak of just aren’t there.

[Elles]

@Fred;8875365

Thank you, AJ.
I was going to respond to Velvet’s comment, but you have done it very well.
This is old ground, and we have been over it before.

My quibble is not with you, OP, but with the term ‘American Thoroughbred’.
But if we are going to go into the discussion about Thoroughbreds bred in NA vs Thoroughbreds bred in Europe then, what Eventer AJ said.
To prove the point, just have a look at A Fine Romance’s pedigree:
He was a Canadian bred, which just means country foaled in, but all those ancestors crossed and recrossed the Atlantic numerous times - Irish, English, French, Italian, and American.
http://www.pedigreequery.com/a+fine+romance

An ‘American’ Thoroughbred is simply a Thoroughbred foaled in USA.

I think some lines are more “typical” American (more generations being American) than others. But I do absolutely not look at them as being inferior to any other TB population in any way! And I do agree that there has been a huge amount of crossing and recrossing the Atlantic.

[SnicklefritzG]

You also are well known for bashing TB’s and insulting them. It is hard to take you seriously.

[QUOTE=Bayhawk;8876218]
And besides eventing…you see the influence of these horses basically nowhere. ok…maybe in the speedbump hunter and jumper classes.

Most breeders don’t want them and most of the market doesn’t want them because most have a shorter front leg , a higher croup and really low neck sets that render them incapable of top sport or producing for top sport.

I go to many shows around the world each year. I watch online most shows around the world. I study sporthorse rankings ,sire rankings and mare family rankings. These horses you speak of just aren’t there.[/QUOTE]

[Elles]

http://www.sport-horse-breeder.com/market-share.html
When I researched those mounts I found approximately 25 to 30% were actually bred here in America by Americans–therefore they were legitimately American Sport Horses even while they were not identified as such. Those horses country of origin was hidden because they were labeled under a foreign government banner, and there were a few others which were not given a breed identification at all. One of the notices identified a Thoroughbred as an ‘English’ Thoroughbred, but left the American TBs as just ‘Thoroughbred’, and a couple of Hunter bred horses (American Sport Horses) were called ‘TB cross’, implying they were a mutt. But all the others were proudly labeled Dutch, Belgian, Holstein, Irish etc (all just as much mutt bred as our sport horses by the way), giving their government products free promotion.

[Cumano]

[QUOTE=Elles;8876289]
http://www.sport-horse-breeder.com/market-share.html
When I researched those mounts I found approximately 25 to 30% were actually bred here in America by Americans–therefore they were legitimately American Sport Horses even while they were not identified as such. Those horses country of origin was hidden because they were labeled under a foreign government banner, and there were a few others which were not given a breed identification at all. One of the notices identified a Thoroughbred as an ‘English’ Thoroughbred, but left the American TBs as just ‘Thoroughbred’, and a couple of Hunter bred horses (American Sport Horses) were called ‘TB cross’, implying they were a mutt. But all the others were proudly labeled Dutch, Belgian, Holstein, Irish etc (all just as much mutt bred as our sport horses by the way), giving their government products free promotion.[/QUOTE]

The data bases and standings she referes to label each horse by their studbooks and not by their country of origin. If horses are not registered, they will be listed as crossbreds or unknown breeding. Also, in the individual rankings, when registration can be confirmed, horses are refered to as TB. In the studbook standings, they count only the members of the WBFSH, and no TB studbook is members. You must keep in mind that the federations goal is to regroup studbooks for sport horses. It is à regroupment of stud books, not breeders. Technicaly, as for the wbfsh, each such registration organisation for TB, such as the American Jockey Club, would be considered a distinct studbook, such as are the KWPN and the KWPN -NA. When you read the rules of the Jockey Club, it is resolutely race oriented organisation. They issue registration certificates purely based on the validation of the genetic of the horse, and nothing else. Their is no approval requirements, standard, breeding policies or even any statement of their breeding objectifs. This does not mean that they are a lesser organisation, or that the TB is a lesser horse, but simply that no sport horse studbook exists for TB. Their is no point in the WBFSH to recognize an organisation that does not share its core values, and Jockey Clubs have probably no interest in the WBFSH in the first place as they do not consider themselves as a sport horse Studbook, or in having any mission in connection with developing à sport horse breeding program. They register TB horses, maintain racing records, issue racing permits and are involved in the racing industry. The gigantic conspiracy described in that text does not exist, and her interpretation of the situation clearly results from a deep misunderstanding of the studbooks role and operation, of the implication of the states and the functionning of the sports and breeding governing bodies.

[beowulf]

[QUOTE=Bayhawk;8876218]
And besides eventing…you see the influence of these horses basically nowhere. ok…maybe in the speedbump hunter and jumper classes.

