[QUOTE=Prima Equestrian;6492385]
Thanks Bayhawk re the KWPN congrats.[/QUOTE]
Your welcome Michelle ! I was just pulling your chain a little…thanks for being a good sport. Congrats again to the KWPN and all its breeders ! They certainly had a huge Olympics…
[QUOTE=stolensilver;6491766]
I’m thrilled by the success of the AES studbook. Compared to the others it is a tiny studbook. I don’t know how many foals are registered with it each year but it will be a fraction of the numbers being born into KWPN.
Lets celebrate success rather than running down other people’s achievements.[/QUOTE]
^^^^^^ This. Congratulations to all who succeeded, and as you say StolenSilver, its a fantastic achievement for the AES!
[QUOTE=subk;6491576]
If breeders were more interested in breeding quailty horses for specific disiplines instead of breeding for a whichever WB club they want to identify with we’d end up having better horses.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. When I started breeding horses that jump the sticks, it was clear to me that Holsteiners were the way to go.
Holsteiners, generally speaking, are specialists. I wouldn’t presume to take Olympic breed results and spread that across the board as a measure of “breed success” generally in horse sport.
[QUOTE=Bayhawk;6491926]
This statement is soooo wonderfully intelligent.[/QUOTE]
and this statement is so wonderfully ruuuuuuuuuude.
It simply isn’t enough to use the arguement that KWPN horses did better because there were more in attendance at the games, nor that its becuase they produce more progeny each year than any other stud book. One has to ask why there were more and why they had more horses through to the individual final round than any other stud book, talent and scope are one thing, but evidently riders are selecting buying and producing these horses in the first instance. Why aren’t they selecting more Holstein, SF, BWP etc Have the KWPN managed to develop a stud book of Olympic standard horses that have not only the scope and ability but trainability and temperament which has always been at the helm of their breeding directives.
Chapeaux also to the AES and Triple X and to the commentators who repeatedly highlighted that he was home bred.
[QUOTE=L&L;6492811]
and this statement is so wonderfully ruuuuuuuuuude.
It simply isn’t enough to use the arguement that KWPN horses did better because there were more in attendance at the games, nor that its becuase they produce more progeny each year than any other stud book. One has to ask why there were more and why they had more horses through to the individual final round than any other stud book, talent and scope are one thing, but evidently riders are selecting buying and producing these horses in the first instance. Why aren’t they selecting more Holstein, SF, BWP etc Have the KWPN managed to develop a stud book of Olympic standard horses that have not only the scope and ability but trainability and temperament which has always been at the helm of their breeding directives.
Chapeaux also to the AES and Triple X and to the commentators who repeatedly highlighted that he was home bred.[/QUOTE]
“One has to ask why there were more and why they had more horses through to the individual final round than any other studbook” .
Then one also has to ask…seeing as they had more to the final round than any other studbook , why no medal ? why are they not the #1 WBSFH ranked studbook in the world with all these horses and your incorrect assumption that riders prefer to ride their horses more ?
From 2001 - 03 , when most of this years Olympic horses were born , KWPN registered somewhere better than 16,000 foals per year. Holstein somewhere around 4,500 per year. SF somewhere around 5,000 per year. BWP somewhere around 4,000 foals per year.
With registering an average of 10,000 LESS…yes I said 10,000 LESS foals per year…SF , BWP , and OLD kept KWPN off the individual jumping Olympic podium and Holstein is the #1 ranked jumping studbook in the world in 2012.
sorry , but I have plenty of questions.
[QUOTE=subk;6491576]
If breeders were more interested in breeding quailty horses for specific disiplines instead of breeding for a whichever WB club they want to identify with we’d end up having better horses.[/QUOTE]
That’s a factor indeed. 
KWPN is a wonderfully open studbook. Unfortunately, their policy towards TB mares makes it complicated if one wants to use another studbook down the road with said mare’s fillies. 
While they are not perfect, that’s why I’m going with the GOV this year. Practically as open as the KWPN and no limits for future fillies.
