Breedism and Warmbloods

[Bombproof]

[QUOTE=J-Lu;8200059]
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.[/QUOTE]
Perhaps. I was just speculating that they will do that if they want the American Warmblood to become an actual breed.

@J-Lu;8200059

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.

The QH is a very recent breed, having only been around as a breed rather than a type since 1950. The AQHA has unquestionably had some growing pains, but overall they’ve done pretty well at defining and creating a breed. I doubt Trahkeners were completely stabilized as a breed less than 70 years after their inception either. If anything, the modern understanding of genetics has enabled enthusiasts to create a breed faster than ever. My point was that the process was the same.

Where people get confused about the origins of Warmbloods is due to a failure to understand that “heavy” horses of 300 years ago were not “draft” horses as we know them and most of the progenitor stock of the WBs is now extinct. The draft horse as we know it today is also the product of 300 years of breeding but in a different direction. Today’s draft horse is not the heavy horse of 1700. Percherons are a good example. Their original purpose was to provide a large, strong, athletic horse to carry large men in armor. As that need disappeared, they were selectively bred to become true draft horses. Today, they are again being bred to lighter horses in an attempt to get back to something like the original horse. Many of the modern WBs were a carriage horse or light workhorse 100 years ago and the modern sporthorse WB was created by breeding back to lighter horses. This sort of thing happens all the time as the demand for a type of horse waxes and wanes. Few people today would think of hooking their WB to a carriage, but that is exactly what they were used for not that long ago; they are not the same horse of 100 or even 50 years ago. Neither is a Shire or a Belgian. I’m sure you can start with horses available today and create a breed which successfully fills the same niche as the European WB, but it won’t be the same horse because the progenitor stock for that horse no longer exists.

[Caol_Ila]

My Shire-TBX was inspected and graded as ‘red preferred’ (or was it blue? those papers are at my parents’ house 8000 miles away) 20 years ago. Looking at the AWS website, it does not look like they have closed their studbook in any appreciable way since then. How do you start establishing a predictable ‘type’ if you are letting all sorts of draft crosses or WB crosses or whatever into the studbook for 20 years? Maybe the people on here who know more about breeding can tell me.

[Scaramouch]

[QUOTE=J-Lu;8200050]
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.[/QUOTE]

Good grief. The point was to illustrate that “real” warmbloods are in fact quite different from first generation draft/TB crosses. I could have easily made the same point with an Oldenburg or a Hanoverian - or KWPN, or Holsteiner, or Selle Francais, or BWP, or, you know any horse registered in another European book that, just like Trakehner, began infusing the regional work and harness breeds with TB and Arab blood more than a century ago. Draft blood isn’t allowed into any of them, and contrary to the OP’s stated belief, they didn’t start off crossing Percherons with TBs in the 1960s!

[fordtraktor]

That article was so weird to me. The “breedism” was about people in the hunters on their “fancy expensive Thoroughbreds” such that the draftXs can’t compete against them? misses the mark by about 20 years. That hasn’t been the reality for a couple of decades. You see a few TBs but they are the ones that are dead ringers for WBs.

[atr]

Seems to me there’s a lot of reverse breedism going on here…

[Bombproof]

[QUOTE=Caol Ila;8200101]
My Shire-TBX was inspected and graded as ‘red preferred’ (or was it blue? those papers are at my parents’ house 8000 miles away) 20 years ago. Looking at the AWS website, it does not look like they have closed their studbook in any appreciable way since then. How do you start establishing a predictable ‘type’ if you are letting all sorts of draft crosses or WB crosses or whatever into the studbook for 20 years? Maybe the people on here who know more about breeding can tell me.[/QUOTE]
I don’t know much about the AWS and I don’t know what their ultimate goal is, but 20 years is a very short time in terms of developing a breed. If they want to actually develop a breed, at some point they will have to close or restrict their studbook. It’s possible that developing a distinct breed is not actually the goal. I don’t know. However, if I read their website correctly, entry into the book is based solely upon how the horse performs in the specified events. In that case, it sort of makes sense to keep the book open because they’re interested only in performance and aren’t really trying to develop a breed but to maintain a registry for performance horses.

[Caol_Ila]

Yeah, I don’t know either. Don’t even know what it does for the horse. It was something the previous owner did; I’m way too cheap/cynical/apathetic and would never have bothered.

[cloudyandcallie]

First let me say that my favorite horses are TB mares, specifically Kentucky bred TB mares as Callie was.

Then let me say that it was only fair that after I bought a German warmblood and all the european books on warmbloods, that a little domestic trakehner fell in love with Cloudy and I ended up getting her 4 yrs ago. Poetic justice.

But I have to again say that Americans do not breed warmbloods like the europeans breed warmbloods. If everyone would buy and read the warmblood books published overseas, you can buy the ones from Great Britain as well as the translations from other countries like Germany, you will see that they have rules and regulations. And if breeders do not follow the rules and regulations, their horses don’t get into the registries. I am not happy that the europeans slaughter and eat their “mistakes,” but by having strict rules and keurings, the europeans keep improving their horses.

