[QUOTE=SmartAlex;8203545]
Snobism is when a daisy cutting perfect QH hunter beats a warmblood fair and square and the warmblood riders pull their skirts aside and say “well it still isn’t a warmblood”.[/QUOTE]
It is honnestly not something I have often seen on the showgrounds…
What the QH winning, or the skirts thing?
[QUOTE=SmartAlex;8203568]
What the QH winning, or the skirts thing?[/QUOTE]
The skirts thing.
I’m a little surprised the article has generated so many pages of comments. “Let’s End Breedism in the Showring,” didn’t read like the title suggested to me. Mainly I think it was about how the author loves big horses “the bigger the better” and loves her horse and is going to show his “high stepping” self in the hunters. A couple “friends” (?) suggested she do the jumpers or realize she would be competing against $300,000 horses.
Now I have no idea how this horse goes, but if he is completely not a hunter type of horse in his jump and carriage (which the picture does suggest) then maybe it is friendly to suggest a different class. It’s a lot of money to show. I guess you have to look at why you compete. Is it to win? Is it to have fun and be with friends?
But I don’t know if it was really about breedism? I think it was just about the author doing what she wants to do with her horse–and more power to her on that. I think the title was misleading. Since hunters are judged on way of going, I imagine a high-stepping carriage-type KWPN would similarly be penalized in a flat class. I think the article is more about people competing with horses that didn’t cost $300,000 (or whatever) regardless of breed and type and having fun and working on personal goals.
The reality is that hunters is JUDGED on a style of going over fences. Horses with big strides are necessary. It isn’t a breedist thing. If you QH, draft cross, TB, whatever puts in a handy round like this then you can win too: http://youtu.be/jSvHRx_tKmA
I’m not even going to touch the American Warmblood thing. ??
Back in the 80s at the NY State Fair I was happily sitting in the warm up ring on my rather large, grey Appaloosa wondering why all the girls from the NYC area on their sleek bay thoroughbreds were giggling behind their gloved hands. Now I know it was because I was sitting on 1400# of polka dots :lol: It took me years to figure that out. At the time I thought my zipper was down.
[QUOTE=SmartAlex;8203574]
Back in the 80s at the NY State Fair I was happily sitting in the warm up ring on my rather large, grey Appaloosa wondering why all the girls from the NYC area on their sleek bay thoroughbreds were giggling behind their gloved hands. Now I know it was because I was sitting on 1400# of polka dots :lol: It took me years to figure that out. At the time I thought my zipper was down.[/QUOTE]
Funny!
[QUOTE=Ambitious Kate;8203500]
I don’t understand. A first generation cross cannot be a breed, right? Because they don’t breed true. A first generation cross can come out looking like anthything - and a full sibling would look like a different animal all together. And each, bred to a similar cross, would not breed their own characteristics, nor keep those down the line. So, no, they aren’t a breed.
Warmbloods have been selectively bred for hundreds of years to yield a type which can be characterized in their respective breeds. Also, I am gleaning that Warmbloods may actually have a non-draft heritage.
So why would anyone one believe that crossing a cold blood and a hot blood would result in Warmblood? That’s not what warm blood is. Correct? Nobody thinks that’s what Warmblood is - except some people who don’t know any better?
Am I also gleaning from this thread that there is an entire American registry defined by the crossing of horses with drafts calling themselves warmbloods? That would mean that the ignorance is widespread? And that these horses aren’t even a breed. OK. Just sorting this out. Explains the confusion things I’ve seen about American Warmbloods.[/QUOTE]
Not really correct…
There is a difference between warmblood and Warmblood. Capitalized, it refers to the group of European purpose bred horses that did START with heavier types (many looked like draft horses, but remember, this was a period when a heavier horse was the norm in Europe) bred to lighter types, but with many generations of selective breeding and ruthless culling to create a very purpose bred horse. The Warmbloods are not really a group of breeds (perhaps with the exception of Trakehner), but a group of studbooks (originally based on the region in which the horses were bred). They allow other horses in - depending on the studbook, what is allowed in varies, but for most it is Tbred and Arabian that meets the studbook criteria. They are registries, not breeds. And some are more open then others as to what other breeds/types they allow in (RPSI, Old NA are quite open in the mares they accept, Hanoverian and Holsteiner are much more selective).
Lower case “warmblood” really just refers to any horse that is not hotblood (Arab, Tbred, etc) or coldblood (draft). Could be a cross, could simply be a breed that is not hot or cold (such as the Morgan), and included many riding bred horses. That terminology has long been accepted in the US - long before we were importing Warmbloods. I have old horse books that date back to the 50s and 60s that use the term warmblood, hotblood, coldblood. This was well before the Warmblood craze in the US.
As for registries that “specialize” in draft crosses - if anyone is referring to AWR/AWS/PHR, those registries do NOT specialize in draft crosses. They offer registration options for these horses, but also for any other horse that meets the definition of “warmblood” (including Warmbloods), and meets their performance criteria. Actually, PHR originally registered Tbred crosses, so there were a lot of Draft crosses there, but now they accept anything. None of these registries claims to be a BREED registry. I do wish they would use a different term then Warmblood, simply because it obviously offends so many people. Maybe American Sport Horse would be more fitting.