I think I see what Bayhawk’s getting at, it might be nice to know percentages of medalists etc instead of just the medal totals because a larger registry will definitely have an advantage. It is similar to the argument about stallions who breed thousands of mares and have a few successful offspring, vs stallions who breed only a handful of mares but a higher percentage of the offspring go on to be successful. There are a lot of ways to interpret and manipulate numbers. Which is not to take anything away from the KWPN, I personally favor Dutch horses over Holsteiners.
I’m not familiar with the AES. Is this a reputable registry, or is it like a Euro equivalent to “American Warmblood” (although more successful from the looks of things!)
[QUOTE=pinecone;6493812]
I think I see what Bayhawk’s getting at, it might be nice to know percentages of medalists etc instead of just the medal totals because a larger registry will definitely have an advantage. It is similar to the argument about stallions who breed thousands of mares and have a few successful offspring, vs stallions who breed only a handful of mares but a higher percentage of the offspring go on to be successful. There are a lot of ways to interpret and manipulate numbers. Which is not to take anything away from the KWPN, I personally favor Dutch horses over Holsteiners.
I’m not familiar with the AES. Is this a reputable registry, or is it like a Euro equivalent to “American Warmblood” (although more successful from the looks of things!)[/QUOTE]
You are correct Pinecone. Not taking anything away from the KWPN for sure but it appears to me by looking at the stats every year vs. foals born that the KWPN underachieves while Holstein , SF , BWP over achieve.
I also have my theories on why. Holstein and SF have a super condensed gene in a relatively small mare band. This is why Holstein can be the #1 ranked studbook in the world with only producing less than half the foals every year of the KWPN. This is also why SF currently has the top producing stallions at the moment.
With Hols and SF , it boils down to quality over quantity.
I believe the SF is a larger book than 5000 foals a year–more like 8000 (before the recession) and has I think between 13-15,000 mares --that also would not include the french anglo arab book which might be relevent for the eventing discpline that uses some of the same lines.(Not that any of that takes away from the talents in the SF genes.) It does from my ammie eye appear that the SF have been introducing in the last years more German-bred jumping lines on top and am curious if that is true–what effect that will have on the SF.
http://www.biw.kuleuven.be/genlog/livgen/docs/SF.pdf
Table 2
Abbreviation, name, country and number of foals born in 2001 of
the breeding organisations that were included in the questionnaire
(n = 19)
Abbreviation Name Country Foals
BAD Baden-Wu¨rttemberg D 1211
BAVAR Bavarian Warmblood D 1426
BWP Belgian Warmblood B 3377
DWB Danish Warmblood DK 2228
FWB Finnish Warmblood F 220
HAN Hanoverian D 7784
HOLST Holsteiner D 3381
HUN Hungarian Sporthorse HUN 614
ISH Irish Sport Horse IRL 4413
KWPN Dutch Warmblood NL 11,785
NRPS Dutch Riding Horse and
Pony Studbook
NL 638
NWB Norwegian Warmblood N 100
OLD Oldenburg D 4384
SF Selle Francais F 8300
SHBGB Sport Horse Breeding of
Great Britain
GB 592
SI Italian Saddle Horse I 3340
SWB Swedish Warmblood S 3000
TRAK Trakehner D 1563
WEST Westphalia D 3974
The questionnaire was sent to the 44 breeding
organisations that are member of the WBFSH and
that produce in total approximately 90,000 foals per
year. Finally, this study was based on the completed
questionnaires for 19 organisations. All these breeding
organisations happen to be European and produce
in total approximately 62,000 foals per year
(Table 2). Although many organisations did not
respond, the majority of breeding horses were represented
as the total number of horses registered by
the non-responding organisations was small.
The Dutch breed horses to be sold. They pick the best stallions and have been doing so for years now. Their modern SJ bloodlines are primarily founded on Holsteiner stallions used since the 1980’s, and even before. They also have developed some very nice D bloodlines of their own from using other breeds stallions.