One glaring example here in the states that I have seen many times over is that people buy or lease a cheap TB mare with bad conformation or breeding, sometimes they even get the mare free, and breed to whatever stallion, sometimes not even a registered warmblood, and call the results a warmblood. I’m not saying that there aren’t some good domestic crossbreds, but I am saying that breeders here, if they want to compete with the europeans, need to establish some procedure to insure that good mares are bred to good stallions. (The europeans refined their warmblood mares with TB stallions or lighter WB stallions.)

But this argument will continue as long as Americans have few rules and many opinions on breeding warmbloods.

[Graymaresrule]

[QUOTE=Ambitious Kate;8200063]
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.[/QUOTE]

FWIW words can have several meanings. Maybe a warmblood has been bred to a standard for generations and maybe it’s a draft x TB or arab cross.

Most of my family has a science, largely chemistry, background. “I only buy organic foods. I don’t want all those chemicals” grates on their last nerve.

But please do not call my Registered Irish Draught Sport Horse a warmblood

[StormyDay]

[QUOTE=Bombproof;8199072]
Here’s the thing about elitism, though…if horse A performs the task at hand better than horse B, then by definition he is a “better” horse in those circumstances. Simply being from bloodline X rather than bloodline Y doesn’t tell the story of which horse is “better.” If you go into the task on your $30,000 Hanoverian and someone of equal skill performs the task more successfully on his $250 BLM horse of uncertain parentage, then you just wasted $29,750 and nobody wants to admit that. If your sport requires a big, scopy, strong horse with a level head, does it really matter whether you got that horse by buying a recognized Warmblood breed or by crossing an OTTB to a Percheron?

You don’t predictably get a “better” horse for the purpose with a Warmblood than with a TBxdraft. What you DO get is a higher degree of certainty that the next generation will follow suit. That’s where the many generations of selective breeding come in. The traits you see in this horse have been pretty well “firmed up” and you can say with confidence that the next generation will probably be much like this one. In other words, if the two horses are geldings, bloodlines don’t mean squat and performance is everything.

Breedism is silly. It’s kind of like not living in the real world. Go ride your horse and if he’s “better,” it will be obvious. If he’s not “better,” that will be obvious as well and the guy on the mongrel horse will be happier than you.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. The horse should win because it is good, not because it happens to be a warmblood rather than a TB or a appy. I ride unconventional horses, but that doesn’t mean I don’t understand why some people buy warmbloods. You can usually guarantee, barring any injuries, that the horse will do what you want it to do, according to its bloodlines. You couldn’t do that with my reining background paint. But what do you know, he can jump!

[Sunflower]

The word “warmblood” is a generic descriptor of a TYPE of horse, not a breed specific reference. Within that, there are many kinds of warmblood types, and perhaps even breeds, dependent upon the rules of a particular registry. Some horses might be in more than one registry-- again, dependent upon the rules of that registry. Some registries are very firm with rules about what horses can be registered and for what purpose.

In the US the idea of a breed is one that has a closed registry. Not so in Europe, necessarily, the reference, according to this article, can be a geographic one ( most warmblood registries refer to an area or location) as opposed to a word indicating closed registries. http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/horses/dutchwarmblood/

A horse belonging to a particular registry (or registries) is recognized according to the name of that registry ( Oldenburg, Holsteiner, etc). But the term “warmblood” itself does not denote any particular breed, but a type-- and that type is a mix of hot and cold blood, and does not, in and of itself, indicate if that cross is in the parents or further up the generation line.

[Sticky_Situation]

Granted, I’m speaking as someone who competes in lower level eventing which usually has quite a bit more “diversity” especially at the lower levels than does the hunter ring or pure dressage, but I would say that “breed ism” based on a horse’s perceived genetics is actually pretty rare.

My current horse is a 15.2ish appendix QH of mostly racing bloodlines. He’s built somewhat downhill but is a correct, rhythmic mover, and has proven himself to be pretty scopey over fences. We’ve competed through Trainibg together. If I do my job as a rider, he is quite competitive against horses of all breeds, and scored an ‘8’ for gaits on our last dressage test at a recognized HT. Times when we don’t place as well after dressage, it’s usually because he was tense, or I didn’t ride as well, not because the other horses were European.

My first event horse, incidentally, was also an appendix QH and I never felt that he was discriminated against either.

[Alagirl]

[QUOTE=Sunflower;8201007]
The word “warmblood” is a generic descriptor of a TYPE of horse, not a breed specific reference. Within that, there are many kinds of warmblood types, and perhaps even breeds, dependent upon the rules of a particular registry. Some horses might be in more than one registry-- again, dependent upon the rules of that registry. Some registries are very firm with rules about what horses can be registered and for what purpose.

