Menu

Stay in Touch
Sign up for ENews
Subscribe Now

Unlimited access >

Menu

Breedism and Warmbloods

Off Course
#61

[QUOTE=mvp;8199614]
For that one individual already performing, yes, parentage doesn’t matter. That’s because you know the phenotype you have and you/the judges like it.

But dig any deeper and you can see why people would be “breedists.” If you are buying a very young horse, or one to breed, or one with some bad condition or training, you are buying some of the latent properties of the animal. And there, it might help to know about what its parents did.

In other words, there is a time and a place to be fussy about heritage. And to be “breedist” really means “to favor the practices and standards that went into making this individual animal.” So, for example, I’m not an AQHA breedist insofar as I don’t agree with some of the practices of that registry (e. g. how HYPP was handled).[/QUOTE]

I don’t disagree with you, but I don’t think that’s what the author of the article referenced by the OP meant. When I think of “breedism” I think of someone who says or thinks, “My horse is superior to yours because it’s a ***.” Being partial to a certain breed because most of the examples of that breed excel at a particular sport is not the same thing. I’m partial to Quarter Horses because most of them are very good all-purpose horses, but the two horses I own right now are OTTBs, both of whom I acquired as mature horses with proven performance as multi-purpose animals. If I were going shopping for a horse I’d be likely to look first at Quarter Horses, but it would be silly for me to tell someone on a trail ride, “Well, TBs aren’t as good at trails as QHs” when he’s riding right alongside me and obviously getting the job done. That’s what I think of as breedism. And, yes, I’ve seen a lot of it.

#62

^^^

In answer to your question, I think it’s because people don’t know jack about the biology of selective breeding and(therefore?) are sure it’s snobbery with some BS science behind it.

If you do understand the science, I think you are correct not to care if you don’t have a true purpose-bred kind of cross.

I have one of these: I bought a half-Arabian, half German WB, RSPI mare. I barely know what RSPI is. She is registered with the Arabian Horse Association. I wanted that so that I could show her in their sport horse shows. She’s good, phenotypically speaking, for my purposes and the price I paid for her.

However! She is not breeding quality for some phenotypic reasons and because she’s that F1 product of two really different breeds. Who knows which parts of Arabian dam and WB sire she’d give to (their) grand baby, the F2 generation?

Also, I’m not sure what registry would record her pedigree. The AHA would not, and for good biological reasons. If you diminish the percentage of Arabian by outcrossing (going from this mare as an F1 to, say, 1/4 Arabian and 3/4 other things in the F2) you wouldn’t want to be the registry responsible for that potential mess. In other words, you wouldn’t want someone to think that the 1/4 Arabian, 1/4 Holsteiner, 1/4 Haflinger, 1/4 Appy I bred (this mare’s foal) was a wonderful example of the Arabian breed standard.

By the same token, young registries that do admit these kinds of mutts…. that’s fine in the beginning and if they have some good phenotypic and performance standards. After all, every studbook has to start with foundation stock from somewhere and chosen somehow. But if you keep that studbook open and your standards low, then, as people point out, the pedigrees don’t mean much because those family trees on paper don’t express any consistent kind of selection in that history.

Sorry to get long-winded. I get all riled up when people diss things in part because they didn’t try to understand. I get all “explainy” because it’s just.not.that.hard to understand selective breeding in a general way.

#63

RPSI is Rheinland-Pfalz/Saar International, in Germany a small registry, established in the first half of the 18th century.
At one time they delivered 200 or so horses to form the base for one famed stud farm in East Prussia…the one with the elk antlers…

Arabian isn’t the first choice of outcross but - depending on the WB bloodlines (it got murky there since the 80s) hardly what would be considered an F1 generation.
See, the type has always been a light warmblood, unlike Hanover with 17h moose/head like a house thing. The breeding stock always contained a lot of TB and Arabian blood. Napoleon rode a stallion reportedly of that breeding stock, named Fayoum.