Other breeds are breeding for different purposes/different breeding parameters.
And now that most breeds are allowing in the best stallions, this will change a few of them from their recent past. Look at the stallion selection last January of the Southern German Breeding Assn. (the collection of Southern German Verbands). Most of the sires were from outside of their Verbands.
They are breeding Euro Horses now.
And eventing is something else entirely. The Dutch breeders are not so interested in eventing–and eventers need a huge dose of TB in them anyway, so the modern eventer is a specialty bred horse.
[QUOTE=Bayhawk;6493583]
“One has to ask why there were more and why they had more horses through to the individual final round than any other studbook” . [/QUOTE]
Again I insist that I don’t want to take anything out of the KWPN performance, but to answer Bayhawk above question I need to point out that there are only 4 horses to reach the final out of the 20 who started (76 total horses started including 20 KWPN and 22 reached the final leg including 4 KWPN) that is 20%
If you compare with Holstein then from 6 who started 2 went to the final leg, that is 33%
If you compare with SF then from 8 who started 4 went to the final leg, that is 50%
Note that if Casall was not wounded then the % of Holsteiner and SF moving to final leg would be equal at 50%.
[QUOTE=andy.smaga;6494483]
Again I insist that I don’t want to take anything out of the KWPN performance, but to answer Bayhawk above question I need to point out that there are only 4 horses to reach the final out of the 20 who started (76 total horses started including 20 KWPN and 22 reached the final leg including 4 KWPN) that is 20%
If you compare with Holstein then from 6 who started 2 went to the final leg, that is 33%
If you compare with SF then from 8 who started 4 went to the final leg, that is 50%
Note that if Casall was not wounded then the % of Holsteiner and SF moving to final leg would be equal at 50%.[/QUOTE]
Yes Andy , this is the point I am trying to make. It is of my opinion that Hols and SF have superior horses even when they produce far less foals each year.
The clue here is in the mare families. This is why Hols and SF are stronger. KWPN breeds in a matter of what I refer to as stacking the stallions. Example : Bloubet / Contender / Quidam / Argentinus , without as much concern with the motherlines. After all , the original Dutch motherlines are mostly extinct , so they have to make their horses “stacking the stallions” and this is why it takes them producing a far greater number of foals just to achieve the same result (or not) as Hols and SF.
again , this is only my opinion but if I’m buying horses for the top of the sport , I personally am going to Holstein and France to get them.
[QUOTE=omare;6494190]
I believe the SF is a larger book than 5000 foals a year–more like 8000 (before the recession) and has I think between 13-15,000 mares --that also would not include the french anglo arab book which might be relevent for the eventing discpline that uses some of the same lines.(Not that any of that takes away from the talents in the SF genes.) It does from my ammie eye appear that the SF have been introducing in the last years more German-bred jumping lines on top and am curious if that is true–what effect that will have on the SF.
http://www.biw.kuleuven.be/genlog/livgen/docs/SF.pdf
Table 2
Abbreviation, name, country and number of foals born in 2001 of
the breeding organisations that were included in the questionnaire
(n = 19)
Abbreviation Name Country Foals
BAD Baden-Wu¨rttemberg D 1211
BAVAR Bavarian Warmblood D 1426
BWP Belgian Warmblood B 3377
DWB Danish Warmblood DK 2228
FWB Finnish Warmblood F 220
HAN Hanoverian D 7784
HOLST Holsteiner D 3381
HUN Hungarian Sporthorse HUN 614
ISH Irish Sport Horse IRL 4413
KWPN Dutch Warmblood NL 11,785
NRPS Dutch Riding Horse and
Pony Studbook
NL 638
NWB Norwegian Warmblood N 100
OLD Oldenburg D 4384
SF Selle Francais F 8300
SHBGB Sport Horse Breeding of
Great Britain
GB 592
SI Italian Saddle Horse I 3340
SWB Swedish Warmblood S 3000
TRAK Trakehner D 1563
WEST Westphalia D 3974
The questionnaire was sent to the 44 breeding
organisations that are member of the WBFSH and
that produce in total approximately 90,000 foals per
year. Finally, this study was based on the completed
questionnaires for 19 organisations. All these breeding
organisations happen to be European and produce
in total approximately 62,000 foals per year
(Table 2). Although many organisations did not
respond, the majority of breeding horses were represented
as the total number of horses registered by
the non-responding organisations was small.