And most definitely, a first generation cross is NOT a breed, but it MAY be registered. The Warmblood registries register first generation crosses (Tbred/Hanoverian for example), the Arab registry registered Arab crosses, and so on. They are registered, but not a breed - there is a difference.
Regarding First Generation crosses - they tend to be much more consistent then 2nd and 3rd generation crosses. It is pretty common to see these look fairly similar, but then when you start into 2nd and 3rd generation, you get a lot of genetic diversity. Then, if carefully planned, culled, selected, by 4th or 5th generation, things start to stabilize. Which is why very few breeders (of any kind of crosses) get into the 2nd/3rd generations, and why the Warmblood registries have established such successful programs - prior generations of breeders did the 3rd and 4th generations for us!
There are some lovely crosses out there - and non-Warmblood horses that are quite successful in dressage and hunters. We are lucky to have the ability to choose the horse that we enjoy - whether it is Warmblood or warmblood - or hotblood for that matter. Whether it is a cross or a purebred. We don’t tend to cull our horses the same in the US as in Europe - slaughter is pretty much banned, so you see ALL the horses out there (some of better quality then others). I never really understood what the big deal is what designer brand name is used for the horse - if it is a nice horse, you are lucky to have a nice horse! Ride and enjoy…
Copying from other thread for simplicity.
I didn’t read all the replies, but would point OP to The Making of the Modern Warmblood if nobody else did.
The Germans have had separate riding and cart/work lines since the 1700s. Calling a warmblood a draft cross shows a lack of understanding and a complete disregard of hundreds of years of careful selective breeding and refinement.
While the “best” horse will always depend on what job you would like it to do, in dressage /jumpers/hunter competition, the warmblood has no peer.
This thread illustrates the importance of understanding bloodlines since apparently people will call anything a “warmblood”.
One must pay close attention to stallion and mare lines all the way back if one intends to breed.
There are some good American sport horse breeders, but threads like this make it easy to understand why so many still go to Europe.
It is also why American based registries aren’t taken seriously. See the AWS thread in breeding.
If someone buys a gelding, none of this matters. If someone buys a mare, it becomes critical.
European Warmbloods are registered by Region and approved parentage. They have breed management staff that determines the desired breeding direction of the regional mare base and approve sires, and sometimes dams, on their criteria.
Registries are records of pedigrees brought into a single pool of accepted horses.
in the USA we do not think of registries by region, but breeds by related bloodline: a California Quarterhorse bred to an Oklahoma Quarterhorse is just a Quarterhorse.
in Europe, a mare of acceptable Warmblood bloodlines in Registry region XX that is bought by a breeder in Registry region NN may be approved and bred to a Stallion approved in region NN. Her foal would then be registered in Registry region NN.
Had she remained in Registry region XX and the same stallion been an approved sire in Region XX, her foal of identical pedigree would be registered in Registry XX.
Unregistered animals no matter where they are found are not eligible for inclusion in USA registries.
Because all stock in Europe must be identifiable, Regional registries may offer these animals a COP if the dam and sire are known but not approved.
Thus the different value of various books levels of papers on EURO Warmbloods.
Realize that ALL Sporthorses have only been bred ‘for Sport’ since the re-establishment of the Olympic games post 1900; and especially after mechanization made the all-purpose, farm/riding/cavalry/artillery/driving horse obsolete after WW 2 especially.
We call the European Registries OPEN and the breeds as OPEN, too. That doesn’t mean indiscriminate, simply that the breed management looks outside of their genetic base for additional improving genetics.
We call the USA breed registries CLOSED IF they are exclusively bred to within registry parents. USA registries may recognize ‘improvement’ animals from Thoroughbred or (rarely) Arabian outcrosses which are often ‘appendixed’ and must be bred back to horses within the registry. Some Stockhorse breed registries also approve QH outcrossing.
The general thought in the USA is that a breed implies a closed book and animals that breed true. Not so in Europe.
Whether any horse is a success in the ring depends on whether it’s native abilities are suited to the discipline it is (hopefully very well) trained for.
Totilas would not have been a successful Show Hunter, either…
Totilas would not have been a successful Show Hunter, either…
Which makes me think the problem the original author is complaining about isn’t breedism at all, but the standards hunters are judged by!
A beautiful Percheron will not look like a beautiful Thoroughbred. Nor will either perform like the other.
Hunter showing is ‘subjective’ in that the judge is looking at technique, smoothness, rhythm and so on over fences, not simple clearing them happily. The ‘pleasant picture’ is necessary to win in a Hunter class.
And yes, she has misjudged that the ancestry of her horse is the reason it is being marked down.
-On the other hand, color has no basis on performance or type and there are many judges with color prejudice… That’s showing!