Now, RSPI would put her offspring in the books, but possibly not in the main book, depending on the approval of the sire of your mare and her inspection scores.

http://www.pferdezucht-rps.de/
http://www.rhpsi.com/

Everybody wants that TB and Arabian blood in the pedigree, but nobody wnats it up close…
(Anglo Arabs were also a popular way to lighten up the results, and Trakehners of course. Donauwind was very popular in his time)

#64

There may actually be a place for a registry that records the pedigrees of cross-bred horses, but it would be meaningful only if the horse had to meet some standard of performance. For example, if you had a QH x Saddlebred which scored at some defined level as a cutter, that might be good to know and might have some meaning at breeding time. Similarly, if you crossed a Percheron to a TB and the offspring showed successfully in dressage, it might not be a bad idea to breed that horse back to another Perch or TB. But you need to know something about the ability of the horse to do the job you have designed it for, otherwise it’s just an exercise in paperwork. The thing people often overlook is that while almost all modern breeds resulted from crossing of existing breeds, it’s the selection that makes them a breed in their own right. A draft x TB isn’t a Warmblood (upper case “W”) but it might do the job as well or better than the WB. If so, that’s great, but in the next generation you’re more likely to have a predictable result from the WB than from the cross. The German Riding Pony referenced above (assuming the information gleaned from a quick internet search is accurate) resulted from a targeted breeding effort by knowledgeable horsemen who were strict about the horses’ performance. Could we do the same thing and create a true American Warmblood by crossing various horses for a few generations? Absolutely! Maybe we even should do it, but even if we did, I wouldn’t approve of looking down upon the guy/gal who just turned in a good performance on a mongrel.

#65

[QUOTE=Foxtrot’s;8199570]
I remember back in the day (my day, that is) warmbloods were hardly known out here. They were often coarser, showed the link back to their utility days of pulling, with camped out hind ends, and often colouring that would give a hint of their ancestry. They were labelled as ‘dumb bloods’ and the TB people abhorred them.

Through the process of selective breeding, breeders have spent much effort on improving the interior qualities, the gaits for the specialised job they have to do as sporthorses and their inspections are designed along the lines of improving the abilities…hence Totilas, Hickstead etc.

The Dutch Warmblood breed is an example of how far they have come in a very short time, not hundreds of years.[/QUOTE]

Ah yes, “dumb bloods”!!! In my junior hunter days TBs still dominated and WBs were just beginning to steal their thunder. My parents were/are TB people who abhorred them. But just this year my 73 year old father and I were watching the performance hunters at Devon and he asked me what percentage of the horses we were watching were warmbloods? He was shocked when I said ALL OF THEM. He commented that they are much more refined now and he was VERY impressed with them. Just funny how things/times change.

Sadly for him, now that he likes the current WB hunters, I’ve moved onto the jumpers and am quite happy with my OTTB :wink:

#66

I don’t know jack about the hunter culture, but in dressage, I have never encountered a ‘breedist’ as described in the article. I’m sure they are out there – it’s the horse world, after all, with every kind of crazy you can imagine, and many you can’t – but I wouldn’t say it’s commonplace. If you have an individual horse that is doing well at its chosen discipline, then yay. Whatever the breed. Who cares.

The article made me think, why is it the people with draft crosses who are so defensive about having a draft cross. I jokingly call my horse the ‘poor man’s warmbood,’ because draft crosses do a lot of the jobs for ammy riders that WBs do, and they cost less and like I said earlier, a lot of them are easier to handle and train. But really, it’s a very different sort of horse and there is no need to get your hackles up and defend it.

Anyway, I know the American Warmblood Society has inspections and grades: my horse’s previous owner had her inspected and branded as a two-year old. These days, she probably has the only AWS brand in Scotland!

#67

Interesting. I know very little about the American Warmblood Society, but I just looked them up. http://www.americanwarmblood.org/eligibility.html Apparently at present they have a wide-open stud book with entry based solely upon performance. That very well may be the foundation of what eventually will become a true breed. Likely at some point they will close the book or at least significantly restrict it and concentrate upon refining the horses they have accumulated into the Society. That was the case with the AQHA in the early years; entry into the book was based upon having two of three key characteristics – QH breeding, QH conformation, and QH performance – and a number of horses of uncertain parentage were enrolled because they looked and ran like QHs. Eventually the book was greatly restricted and they concentrated upon refining the breed from the extant genetic pool. In all probability, most breeds developed much the same way.