http://www.biw.kuleuven.be/genlog/livgen/docs/koenen.pdf[/QUOTE]
thanks for posting more accurate numbers Omare. I was trying to just go off memory from 10 years ago.
KWPN produced 8,404 MORE foals than Holstein did 11 years ago and the 11 year old horses from that foal crop have helped make Holstein the #1 WBFSH studbook in the world today. This just goes to show you how prepotent the gene is in Holsteiner breeding.
8,404 less foals and Hols outbred KWPN…unbelievable !
You aren’t really using a fair denominator. Remember that a large number of the KWPN horses are strictly being bred for dressage, very few HOLST are dressage bred (that being said, I have a HOLST cross bred for jumping that is a wonderful PSG dressage horse), so using number of foals/yr isn’t showing number of horses bred for their jumping talent.
All of these studbooks have horses bred for all of the Olympic Disciplines. Even if you cut KWPN in HALF, they aren’t as pre-potent. If you were to go even further into the #'s, lets pull out all of Holsteiner mares registered as KWPN who contribute to their numbers. Holstein doesn’t use outside mares, only approved outside stallions. And even then this years top performers are all by Stallions bred in Holstein. KWPN can’t say that. Actually, nobody in the top 10 can say that.
The question is, if you want to go LOOKING for a jumper, I would go either to Holstein or France. If you want to go looking for a Dressage horse, then maybe not. Doesn’t mean that KWPN didn’t breed more jumpers for the Olympics, they did. It just means if you want to go looking it might take more LOOKING to find one.
Tim
[QUOTE=out west;6495986]
You aren’t really using a fair denominator. Remember that a large number of the KWPN horses are strictly being bred for dressage, very few HOLST are dressage bred (that being said, I have a HOLST cross bred for jumping that is a wonderful PSG dressage horse), so using number of foals/yr isn’t showing number of horses bred for their jumping talent.[/QUOTE]
Holstein also has registered foals go to dressage , eventing and driving. you take away those horses and the number is even more damning.
Bottom line…KWPN produced 8,404 more horses and can’t match the production of Holstein and SF.
It is my opinion that if HOLS , SF , BWP and KWPN produced the same number of foals KWPN would be at the very bottom. They don’t put as much emphasis on the motherlines ,therefore they have to produce a far greater # of horses and struggle to produce the same results…or in this case ,not.
Is Cash and Carry that good a sire? He’s responsible for 2 of the top five Holsteiners that put them on top of the WBFSH rankings–one of which got its 2011 and 2012 points in parts of the old Soviet Union. 2 of the top five Holstein jumpers in the world certainly LOOKs impressive without knowing anything more.
[QUOTE=vineyridge;6496082]
Is Cash and Carry that good a sire? He’s responsible for 2 of the top five Holsteiners that put them on top of the WBFSH rankings–one of which got its 2011 and 2012 points in parts of the old Soviet Union. 2 of the top five Holstein jumpers in the world certainly LOOKs impressive without knowing anything more.[/QUOTE]
And all the other books have their horses compete in FEI events all over the globe as well.
Cash and Carry is a very good sire. He has sired many international jumpers. You also have many other sires whose children contribute points as well.
If the US had sent their best horses (Cristallo and Cedric) Holstein would have scores far better. LOL
[QUOTE=why not;6497660]
If the US had sent their best horses (Cristallo and Cedric) Holstein would have scores far better. LOL[/QUOTE]
No doubt about that Harrie. Also Corradina…
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