Most breeders don’t want them and most of the market doesn’t want them because most have a shorter front leg , a higher croup and really low neck sets that render them incapable of top sport or producing for top sport.

I go to many shows around the world each year. I watch online most shows around the world. I study sporthorse rankings ,sire rankings and mare family rankings. These horses you speak of just aren’t there.[/QUOTE]

Wrong - the market does not want them for NONE of the reasons you described. The market DOES want them when they are quality animals, as most of them are - the problem is that there are so select few stallion owners that want to campaign a TB. Part of it is public perception, and the other part, IMHO, is because it’s easier to source WB talent than TB talent. Most do not know how to pick a good TB. One only needs to look at the impact Coconut Grove is making in HOL/HAN. If the market did not want TBs, there would not be approved TB stallions in the registries being used… Oh wait… there are…

You are painting an entire breed with a very broad brush - not all of them, or even most of them, have shorter forearms, higher croups, or low neck sets. Some of them do - of course. That would be like saying “all warmbloods have terrible work ethic and screws loose” just because a select few do.

SOME commercial stallions for dirt do, as they delineate towards hyperspecialization for speed. MANY do not. Short forearms, btw, make for a slow horse…

The more you post about TBs the more I realize how little experience you have with them – that in itself would be perfectly fine and acceptable were it not for the fact you lambast an entire breed for select few individual attributes. If we are going to extrapolate a breed in its entire based on a few individuals then I get to say all warmbloods are unsound, weak-loined, and long backed.

The sires I mentioned above do not have short forearms, high croups, or low set necks. Try again.

[SnicklefritzG]

Awesome post

[QUOTE=beowulf;8876414]
Wrong - the market does not want them for NONE of the reasons you described. The market DOES want them when they are quality animals, as most of them are - the problem is that there are so select few stallion owners that want to campaign a TB. Part of it is public perception, and the other part, IMHO, is because it’s easier to source WB talent than TB talent. Most do not know how to pick a good TB. One only needs to look at the impact Coconut Grove is making in HOL/HAN. If the market did not want TBs, there would not be approved TB stallions in the registries being used… Oh wait… there are…

You are painting an entire breed with a very broad brush - not all of them, or even most of them, have shorter forearms, higher croups, or low neck sets. Some of them do - of course. That would be like saying “all warmbloods have terrible work ethic and screws loose” just because a select few do.

SOME commercial stallions for dirt do, as they delineate towards hyperspecialization for speed. MANY do not. Short forearms, btw, make for a slow horse…

The more you post about TBs the more I realize how little experience you have with them – that in itself would be perfectly fine and acceptable were it not for the fact you lambast an entire breed for select few individual attributes. If we are going to extrapolate a breed in its entire based on a few individuals then I get to say all warmbloods are unsound, weak-loined, and long backed.

The sires I mentioned above do not have short forearms, high croups, or low set necks. Try again.[/QUOTE]

[Foxtrot_s]

When a show puts on a class - i.e. for TB’s - it is presumably an effort to promote the breed. They would therefore expect the entries to be less in the beginning, but they could also swallow the ‘loss’ for the greater good, I would think.

Off the subject, but when I look at a TB pedigree I’ll recognize some of the names, but mostly the older ones who have records as sport horse sires.
What I then look for is how many are bred in France, or GB, and if they have done the fences. Doesn’t matter where they were bred, as they fly stock around the world, north south, east west, like we do going on vacation.

[Bayhawk]

[QUOTE=SnicklefritzG;8876287]
You also are well known for bashing TB’s and insulting them. It is hard to take you seriously.[/QUOTE]

Doesn’t matter if you take me seriously or not. The facts are the facts.

I don’t bash them. I just don’t believe in their quality as sporthorses.

[Bayhawk]

[QUOTE=beowulf;8876414]
Wrong - the market does not want them for NONE of the reasons you described. The market DOES want them when they are quality animals, as most of them are - the problem is that there are so select few stallion owners that want to campaign a TB. Part of it is public perception, and the other part, IMHO, is because it’s easier to source WB talent than TB talent. Most do not know how to pick a good TB. One only needs to look at the impact Coconut Grove is making in HOL/HAN. If the market did not want TBs, there would not be approved TB stallions in the registries being used… Oh wait… there are…

You are painting an entire breed with a very broad brush - not all of them, or even most of them, have shorter forearms, higher croups, or low neck sets. Some of them do - of course. That would be like saying “all warmbloods have terrible work ethic and screws loose” just because a select few do.

SOME commercial stallions for dirt do, as they delineate towards hyperspecialization for speed. MANY do not. Short forearms, btw, make for a slow horse…

The more you post about TBs the more I realize how little experience you have with them – that in itself would be perfectly fine and acceptable were it not for the fact you lambast an entire breed for select few individual attributes. If we are going to extrapolate a breed in its entire based on a few individuals then I get to say all warmbloods are unsound, weak-loined, and long backed.