#68

[QUOTE=Alagirl;8199649]
RPSI is Rheinland-Pfalz/Saar International, in Germany a small registry, established in the first half of the 18th century.
At one time they delivered 200 or so horses to form the base for one famed stud farm in East Prussia…the one with the elk antlers…

Arabian isn’t the first choice of outcross but - depending on the WB bloodlines (it got murky there since the 80s) hardly what would be considered an F1 generation.
See, the type has always been a light warmblood, unlike Hanover with 17h moose/head like a house thing. The breeding stock always contained a lot of TB and Arabian blood. Napoleon rode a stallion reportedly of that breeding stock, named Fayoum.

Now, RSPI would put her offspring in the books, but possibly not in the main book, depending on the approval of the sire of your mare and her inspection scores.

http://www.pferdezucht-rps.de/
http://www.rhpsi.com/

Everybody wants that TB and Arabian blood in the pedigree, but nobody wnats it up close…
(Anglo Arabs were also a popular way to lighten up the results, and Trakehners of course. Donauwind was very popular in his time)[/QUOTE]

Thank you for the clue!

And what a surprise to think that RPSI would accept her offspring. As I say, there are some conformational traits that I think ought to end with her. And she was bred because the gal who owned the (pretty nice) stallion wanted to trade for some contracting work with a neighbor…. who had an old Arabian mare they had bred several times and a kid who thought she wanted a project horse. The kid (now starting college and enjoying a serious boyfriend) changed her mind.

In short, there’s nothing about this mare that says “And you can breed her when you are done riding her!!!” If she went to the little Half-Arabian Dressage Mare Olympics by sheer force of her intelligence and work ethic (and she stays sound for a dang long time), I might reconsider.

#69

[QUOTE=mvp;8200021]
Thank you for the clue!

And what a surprise to think that RPSI would accept her offspring. As I say, there are some conformational traits that I think ought to end with her. And she was bred because the gal who owned the (pretty nice) stallion wanted to trade for some contracting work with a neighbor…. who had an old Arabian mare they had bred several times and a kid who thought she wanted a project horse. The kid (now starting college and enjoying a serious boyfriend) changed her mind.

In short, there’s nothing about this mare that says “And you can breed her when you are done riding her!!!” If she went to the little Half-Arabian Dressage Mare Olympics by sheer force of her intelligence and work ethic (and she stays sound for a dang long time), I might reconsider.[/QUOTE]

Well, there are those horses.

Sis’s mare was half TB, half RSP, heavy on the TB and Trak.

Sadly the mare was downhill, pretty straight in the rear end and inherited the tendency for heaves form her sire (My uncle was hopping mad when he found out years after he had bred that filly that this was well known.)

The mare’s Dam was by Carajan (Trak) out of a Der Unhold(TB) mare

From what I knew, she wasn’t for breeding.
Sis bred her twice. I don’t know how the filly turned out, she was sold as foal, the gelding had a bit of a hitch in his getalong and needed to be managed carefully with his breathing…

#70

My horse is Selle Francais branded and bred in France. I took his pedigree as far back as I could while still finding pictures. This was the heaviest horse I could find.
http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/normand2

My horse is a result of 100+ years of carefully breeding heavier cart horses (as mentioned before) and thoroughbred blood. There is some Anglo Arabian blood in there as well. I’m sure the ancestry of the Angle Norman cart horse has a heavy amount of draft blood in it but that was well back in the early 1800’s.

Fun fact: My horse apparently has the blood of the Godolphin Arabian and Darley Arabian through Eclipse :slight_smile:

FWIW I think draft crosses are fantastic and I’m seriously considering a 3/4tb- 1/4 draft for my next horse

#71

[QUOTE=Bombproof;8199673]
Could we do the same thing and create a true American Warmblood by crossing various horses for a few generations? Absolutely! Maybe we even should do it, but even if we did, I wouldn’t approve of looking down upon the guy/gal who just turned in a good performance on a mongrel.[/QUOTE]

I don’t mean to disagree with you, but after you established the criteria for that American WB, some performance standards and a set of foundation animals, you’d close the stud book. And then you would have to subsequently think less of those folks who wanted to claim that their F1 crosses were about as good as or genetically equivalent to the early generations you are producing within that closed, selected American WB population. Or, rather, you-- or anyone-- doesn’t have to disregard a great performance turned in by any individual animal. I don’t think any judge does that, at least not within USEF hunter world (they may within the AQHA show world if things are corrupt).

