America's 10 Most Influential Sport Horse Breeders

[YankeeLawyer]

[QUOTE=TKR;5060124]
What about Warioto Farm in Tennessee that stood a number of stallions and produced alot of hunters for many years? I know the chestnut Thoroughbred stallion that showed and bred for years stood there – mind is blank (how unusual, LOL!). What about Hamilton Farm – they were certainly influential in their heyday?
Good Luck!
PennyG[/QUOTE]

I thought of these also but DY asked for most influential of the past 10 to 15 years, and those guys were 80s / early 90s.

Hamilton not only stood Galoubet, Bonjour, and Benvolio, but also was a leader in AI and developed the Equitainer for shipping semen - and for that reason alone perhaps should necessarily be included in the list! http://www.equitainer.com/Company/History.htm

[canwong]

My vote goes to:

Beaulieu Farm in Quebec and BlazingColors in Ontario.

[Snicklefritz]

Karen Reid of Fox Fire Farm in Washington. She has done so much work to make some really good Holsteiner stallions available to everyone in North America. She currentley has 5 stallions standing on her farm and has sooo many others available that stand in Germany. She really works hard for the Holsteiner breeders.

[ne1]

karen, hans, karen and blair, lieselot etc… there isn’t a shortage of holsteiner breeders omitted to this point, and jumpers in general. just a function of this audience.

have fun with that project. seems like walking through a minefield.

[sfstable]

[QUOTE=YankeeLawyer;5060152]

Hamilton not only stood Galoubet, Bonjour, and Benvolio, but also was a leader in AI and developed the Equitainer for shipping semen - and for that reason alone perhaps should necessarily be included in the list! http://www.equitainer.com/Company/History.htm[/QUOTE]

Good point !!! That development probably has influenced every breeder on this board regardless of discipline.

[Home_Again_Farm]

@not again;5060122

Bruce Davidson and Mary Hazzard have probably bred more internationally successful horses than everyone else here combined…

:yes:

[Oakstable]

And the qualifications of Down Yonder to select the most influential breeders are what?

[DownYonder]

[QUOTE=Oakstable;5060376]
And the qualifications of Down Yonder to select the most influential breeders are what?[/QUOTE]

I was ASKED if I would develop an article for a magazine. I perfectly well know that I probably do not have the knowledge needed for this, which is why I asked for input on this forum.

It is catty comments like this that make me wish I hadn’t bothered.

Maybe YOU would like to write the article? Go ahead - I will be happy to turn the chore over to someone else.

Thanks to those of you who have had helpful suggestions. I will be talking to my Editor tomorrow and we will probably head in a different direction, or drop the project entirely.

[YankeeLawyer]

[QUOTE=DownYonder;5060957]

Thanks to those of you who have had helpful suggestions. I will be talking to my Editor tomorrow and we will probably head in a different direction, or drop the project entirely.[/QUOTE]

I think if you tweak the title, that change alone would solve much of the problem. perhaps something such as “Leaders in Sporthorse Breeding in America,” with an intro stating that those profiled are among some of the most influential here, etc., might work a bit better. You might even state that in researching the article, the fact that it is a challenge to pick JUST 10 is a testament to how far the breeding industry has come in NA, with greater breadth and depth in the programs than ever before. Personally I would do a strong introductory section along those lines, which would set it up nicely for the discussion of the ones selected.

[selah]

I think we would be remiss if we did not include Wendy at October Hill Farm as being very influential to jumper breeding in the US. She has made available to the NA jumper breeder such greats as Mezcalero, Lordship, and Coconut Grove, and also has an excellent mare band, many of which are available for custom foals. Her contributions extend far beyond those I have listed…

Good luck DY! IMO, you have just been through the toughest part of this assignment (folks trying to tank this thread)…now the fun begins! The sport horse breeders became influential not because of glory-seeking self interest, but out of a pure passion for great horses and sport, and a willingness to bring others along on the ride:cool:

[LavenderFarm]

Maybe you could approach this from an historical perspective: “Pioneers in North American Sporthorse Breeding.” That could be very educational and would still include Hilltop, ISF, etc.

[Equibrit]

Most of the “influence” applied to modern breeding occured a long time ago. You are then faced with the question of how far back you need to go. Would you be referring to people currently involved in breeding or those that shaped modern breeding ?

