Diversity in the Holstein collection this year

The thing that strikes me about a lot of breedings posted about on this board is that they are reproducing breedings done by many other people. If you are doing what everyone else is doing you’re likely to get what everyone else is getting.

To me breeding is about doing what everyone else is not doing. To give examples from dressage someone had to think outside the box and use Quaterman in order to produce Quaterback. (Quite why Quaterman’s connections haven’t cashed in on this very famous son is a puzzle to me) Someone had to think outside the box and use Hofrat in order to produce Hotline. Someone had to realise the failed jumper Sandro Hit was a good enough mover to use as a dressage sire.

If everyone had just put D line to W line and Jazz to Ferro we would soon run out of bloodlines.

So to the original poster you have a fabulous mare with proven bloodlines and proven soundness and ability. For her first foal I agree with the posters who have recommended using fresh chilled semen. And for her first foal I’d be brave and use a stallion that isn’t a big name. Use a local one. Use one you can go and see. Use one that makes your heart sing. You may well get a foal that is not like the horses everyone else is producing and your foal could be better because of being different. For her second foal you could then move on to frozen and use a big name stallion especially as you’ll have a better idea of what your mare throws.

My goodness people. When Reece says Quinar is unlikely to produce what the OP wants from her mare, he is not saying Quinar is no good! Quite the contrary. For a different mare, he might be ideal. That is ALL he is saying.

A stallion may be a super individual with great breeding value but not suit a particular mare or the owner’s objectives. Is that really hard to understand?

I’m not a fan of blowing smoke so his approach (as well as Tim’s, Nick’s, Tom’s et. al.) bothers me not one whit. The delivery is not an issue, but you might want to take Terri’s approach here.

Sue

Now this is a post worth thanking. :yes:

SueL you’re free to see whatever you want. :lol: I don’t believe in blowing smoke either and when I look at Reece I see someone ranked #289 in the USEF rankings this year with 8 points. Perhaps he’s still rather new to top jumper breeding or has horses showing in Germany. Either way he really has no justification in his “I am the king of breeding” mannerisms.

All sixpoundfarm did was relate HER experiences. What is wrong with that I’d like to know. I’ll answer that question myself – nothing.

Stolensilver, remember that most people are breeding to sell; and in these days of intense marketing of sires, the reputation of the lines is what makes the foal attractive to a purchaser. Heck, that’s why so many luxury items are counterfeited; people want the name, not the original’s quality.

Well, not every breeding needs to be out of the box. Only those where you think you’ll get something better than doing the expected cross.

Breeding in itself is a luxury, so people should just be trying to get the best horses they can breed rather than just breeding to big names anyway.

In any case, there are likely to be names in the pedigree that some people recognize! :wink:

Stolensilver - I think it depends. IMO, there’s a place for both. Particularly when you start with a registry, v. a breed, which many sporthorse “creators” have done, there has to be a fairly decent junk of “reproducing what others are producing” to keep enough consistency within the registry to be able to accomplish registry goals and create results that can have some halfway reliable duplication. OTOH, a lot of that effort to create consistency ties back to a cross that was, originally, not a duplication of what everyone else was doing.

This goes back to the point that I was trying (maybe sucessfully, maybe not) to make earlier on breeding wb jumpers (which is somewhat synonymous with Holsteiner breeding these days, although SF might beg to differ and KWPN might just rebrand product nod).

A lot of the successful jumpers today originated from the “registry” as opposed to “breed” approach. What those registries did, in large parts, was to take Harness/Trotting blood and introduce TB and AngloArab (the latter usually from a SF source, and sometimes the trotting blood as well, although that’s a bit more the untold/unacknowledged story).

So now, what involved taking some fairly disparate horses 4 or more generations ago has now, because of registry direction and because breeders within a registry were willing, in some large portions, to do what the others in the registry were doing, has become something where there is a product that is now being reproduced from more and more similar sires and dams than the more dissimilar sires and dams of multiple generations ago.

With many (maybe even most? it would be interesting for someone to do the comparisons) of the top jumping horses and top jumper producing sires, you have a situation where around 4 or so generations back, almost every cross in the pedigree has XX or OX (sometimes Trak) and also has some kind of trotting/harness aspect (often from the damline). With lots of linebreeding back (be it Cottage Son, Rantzau, Ladykiller or Orange Peel) and forth, and lots of line breeding already existing in some of the harness dams used originally, you began to generate a more and more reproducible product.

