The shortened Belmont stakes
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/othersports/american-thoroughbreds-are-no-longer-bred-to-go-the-distance-in-the-belmont-stakes/2014/06/03/0dfb13ac-eb11-11e3-9f5c-9075d5508f0a_story.html
Wow what a negative thread! I was skimming it for hours last night after a long hiatus from COTH. Anyhow, just to respond to some of the nonsense on the last few pagesâŠ
I was at the Belmont Stakes last year, and found the winner to be a gorgeous horse with beautiful gaits, whom I would love to use for sport horse breeding, but alas I will not be able to afford him, lol. Palace Malice, who also won the Belmont the year before, ran that day in another race, and ditto, what a nice horse for sport , as well as for racing.
As far as California Chrome goes, he looks like a typical thoroughbred, there is nothing wrong with that. I think its the larger fields and fresh ones shipping in for the Belmont that will make us never see another Triple Crown winner.
As far as this Holstein approved knee hanging TB goesâŠwhat!!! No wonder there is so much blahblah from warmblood breeders against breeding with TBs if this what they use. I canât imagine wanting to use a knee hanger of any breed.
Renascence â that was my bad --the Holsteiner approved Fragonard xx was not a knee hanger (although he was shown cantering around a 3 foot-ish course which was disappointing to me). I did not realize it was his son showing in what I would consider less than stellar-knees down- form x-countryâŠApparently Fragonard was a champion hurdle horse so he has got to have quick reflexes over fencesâbut I was admittedly disappointed --hence my quick negative reactionâseeing yet (another) xx stallion jumping a whopping 3 foot displaying his talent. But he was an exracehorseâso I suspect kudos to him for hunting around an indoor course.
So my badâhaving grown up and lived miles from the Md hunt cup and hunt and steeplechase country --worked for a steeplechase hall-of-famer that made the jump jocks trot 4 foot plus board fences for fun, I still have visions of big good looking- standing over a lot of ground- thoroughbreds jumping big verticals.
I do not know much about Fragonard, but breeders who use him clearly find something in him. These TB stallions are an ingredient in the whole receipe. Scope or style over jump is most probably what they expect from crossing with him. As for your knee hanger, he was just the Trakhener eventing young horse champion in 2011.
These breeders will look behind a not so perfect technique in front, or a downhill balance, if they find otherwise what they want in a stallion. To me he seems reactive, quick of the ground, and seems carefull. For sur he will refine a heavier mare with an uphill balance.
So the video showed Fragonard in the ring, but it was his son on the xctry showing worse form? And that son was judged a young horse event champion? Was it political or did his jumping style change?
Yes of course he will improve heavy mares, it is just that there are a lot of nice TB stallions over here off the track that would make nicer improvement sires, IMO, but I guess you wouldnât get your holstein papers.
Just friend someone like 3 Plain Bays on Facebook to see videos of nice TB jumpers she gets at the track going through jump chutes if you donât believe me.
[QUOTE=Renascence;8118734]
So the video showed Fragonard in the ring, but it was his son on the xctry showing worse form? And that son was judged a young horse event champion? Was it political or did his jumping style change?
Yes of course he will improve heavy mares, it is just that there are a lot of nice TB stallions over here off the track that would make nicer improvement sires, IMO, but I guess you wouldnât get your holstein papers.
Just friend someone like 3 Plain Bays on Facebook to see videos of nice TB jumpers she gets at the track going through jump chutes if you donât believe me.[/QUOTE]
I am no fan of the form of the 5 yo either. And the stallion himself does not strike me as impressive, although I can see the qualities he shows. I have not seen him in person or have talked with someone knowledgeable who saw him and his product. Maybe Bayhwak knows more about the horse as he is more connected than me in Holstein.
But the stallion went through one of the most rigourous selection process. One that have shown to produce some of the best sport horses in the word. I would tend to trust them about the selection criterias. Now if the stallion doesnât meet my own criterias, it is my decision in the end to use him or not.
These organizations have scouting team all over the world looking for the next TB stallion star. They know exactly what is available in NA and if they found something they feel worth a shot, they would try to buy it.It is just that sometime a pretty horse with scope to jump 1m30 is jst not enough.
I doubt it was political about the young horseâI did look him up FFE and he has gone 2*-(maybe I need a red face icon :)??) but I might not be totally wrong as it looks like he consistently pulls rails in the SJ portionâand more than a few on occasionâbut as a young horse he was brave and ground eating going x-country and most have decent dressage scores.
I am sensitive to the perceptions-sorta like having a relative that you love dearly shown off in what you think is less than the best light in front of people you know already think you have limited talents? The view of certain blooded breeds was made clear to me when a video was once posted saying it was the first Hols Verb approved trak/xx â it was a video of a small pony doing tricks during the stallion show. Ouch.
I am sensitive to the perceptions-sorta like having a relative that you love dearly shown off in what you think is less than the best light in front of people you know already think you have limited talents? The view of certain blooded breeds was made clear to me when a video was once posted saying it was the first Hols Verb approved trak/xx â it was a video of a small pony doing tricks during the stallion show. Ouch.
I am not sure I understand what you mean by that ^^^^.
Sorry I will try to clarify if I can.