[WB_Mom]

I think it would be very interesting to break this article down into 2 parts.
Part 1 would be the folks who started breeding for sport some time ago, who set the stage for todays horses. Part 2 are the ones who are breeding ‘today’. (You’ll have to define ‘today’.)
This way you can get a more complete historical perspective on the evolution of breeding in North America, and can include more than your ‘Top 10’. Besides, I don’t see how you can fairly compare someone who was breeding for sport back in the 60’s to those breeding today. I think this would make fascinating reading! Good luck!

[ise]

I personally wish that we had the complete record keeping on horses in competition that would result in an article that was fair and based on reliable information. But unfortunately we do not and what can and probably will result is some people being noted over others who have had a bigger influence but may not be “big names”. I woldn’t even venture to go there.

I’m also a bit taken back by your tentative list. Some of these people HAVE NOT BRED horses or very many. Just having a big name doesn’t make someone a breeder.

Writing this article is going to give an indirect economic benefit to anyone you name on this list. I would very careful to make sure you have COMPLETE information on which to base your selection. The BREEDER is person named on the REGISTRATION PAPERS. Not the owner of the farm, manager of the farm, etc. Also holding Stallion inspections doesn’t qualify either.

[Oakstable]

I spent three decades in the newspaper business as a feature writer and editor. The premise for the article is flawed from my perspective. All print media are struggling for advertising. If you take the original premise, the magazine can probably get those 10 “influential” breeders to buy a vanity ad but disappoint so many other breeders.

If you focus on breeders who are advertisers, then the article has no credibility.

A better angle would be to focus on the pioneers.

[merda]

Great advice from Yankee Lawyer, above. Another consideration could be a two part series with the first being a historical perspective (as suggested by several) and part two looking at the current situation. One issue which could be addressed is the question of numbers of horses produced vs number of horses successful in performance. Good luck.

[stoicfish]

Rather than a top ten, I personally would want to read a series that picks a few pivotal farms/people each time and explains what they did for sport horse breeding. I think that would be way more informative about the industry in general. Then you would not have to narrow things down so much and you could come at it from some really different angles, like farms who imported important sires, TB influence, history of WB in NA and the original importers, people who pioneered reproductive technology (and continue to do so), registry organizers, founders, and educators, today’s large popular studs, and Hunter market influence.
To name only a few popular farms you would run the risk of being superficial and simply trendy instead of informative. Not to mention alienating many different people and groups. With an ongoing series there is always room to include more or previously missed information.
I would subscribe to the magazine if someone did cover all that (for Canada too) as it would be really fascinating!!

[pony_grandma]

[QUOTE=stoicfish;5061545]
Rather than a top ten, I personally would want to read a series that picks a few pivotal farms/people each time and explains what they did for sport horse breeding. I think that would be way more informative about the industry in general. Then you would not have to narrow things down so much and you could come at it from some really different angles, like farms who imported important sires, TB influence, history of WB in NA and the original importers, people who pioneered reproductive technology (and continue to do so), registry organizers, founders, and educators, today’s large popular studs, and Hunter market influence.
To name only a few popular farms you would run the risk of being superficial and simply trendy instead of informative. Not to mention alienating many different people and groups. With an ongoing series there is always room to include more or previously missed information. [/QUOTE]

Far better journalism than professing to be able to determine who is better than someone else by trying to rank them. Too many factors play into the whole picture, which is what should be discussed. Stories about the people behind the important advances in breeding can cover quite a range. I like the ideas listed above.

[DownYonder]

[QUOTE=Oakstable;5061156]
I spent three decades in the newspaper business as a feature writer and editor. The premise for the article is flawed from my perspective. All print media are struggling for advertising. If you take the original premise, the magazine can probably get those 10 “influential” breeders to buy a vanity ad but disappoint so many other breeders.

If you focus on breeders who are advertisers, then the article has no credibility.

A better angle would be to focus on the pioneers.[/QUOTE]

Well, your assumption is flawed. No one said one word about focusing on “advertisers”.

But since you obviously feel you are better qualified to write this article, have at it. I can certainly find other things to occupy my time.

[DownYonder]

And folks, let’s get a few things straight.

I was asked to focus on the last 15 years or so, not go back to the beginning of time. I was also asked to do a single article, not a series. And they do not want to focus on bloodlines, but rather on individuals.

And as many of you have pointed out, it will be virtually impossible to do this, so it will probably get shelved.