I think this is the safe, sweetspot, for many breeders right now and it is going to produce some nice offspring. The bigger question becomes, to what extent has the linebreeding and type selection resulted, today, with the Holsteiners becoming something more like a breed, where the end product will continue to be reproducible without significant new insertions of EITHER xx or harness/trotter blood or to what extent, as the XX and OX repeated insertions from th 4th or so generation become the 7th or 8th or more generation there will NEED to be additional insertions of XX, OX or trotter blood. I don’t think that one is a known yet. I think the search for some XX that brings particular things to the table is partly a failsafe, in case it does end up being needed, but the breeders are by and large more convinced in continuing what has been successful the last 2 or 3 generations. If they have achieved something in the way of a “breed” type result in such a few generations, due to the carefulness of the crosses, then they may not end up needing tb insertions as much.

Part of that will also depend on the courses of the future as well. As trends in courses change, the horse that handles that often changes some as well.

If the breeders who rely on continuing a reproduction of what has been done for the last couple or so generations of jumper breeding are right - they get to claim the sweet spot for a long time to come. If they are wrong, over time they will be breeding for diminishing returns as the sucessful insertions of blood drift further back. Or, as the successful insertions of trotter/harness drift further back. Either/or. I hope this all ties in some fashion to the original post - with the diversity spect. It sounds as if a part of the Holstein focus is on not keeping the registry so focused on the successful crosses over the last 2 generations that the registry loses the ability to turn to other genetic sourcing, relatively quickly, if there begins to be a drop in that proven cross success.

I’ll always be a tb girl. I think a lot of the problem with use of tbs in this country is that we don’t have the same tb riders that we had, once upon a time. I think a lot of European riders can handle a quirky/hot horse these days better than the Americans, who used to have the touch with them. OTOH, you can’t argue with success or against what the trotting/harness blood addes or the raw power of some of the wbs that are produced today.

Still (and esp if you live in an area like the Lexington area) I agree with Baywithchrome that a lot of really lovely tbs do fall through the “win at 2 or die” cracks and they can be the basis for something special here at home. Whether or not they will be, with our record keeping woes and lack of regional registry support etc. - that’s a big big question mark.

The fact that I love tbs and will always prefer them is a really different discussion from the discussion of all the things the Holsteiner registry has gotten right on the jumper front and the likelihood that it has begun to solidify those successes into something that is operating more like a breed and less like a registry and that may need less and less infusions in the future.

All fwiw - some arguments only time will win.

[QUOTE=grayarabpony;5887901]
Now this is a post worth thanking. :yes:

SueL you’re free to see whatever you want. :lol: I don’t believe in blowing smoke either and when I look at Reece I see someone ranked #289 in the USEF rankings this year with 8 points. Perhaps he’s still rather new to top jumper breeding or has horses showing in Germany. Either way he really has no justification in his “I am the king of breeding” mannerisms.

All sixpoundfarm did was relate HER experiences. What is wrong with that I’d like to know. I’ll answer that question myself – nothing.[/QUOTE]

No one ever said I was the king of breeding GAP but I know what I know.

I won’t even go into your ranking find but I’ll tell you this…at least I’m ranked.

You can go back to NOT being a breeder GAP. You can go back to NOT knowing the first thing about sporthorses GAP. You can go back to NOT knowing the first thing about any stallion you refer to but you can go back to what you do good and that is inject yourself in conversations that only serve to validate my earlier lack of basic knowledge points.

Wow Gap, I think 289 is pretty good, considering the millions of horses that are in the US. What’s your number?

Furthermore, this is the is the 1st foal from this mare that has contributed to these points. The mare has just turned 7, pretty damn good if you ask me.

Now back to intelligent conversation…

Tim

One horse this year, out of all the horses he’s bred, has USEF points–and only 8, which is not being very successful at USEF recognized shows. Of course, if the horse showed only once at that level, eight points would be a good result. The one horse was at six shows doing low and high children’s jumpers. The USEF only has a total of 306 breeders with any jumper points at all, and the really, really big names dominate. The leading jumper breeder this year is Mrs. Joan Irvine Smith who breeds Holsteiners and has bred Holsteiner/TB crosses in the past that are currently showing and accumulating points. She has over 98 THOUSAND points with about 24 horses. Many of her horses are with the Cudmores, and their homebreds put them 3rd on the list with tens of thousands of points. VDL of Holland is 4th.

I THINK that’s all GAP was pointing out. One can check the back years quite easily to see if more horses bred by Bayhawk got more points.

Really, this is what the thread has come to? See this is fascinatiing to me. Someone who will never be ranked decides to attack someone who is because that is the only way to feel important. It has contributed zero to the thread. Maybe in 10 years time we can check the results again. I fail to see the point in ALWAYS putting other people down to make yourself feel like you have a reason for typing.

SS, great points on thinking outside the box. And for all those horses who were successful as outside the box breedings, there will be many more examples of those that failed. The same as for every tried and tested formula for breeding, there are still failures. But sticking with a plan means a higher level for having success. As you know, this is not my way of thinking but, as you’ve shown, outside the box has it’s merits.