I did try to find an ‘origin’ for referring to warmblood horses as crosses or ‘mixes’ of cold blood and hot blood, but alas, on-line texts of the era in question 1800’s to 1930’s are mostly snippet preview only and the lines needed are not in the preview, though certainly in the books (by respected horsemen, breeders, etc.).
this might take you to one circa 1813
https://books.google.com/books?id=HB0gAQAAIAAJ&pg=PT247&dq=WARMBLOOD+HORSES&hl=en&sa=X&ei=EuuKVdPILpLEogSGpKSoCg&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBDgo#v=onepage&q=WARMBLOOD%20HORSES&f=false
I was contemplating this during lunch break…
On the other thread the statement was made
[QUOTE=Sunflower;8201007]
Tthe 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]
So, if a QH or an ASB or a STB is not a warmblood.
But an Oldenburg or a Holsteiner or a Trakehner is a warmblood.
And a warmblood is not a merely mixture of hot blood and cold blood.
Then what does the word mean? Is there a Dutch/German/or whatever general term for purposebred hunters / jumpers / dressage horses that encompasses several books in general? Is Warmblood an Americanization of Whaermbleud from the German meaning “Useful jumping horse”?
“You keep uzing dat whourd. I do not dink it mean’ wha’ you dink it means”
:lol: I mean honestly. My question is if “warmblood” doesn’t mean mixing cold blood and hot blood… then WHAT is the etymology of it?
Without reference to the 20 or so books over the 1840-1940 period, Here is a synopsis:
First people referred to warmblood meaning TB, north African Barb, Arab. Coldblood was a horse without warmblood.
A bit later, warmblood was extended to include horses of an active nature (driving horses, ride and drive horses, cavalry horses) that were clearly resulting from crosses with the above breeds/strains.
Later, especially in English derived cultures, these horses were labeled half-bred horses; distinguishing them from non-selectively bred untraced pedigree horses.
Sometime in the middle 1920s to 1930s warm blood came to be attached to European Breed registries (at that time still primarily dual purpose horses) and in English derived ‘hunt’ cultures was attached to crosses with the then extant grade heavy draft mare x TBs often available from the Midwest, Illinois, Ohio, Virginia producers. Euro- breeds were considered ‘coach horses’ in the USA…
https://books.google.com/books?id=v4jfAAAAMAAJ&q=WARM+BLOOD+breeds+HORSES&dq=WARM+BLOOD+breeds+HORSES&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ZPiKVZvEE87roAT49p7gBw&ved=0CEoQ6AEwBTgo
Post WW-2 in the USA the European registries were referred to only by regional name, as Hannoverian (not my spelling), etc. and USA didn’t use Warmblood but referred to them as half-bred. (This coincided with the large infusion of TB and Shagya into the various Euro- studbooks and the re-thinking of the breeding goal solely toward Olympic sport.)
With the ascendance of the European Warmblood registered horses into top international wins, came the creation of the Federation to record and market these registriesfor Olympic Sport under the blanket Warmblood term.
“The WBFSH publishes official rankings of horses competing in international sport and also ranks the breeding organizations. Since 1992, the WBFSH has held the World Breeding Championships for Sport Horses.”
This has had the effect of focusing the term warmblood as ONLY referring to the member registries.
Similar to the way people will ask for a Kleenex, as if that were the only facial tissue.
As a corollary, it wasn’t until relatively recently that the original warmblood TB Arabs and Barb became Hot bloods - with the negativity applied to same.
It does rather sound like the OP isn’t happy that hunter judges are looking for a particular type. Not to be mean, but just sounds like sour grapes masquerading as a complaint about “breedism.”
There are still many people not involved with European Warmbloods in the USA who go by the warmblood equals crossbred of any combination of ‘pure cold’ (draft) and ‘pure hot’ (Arab, TB) in any generational background:
There are only 3 categories a horse can be in; hot, cold, warm. Pick one.
Nothing wrong with it, except it seems to get European Warmblood breeders hackles up. The 3 class system isn’t a designation used in Europe. -Although I do note that they refer to their stock as Sporthorses for differentiation.
one might say that a person in the USA that doesn’t use European before Warmblood is inaccurate if they are referring just to the WBFSH stock; while the actual warmblood is a mix designation, non-discipline specific.
Absolutely agree the OP directed her complaint in the wrong direction. Type and function, not breed, is the downfall.
Words often have more than one meaning. Ask 100 people what is a draft and they will most likely say a cool breeze. Probably at least half will say that a thoroughbred is a pedigreed animal of some sort or a race horse.
How often do you hear someone say “I only eat organic food. I don’t want to eat all those chemicals”? Well, unless a person is eating pure salt they are eating organic and salt is indeed a chemical.
Get over it, warmblood can have at least two meanings
The problem is deceptive use in order to confuse the uninformed buyer.
People will list almost anything as a “warmblood” simply to try to sell it for more money to people who don’t know better.
It matters because lots of people just don’t know bloodlines.
[QUOTE=Dressagelvr;8204733]
The problem is deceptive use in order to confuse the uninformed buyer.
People will list almost anything as a “warmblood” simply to try to sell it for more money to people who don’t know better.
It matters because lots of people just don’t know bloodlines.[/QUOTE]
Then it is up to the seller to educate the buyer why one horse might be better than another.
Unless the authorities(government or advertising entity) step in and specify the requirements for a warmblood horse there are no standards.
MArtha Stewart attempted to register “Katonah”…the WBFSH could attempt the same
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.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