In the US the idea of a breed is one that has a closed registry. Not so in Europe, necessarily, the reference, according to this article, can be a geographic one ( most warmblood registries refer to an area or location) as opposed to a word indicating closed registries. http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/horses/dutchwarmblood/

A horse belonging to a particular registry (or registries) is recognized according to the name of that registry ( Oldenburg, Holsteiner, etc). But the term “warmblood” itself does not denote any particular breed, but a type– and that type is a mix of hot and cold blood, and does not, in and of itself, indicate if that cross is in the parents or further up the generation line.[/QUOTE]

No matter how often you repeat it, it won’t become truth.
No, draft X ‘hot’ blood will not make a warmblood.

[mvp]

[QUOTE=cloudyandcallie;8200840]
I am not happy that the europeans slaughter and eat their “mistakes,” but by having strict rules and keurings, the europeans keep improving their horses.[/QUOTE]

Yanno, selective breeding creates an enormous number of “mistakes”. It just does and there’s no way around that so long as genetic engineering remains in its infancy.

Just interjecting some biology (again). Carry on.

[Midge]

[QUOTE=Bombproof;8200041]
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. [/QUOTE]

For the most part, no one looks down on breeds or colors if they are pretty, stylish jumpers with a big step.

But yeah, you bring a coarse, heavy, gallumping draft cross into the hunter ring, and it will be looked down on. Not because it is a draft cross, but because it is not a hunter.

[Sunflower]

[QUOTE=Alagirl;8201030]
No matter how often you repeat it, it won’t become truth.
No, draft X ‘hot’ blood will not make a warmblood.[/QUOTE]

Yes, it is. Of course it is. That is what a warmblood is. That is where the term originates. Warmblood simply denotes a horse that has a lineage of hot mixed with cold. Anywhere at all along its family tree. It does not mean the horse is registered with any particular book or group. That is something else yet again.

I am utterly confused about saying it is anything but hot and cold blood cross.

But I think I see where the origin of this as a sticking point might be coming from. In most European countries, ALL horses must have a passport, and perhaps even a microchip. There is NO “losing papers” etc because the horse’s origins and owners are tracked through this paperwork. Even a grade horse MUST have a passport.

So if a horse is registered with one of the many different warmblood registries, there is a record of that that will not be lost. A horse that is a Dutch warmblood, Hanoverian, whatever, is referred to as that. To simply call a horse a warmblood generically suggests no registration in any book or group, just a generic horse with hot and cold blood mix.

In the US, however, it is taken to mean something different, perhaps because of the practice that seems to be somewhat common of “losing” papers of imported horses, for whatever reason. Then, it is impossible to prove the horse belongs to a registry, so it becomes just a “warmblood”-- with the suggestion of being a blingy, costly European import-- just cannot be proven.

Any hot/cold cross is a warmblood. There are various registries of horses, in which case the horse is “name of registry” kind of warmblood. But the word warmblood itself does not automatically mean “years of breeding along certain lines.” That is what being part of a particular registry means. Which gets inconvenient I suppose when a horse has had its papers “lost.”

[Bombproof]

[QUOTE=Alagirl;8201030]
No matter how often you repeat it, it won’t become truth.
No, draft X ‘hot’ blood will not make a warmblood.[/QUOTE]

Actually, it does. The very definition of a warmblood (lower case w) is a horse of both hotblood and coldblood ancestry. The Warmblood (upper case W) is a group of breeds of horses which somewhere in the past had both hotblood and coldblood ancestry and have been refined over the years/decades/centuries to become a specific type according to the needs/preferences/prejudices of the registry.

[ladyj79]

Back in the day aka the 1990s when most of us rode thoroughbreds, and three people owned warmbloods, some awesome people had draft xs. And they never called them warmbloods, and neither did anyone else

And there was peace throughout the land.

[kcmel]

[QUOTE=Midge;8201113]
For the most part, no one looks down on breeds or colors if they are pretty, stylish jumpers with a big step.

But yeah, you bring a coarse, heavy, gallumping draft cross into the hunter ring, and it will be looked down on. Not because it is a draft cross, but because it is not a hunter.[/QUOTE]

That’s what I didn’t understand about the article. She is complaining about “breedism” but then she says her draft x moves like a sewing machine (I am paraphrasing–it’s been a few days since I read the article). So if she doesn’t pin well in hunter classes, it’s not breedism, it’s because her horse is a bad mover.

[Pennywell_Bay]

I am steering clear of the Warmblood vs warmblood vs draft cross issue.

I did not like the article. If you want to ride a draft cross and that is your type, more power to you. If you are highly successful in the hunter show ring, more power to you. The author quotes her “high stepping” horse and that is just not the standard for the HUNTER ring. Hunters are flowing strides, beautiful knees, pointy toes. If you don’t like it, don’t show in the hunters whether your horse is a draft, Trak, Olden or purple. It isn’t as much breedism as it the judges are looking for a certain type and MOST draft type crosses are not it.

It is ridiculous to want a whole sport to change the standard to accommodate a few who want to show their drafts. Show them. But don’t complain when you know that hunters ARE looking for a certain type. Sometimes a QH will fit the bill, an appy, a true warmblood, a thoroughbred. But don’t bitch if you ride a nonstandard breed for the hunters that doesn’t cut the mustard in the show ring.

Enjoy your horse for what it is. Rant over.