And as Viney points out there is the commercial end of things. If you want to make money out of breeding, then you will look at what’s going on and you will breed accordingly.

Right, now it’s time for me to go outside and ride the horses that I’ve bred. Then I’m off to work.

Terri

[QUOTE=vineyridge;5888924]
One horse this year, out of all the horses he’s bred, has USEF points–and only 8, which is not being very successful at USEF recognized shows. Of course, if the horse showed only once at that level, eight points would be a good result. The one horse was at six shows doing low and high children’s jumpers. The USEF only has a total of 306 breeders with any jumper points at all, and the really, really big names dominate. The leading jumper breeder this year is Mrs. Joan Irvine who breeds Holsteiners and has bred Holsteiner/TB crosses in the past that are currently showing and accumulating points. She has over 98 THOUSAND points with about 24 horses. Many of her horses are with the Cudmores, and their homebreds put them 3rd on the list with tens of thousands of points. VDL of Holland is 4th.

I THINK that’s all GAP was pointing out. One can check the back years quite easily to see if more horses bred by Bayhawk got more points.[/QUOTE]

Joan Irvine Smith has been breeding 50 mares a year for 30 years on two different farms in Ca and Va. The Cudmores have 3 ranches and let stallions run with a herd of mares and probabaly bred more than 50 mares a year and has a Grand Prix riding wife at his disposal.

I have probabaly only ever put 50 or so foals on the ground total. Most have been fillies from top motherlines that have been quickly picked up for breeding therefore you will never see those in sport.

Out of those 50 or so foals I’ve put on the ground…I’ve produced an approved stallion , 4 site champion mares , 6 premium mares , the mare with the highest free jumping scores in the nation and the highest scoring foal in the Nation plus the aforementioned USEF ranked #289. I have two of my young homebreds with top GP riders at the moment.

I think I’ve done pretty good so far…

The reason I’ve done good so far…knowledge. Traveling to the breeders farm and to the stallion approvals listening to folks that know more than me and willing to pick brains and concede that I didn’t know crap entering into their conversation.

This is the problem of many here. You can’t admit to yourself that you don’t know crap. You won’t breed better horses until you do.

Vineyridge…don’t compare a person who has put 50 foals on the ground to people who have put thousands on the ground and expect the numbers to be anywhere near the same. That was ridiculous.

What is interesting is that out of all these hundreds and hundreds she has produced over a 30 year period…only 24 are gaining points ? Not such good production if you ask me. Compare her to my late friend Mr. Bahlmann of stamm 776 fame. In the SAME TIME FRAME , he put 10 -15 foals on the ground (1/3 of Joans production) and his breeding was ranked #1 in the world ! The world Viney ! This dear friend of mine is where I have learned the most and I will always be grateful to him.

You want to challenge my Holsteiner knowledge based on a stupid USEF ranking ? Bring it on…I don’t get my knowledge with my nose stuck in a computer screen or a book , I get it walking thru horse pastures , barns and shows looking at families of horses. When you and GAP can actually start putting faces to names , you just might start to learn something.

Thank you vineyridge, that’s right. It’s just a fact, as bayhawk is so fond of saying. Although with the disclaimer that USEF info is not always the most reliable…

One of our local vets, Fernando Cardenas out of New Hill, was ranked 23rd in 2010 with 9940 points and 21st in 2011 with 10,780.

And this is what makes the discussions/ arguments regarding Tbs on this forum so puzzling and infuriating! lol

I have to wonder though if Holsteiner has enough lines for an eventual closed book. I would think they’d need more outside lines infused in before that could happen.

Bayhawk, what you are doing is admirable–breeding for other breeders. But at some point, performers at the highest levels need to validate your program direction. I know you’ll agree, as I seem to remember that from some discussions that you had with Tom Reed. With your homebreds at GP stables, you seem have moved on to that step.

Never let anyone EVER forget what happens when breeding for type or a single characteristic becomes more important than breeding for actual work. Maybe it’s just a US phenomenon, but look at the Arabs, Halter QHs, the trap the Trak people got into, color breeders, and the Saddlebred backs. For that matter, look at dogs.

Is there a link where I can find more information on the horses mentioned in the original post?

[QUOTE=vineyridge;5890047]
Bayhawk, what you are doing is admirable–breeding for other breeders. But at some point, performers at the highest levels need to validate your program direction. I know you’ll agree, as I seem to remember that from some discussions that you had with Tom Reed. With your homebreds at GP stables, you seem have moved on to that step.

Never let anyone EVER forget what happens when breeding for type or a single characteristic becomes more important than breeding for actual work. Maybe it’s just a US phenomenon, but look at the Arabs, Halter QHs, the trap the Trak people got into, color breeders, and the Saddlebred backs. For that matter, look at dogs.[/QUOTE]

Especially German Shepards.