The sires I mentioned above do not have short forearms, high croups, or low set necks. Try again.[/QUOTE]

I am in the market. There is never a mention from any rider , anywhere , that seeks out TB horses for sport besides eventing.

If there were…you would see them personally on shows or you would see them in statistics. Not there…

[beowulf]

[QUOTE=Bayhawk;8876731]
Doesn’t matter if you take me seriously or not. The facts are the facts.

I don’t bash them. I just don’t believe in their quality as sporthorses.[/QUOTE]

I suppose Eventing isn’t a sport in your eyes?

[zipperfoot]

[QUOTE=Cumano;8875081]
Don’t get me wrong, this tread has everithing needed to turn into the memorable, good old fashion brawl everyone is hoping for! It has the potential to turn WB people against TB people, Europeans against americans, old school TB afficionado against modern breeding TB enthusiasts, race people against sport horse people…everything is their. I think no one knows exactly what we are expected to argue on…[/QUOTE]

Why can’t we all just get along? After all, a good horse is a good horse, regardless of breed, type, country of origin etc. We all have preferences, of course, but that doesn’t mean that one person’s preference is the best for everyone.

[Elles]

EXACTLY Zipperfoot!!!

[cloudyandcallie]

So are the Germans not importing American TB studs to breed to their warmblood mares anymore? Cloudy descends from War Relic, who was imported (or exported from USA) to Germany to improve the line. He also has the French TB blood from the old line of the French “anglo-arabian tb” Inshallah. Plus the Samber TB blood. I thought the Germans still rely on refining the registries by buying American TB studs and breeding them to their WB mares? Ditto the Dutch.

I always thought it was great, when my old KY TB mare Callie was still alive, that she, with her Poker sire and lineage of War Admiral mixed with lots of French TB blood was a cousin on my hessen Cloudy through that KY TB line. I’d hate to see the Germans reject American TBs. The conformation of Callie was perfect and that of Cloudy is almost perfect according to the experts who have seen them. (And Cloudy could jump anything in his younger days, with the perfect bascule over wood and often over hot wire. He was impatient with BOs who did not put him in, so he cleared more hot wire and amazed BOs.)

[D_BaldStockings]

FYI
Sadlers Wells XX did sire Johann Quatz XX a 1.6m SJ.

Not ‘approved’ anywhere but TB. Apparently had a TB son approved SF, but that never went anywhere.

A quick check of Horsetelex shows Sea Accounts with 1 foal 2004, one in 2007 and several in 2015; those 2015 foals are not going to have records -yet.

Yes, TB have made their mark in Eventing.

Are there many Holst. who are top level dressage horses?

Curious, not condemning: one would expect a horse to do better and have more likelihood of finding a better rider in a discipline they are ‘supposed’ to be bred for.

[D_BaldStockings]

[QUOTE=Cumano;8876387]
The data bases and standings she referes to label each horse by their studbooks and not by their country of origin. If horses are not registered, they will be listed as crossbreds or unknown breeding. Also, in the individual rankings, when registration can be confirmed, horses are refered to as TB. In the studbook standings, they count only the members of the WBFSH, and no TB studbook is members. You must keep in mind that the federations goal is to regroup studbooks for sport horses. It is à regroupment of stud books, not breeders. Technicaly, as for the wbfsh, each such registration organisation for TB, such as the American Jockey Club, would be considered a distinct studbook, such as are the KWPN and the KWPN -NA. When you read the rules of the Jockey Club, it is resolutely race oriented organisation. They issue registration certificates purely based on the validation of the genetic of the horse, and nothing else. Their is no approval requirements, standard, breeding policies or even any statement of their breeding objectifs. This does not mean that they are a lesser organisation, or that the TB is a lesser horse, but simply that no sport horse studbook exists for TB. Their is no point in the WBFSH to recognize an organisation that does not share its core values, and Jockey Clubs have probably no interest in the WBFSH in the first place as they do not consider themselves as a sport horse Studbook, or in having any mission in connection with developing à sport horse breeding program. They register TB horses, maintain racing records, issue racing permits and are involved in the racing industry. The gigantic conspiracy described in that text does not exist, and her interpretation of the situation clearly results from a deep misunderstanding of the studbooks role and operation, of the implication of the states and the functionning of the sports and breeding governing bodies.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for a very accurate assessment of the ranking system in place for Olympic discipline (excluding reining) horse sport.

Apples and oranges. If you breed apples, you don’t have an interest in oranges and don’t record or market the juice from oranges.

[Fred]

[QUOTE=SnicklefritzG;8876287]
You also are well known for bashing TB’s and insulting them. It is hard to take you seriously.[/QUOTE]

I ignore him.