#72

Sure, a WB is the product of draft horses crossed with TBs once upon a time…. and lots of well-regulated selective breeding since. That modern horse doesn’t resemble her “F1 generation” draft x TB.

No. A WB is not the product of draft horses crossed with TBs. Read your horse history.

A Curly-Coated Retriever doesn’t look a thing like a Labradoodle.

But I would think a Labradoodle might make a good hunting dog if properly bred and trained, since both Labradors and Poodles were originally hunting dogs.

#73

[QUOTE=mvp;8200028]
I don’t mean to disagree with you, but after you established the criteria for that American WB, some performance standards and a set of foundation animals, you’d close the stud book. And then you would have to subsequently think less of those folks who wanted to claim that their F1 crosses were about as good as or genetically equivalent to the early generations you are producing within that closed, selected American WB population. Or, rather, you-- or anyone-- doesn’t have to disregard a great performance turned in by any individual animal. I don’t think any judge does that, at least not within USEF hunter world (they may within the AQHA show world if things are corrupt).[/QUOTE]
We’re kind of talking in circles. What I’m saying is that I don’t think it’s appropriate to look down upon a horse because of his breeding when he has proven that he can do the job. An individual draft cross may in fact be just as good or better than an individual WB. It’s when picking a young or untried horse that the pedigree becomes important because it provides some reasonable idea what you’re getting. Yes, of course if you want predictable results you have to close the studbook and refine the horses you have. On the other hand, many or most of the WB registries have in recent years opened their books to some degree to bring in blood to shift the phenotype of the breed. That’s how they went from diligence horses to sporthorses. There’s nothing wrong with that, but they had to closely monitor the results and only register the offspring who met a strict standard.

Again, my basic point is that a horse of breed X isn’t necessarily better than a horse of uncertain parentage. “Better” is proven on the field of competition. The advantage goes to breed X when you have to roll the dice on a horse which hasn’t yet proven itself. In that case, you’re less likely to strike out if you go with a horse with a known bloodline. Once the competition starts, all that matters is how well the horse performs and it’s silly to look down upon a winning horse because he’s of mixed parentage.

#74

[QUOTE=Scaramouch;8199162]
Have you ever looked at the pedigree of a branded warmblood in depth? They’re not the “7/8” cross you would get if someone bred a full draft 30 years ago to a TB and kept breeding the offspring to TBs.

For example: The Trakehner eventing stallion Tatendrang.

Sure, he has a couple of TBs in the third generation, and if you look further back you’ll find more. But if you go waaaayyyy back, say to the late 19th century, you’ll find horses that look like this rather than this.

And, more importantly, in the warmblood pedigrees, you’ll find long lines of horses who have actually demonstrated their abilities in dressage and jumping. Frequently you’ll find horses who have competed on the Olympic levels.

How is it “breedist” to suggest that the descendants of Olympic/top level competitors are likely to outperform the offspring of a (typically) failed racehorse and a heavy draft?

Does that mean people shouldn’t ride draft crosses, if that’s what they prefer? Of course not. And it’s asinine to worry for two seconds about the breed of horse someone else is riding. But is it rational to expect a Belgian/TB to be a world-beater before it has actually walked the walk?

As rational as anyone looking down on Covert Rights for being 1/4 Clydesdale… :wink: Of course it’s also important to mention that his TB dam was an Advanced horse and his Clyde/TB sire went Prelim, so he still has more proven bloodlines than 99% of draft crosses out there…[/QUOTE]

I’m not sure what the point of this post is. Trakehners ONLY incorporate TB or Arabian blood into the books. The book is among the most tightest book in warmblood breeding history. Draft blood isn’t allowed.