Personally I find breeding for performance to be the most admirable thing, because there will be both breeding and riding horses produced by such a program.

TTP there’s a lot of info on the Verband’s site, including some videos:
http://www.holsteiner-verband.de/cms/front_content.php?client=1&lang=2&idcat=32&idart=186&pageno=1

GAP, you have that backward. Have you ever heard ,“Breed the best, ride the rest”? Breeding stock is in many ways superior to a performance horse. This is lost on this county often. When a great one is produced over in Europe, they don’t waste anytime having that mare out there competing, her time is best served in the breeding shed. Over here we only ride the best, and then they retire barren. What good is that?

Breeding stock is every bit as athletic as the sport horses out there, they are also more correct. When you breed breeding quality, you are breeding sport horses that are good enough to breed.

Tim

[QUOTE=RyTimMick;5890272]
GAP, you have that backward. Have you ever heard ,“Breed the best, ride the rest”? Breeding stock is in many ways superior to a performance horse. This is lost on this county often. When a great one is produced over in Europe, they don’t waste anytime having that mare out there competing, her time is best served in the breeding shed. Over here we only ride the best, and then they retire barren. What good is that?

Breeding stock is every bit as athletic as the sport horses out there, they are also more correct. When you breed breeding quality, you are breeding sport horses that are good enough to breed.

Tim[/QUOTE]

I agree with you, but they better be producing performance horses LOL.

As I mentioned in the other thread, the problem is that in the US, the monetary value is in the performance mare. Very few are willing to (or can afford to) spend the same for a broodmare. In Europe, many of those top mares have been with a breeder for generations. We don’t have that luxury here. (yet).

I think that is changing and our broodmare base is improving all the time. :slight_smile:

Wow - I looked thru the list and I am ranked 112th with 580 points, never looked before.

There are always exceptions to every rule and when it comes to breeding there are always surprises, good and bad. You just try to make the best breeding judgement you can and then it is up to mother nature and genetics at that point. Sixpound’s Quinar foal is stunning!!! Also I do know that generally the QDR line will shorten a back, but not always.

No kidding, and besides Tim, you are misrepresenting what I said. I guess you missed the part where I said BOTH breeding and riding stock will be produced by a good breeding program. The whole end point of any breeding program is to produce horses that can be ridden or driven.

Breeding programs are going to produce a lot of male horses, most of which are going to be be gelded and better become damn good riding horses. I doubt that everything that bayhawk is producing is too good to ride, including the geldings. Besides which, there’s nothing wrong with riding a good mare in order for her to prove herself either. Lots of breeders do ET.

[QUOTE=vineyridge;5890047]
Bayhawk, what you are doing is admirable–breeding for other breeders. But at some point, performers at the highest levels need to validate your program direction. I know you’ll agree, as I seem to remember that from some discussions that you had with Tom Reed. With your homebreds at GP stables, you seem have moved on to that step.

Never let anyone EVER forget what happens when breeding for type or a single characteristic becomes more important than breeding for actual work. Maybe it’s just a US phenomenon, but look at the Arabs, Halter QHs, the trap the Trak people got into, color breeders, and the Saddlebred backs. For that matter, look at dogs.[/QUOTE]

Again Viney…you’re not very aware of what you are speaking to.

I didn’t set out to “breed for other breeders” . I had top mares from some of the best stamms in the world and they just have so happened to produce about 75% fillies for me thus far…hence the being scooped up for breeding comment and they are not very likely to wind up in the show ring when they are the ONLY representatives of this line in North America. They are from the stamm of Carlo who is recently ranked 11th in the world. If you want this line , you have to get it from me. You can’t even get in Germany right now.

Again you assume and mis-speak when you imply that someone is breeding for a specific thing. I’m breeding for sporthorses…not quite sure what you are doing ?

I think you need to get your nose out of the computer screen , out of the books , quit making assumptions about what people may or may not be doing and get your butt in the fields ,barns , showrings and sit at the coffee tables of folks who really know what’s going on.

My horses may or may not show up in the future as I have severely scaled back my breeding operation since my wife passed away a few years back. She did all the training and riding , I did the breeding. I don’t have her anymore and am a one man show here. I have sold all my stamms and now only breed with one family of horses. My main mare is in foal for the 9th time and has had only 2 colts ,one of them being born this year. Her first daughter by Cassini II is 7 this year and she is the one ranked.

Don’t ever challenge the knowledge of myself or anyone else based simply on the fact whether they have a horse ranked somewhere or not. Hell , I didn’t even know about my #289 ranked horse until it was posted here. She’s in one of the top show jumping barns in the country and we should see her move up if everyone keeps the paperwork straight.

again …get your butt out of the computer chair and get your mudd boots on and go and try and learn something instead of coming on here spouting off pedigrees and challenging folks breeding programs when you haven’t done squat yourself.