#75

[QUOTE=Bombproof;8200014]
Interesting. I know very little about the American Warmblood Society, but I just looked them up. http://www.americanwarmblood.org/eligibility.html Apparently at present they have a wide-open stud book with entry based solely upon performance. That very well may be the foundation of what eventually will become a true breed. Likely at some point they will close the book or at least significantly restrict it and concentrate upon refining the horses they have accumulated into the Society. That was the case with the AQHA in the early years; entry into the book was based upon having two of three key characteristics – QH breeding, QH conformation, and QH performance – and a number of horses of uncertain parentage were enrolled because they looked and ran like QHs. Eventually the book was greatly restricted and they concentrated upon refining the breed from the extant genetic pool. In all probability, most breeds developed much the same way.[/QUOTE]

IMO, probably not. European warmblood inspections will maintain the quality breeding in the U.S., and people wanting their horses to be inspected will go there. Mainly because there is so much history and experience at that end.

QH breeding candidates didn’t necessarily do QHs well. They suffered like halter Arabians in the 80s did here in the U.S. WB from Europe have hundreds of years of genetics and performance testing behind them, Way more documentation and organized breeding programs than QHs. People wanting sport horses will go to registries that breed/produce sport horses. European-bred horses are becoming a dime-a-dozen here in the U.S. One can’t compete draft crosses directly with these horses unless you have a good one (an oh, so many very good ones are out there), one has to market the niche that these draft crosses excel in and what the individual horse excels in. Draft crosses often make great jumpers and eventers, occasionally they will score well in dressage. They are generally agreeable horses.

#76

No, its not. A draftxTB is not a warmblood. Its a cross bred horse. You don’t cross a ‘cold blood’ with a ‘hot blood’ and make a ‘warm blood’. That’s not how warm bloods are bred. They have hundreds of years of careful selectrive breeding for type which make them warmbloods. There is no magikal mating of a draft and a TB to make a warmblood.

#77

@ Bombproof.

A minor point: IME, when WB societies opened their books to outside horses (usually mares and often TBs), they did that via inspections. Thus the effort to control for type and quality remained in effect. And out-crossing is still a component of selective breeding, often to increase genetic variability (as is healthy for the population) and sometimes to introduce or increase the frequency of a given phenotype common in the outside breed. So the TB and Arabians’ lightness is an example of the latter.

#78

[QUOTE=RPM;8200029]
No. A WB is not the product of draft horses crossed with TBs. Read your horse history.[/QUOTE]

You mean “ever” or after the foundation periods of those WB societies?

#79

[QUOTE=Manni01;8198908]
I have the problem that I own and also used to breed a dog breed which is actually the oldest Retrieverbreed. The Curly Coated Retriever. I guess nobody here ever heard about this breed.[/QUOTE]

Sorry to sidetrack again the thread, but I HAVE. :wink: When I started training my first Doberman in his first Open/Utility class, we also had a couple of Curly Coated Retrievers. Beautiful dogs. Very willing and trainable, at least in the ‘obedience’ exercises that we were doing. I was a bit disappointed when they no longer came to our classes, but maybe the owner was training at the “parent club”, or maybe she was concentrating on conformation—I believe one of her dogs won Best of Breed at Westminster, like, seven years in a row.

Based on my dog at that time, I’m sure that the Doberman Pinscher would have been based lower in intelligence and/or trainability. However, I think the real blame would have to be on my own shoulders–Dante’ was my first dog ever and the first I had ever attempted to train. I’m sure I made a lot of mistakes. That being said, he learned quickly if not “prettily”, and he earned 3 CDX titles in the AKC, UKC, and ASCA clubs.

By the way, EXCEPTIONALLY LOVELY pictures of your Curly Coat retrieving!!!

#80

[QUOTE=mvp;8200069]
@ Bombproof.

A minor point: IME, when WB societies opened their books to outside horses (usually mares and often TBs), they did that via inspections. Thus the effort to control for type and quality remained in effect. And out-crossing is still a component of selective breeding, often to increase genetic variability (as is healthy for the population) and sometimes to introduce or increase the frequency of a given phenotype common in the outside breed. So the TB and Arabians’ lightness is an example of the latter.[/QUOTE]
I thought that’s what I said.

Get your Digital Subscription here - only $21.95 / year

Subscribe here
See gift options

Sign up to our monthly newsletter!

By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.

Copyright © 2023 The Chronicle of the Horse