I love the xxâI think the right one can be a fantastically athletiic partner --so I feel personally embarassed (my flaw) and disppointed when I see a xx being shown as the best of the breed when it is only jumping 3 ftâŠugh-- depressing (but maybe a reality) if that is the best that can be found. It re-enforces the common belief (which may be accurate and fact based) that the xx is not a very good breed for making jumpers. My love for the xx may not lineup with reality.And what is being offered is unlikely to change as people sure are not going out buying well bred well conformed xx colts to try in the GP ring.And what is the chance of finding a GP scoped xx stallion/colt when only 1-2 percent of specialize jumpers make in it into the big ring.
Regarding the video, i interpreted the jokeâposting of the video viewed on another forum saying the first trak/xx had been approved with a video showing a runty short legged (but cute) shetland pony with corresponding" scope" as reflecting negatively what one holst breeder thought of the traks and xxâhence the"âouchâ that hurts as it was not very positive- the traks and xx were the joke I think.
Omare, I donât think it is presented as the very best of the TB. I would love to know more about that specific horse to be able to examplify my point with him. But he is a stallion because he was evaluated on specific criteria, and he was considered sufficiently good on those criterias. He has strenghts and weakness. I think people in Holsteiner do not think he is necessarly the very best of what TB can be! He is an option for breeders who are looking for its strenghts. I can reassure you I am also convinced their are better looking, and probably better athletes, TB out there!
[QUOTE=omare;8119169]
Sorry I will try to clarify if I can.
I love the xxâI think the right one can be a fantastically athletiic partner --so I feel personally embarassed (my flaw) and disppointed when I see a xx being shown as the best of the breed when it is only jumping 3 ftâŠugh-- depressing (but maybe a reality) if that is the best that can be found. It re-enforces the common belief (which may be accurate and fact based) that the xx is not a very good breed for making jumpers. My love for the xx may not lineup with reality.And what is being offered is unlikely to change as people sure are not going out buying well bred well conformed xx colts to try in the GP ring.And what is the chance of finding a GP scoped xx stallion/colt when only 1-2 percent of specialize jumpers make in it into the big ring.
Regarding the video, i interpreted the jokeâposting of the video viewed on another forum saying the first trak/xx had been approved with a video showing a runty short legged (but cute) shetland pony with corresponding" scope" as reflecting negatively what one holst breeder thought of the traks and xxâhence the"âouchâ that hurts as it was not very positive- the traks and xx were the joke I think.[/QUOTE]
I think part of the issue with Tbâs is that the talented ones do not necessarily have the depth of pedigree or the consolidation of genetics to be able to be great breeding horses, like Ladykiller xx who was very strong genetically.
And this is not because they are not wonderful horses but because they are not being bred for it. I think it is testament to their extreme athletic nature that they can do so many different sports to any degree. But the one that can influence UL SJ is going to be one in a million, much like LK and Cottage Son.
If you look back in the pedigreeâs you see a tight hand full of very influential Tb sires in the last 70 years and that is out of all the decent Tbâs that they tried. So even in the past, it was not common to have a Tb sire that raised the bar. The ones that did, really did raise the bar.
So I think they opened it up in hopes of finding that special horse again as it broadens the search.
Pointing out all the Tbâs that are the exception in competition is pointless, unless there was several in the same family that were also talented. That is the difference of a F1 animal and a good breeding pedigree. This is as true of Wbâs also, many great jumpers did not turn out to be great sires.
[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;8114574]
The shortened Belmont stakes
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/othersports/american-thoroughbreds-are-no-longer-bred-to-go-the-distance-in-the-belmont-stakes/2014/06/03/0dfb13ac-eb11-11e3-9f5c-9075d5508f0a_story.html[/QUOTE]
Sigh. EXACTLY what I was saying in my thread. Kelso won the Jockey Gold Cup when it was 2 miles and set a record in the last one when he was 7 yrs old. The times quoted in this article for the Belmont states the times are getting slower & slower for any serious distance.
But even in the mile & less category, only 2 records have been set in 2005; none since then.
And it gets really scary when you look at records of 1 mile +. The record for a mile was set in 1968 by Dr. Fager and it still stands. All the rest of the records up to 2 miles were set from 1950âs to 1980âs. ONE was set in 1991.
In order to shore up an already sinking racing industry, they will keep dumbing down the races and itâs really too bad.
From the Guiness book of world records
âThe highest race speed recorded over two furlongs is 70.76 km/h (43.97 mph) and was achieved by Winning Brew trained by Francis Vitale (United States), at the Penn National Race Course, Grantville, Pennsylvania, United States, on 14 May 2008. Winning Brew covered the quarter-mile (402 m, 2 furlongs) in 20.57 sec. She is a 2 year old filly thoroughbred.â
iâm not sure exactly how up-to-date the records on-line are.
Remember that racing is a competition between horses and they only need to go fast enough to beat the competition, not go for a record time.
And letâs face it most horses retire to the breeding shed if they are any good in their 3 year old year at the max of a classic distance of a mile. Or less.
Real sprinting speed is not sustainable over a long course, as is obvious by looking at the splits for each furlong in the longer races.
For that matter, the high jump record was set more than a few decades ago, despite puissance classes being held to this dayâŠ
Surely you arenât saying the WB has âdeclinedâ due to that data?
While it is true Dr Fager holds the record, It has been approached in more recent times; and by a 3 year old 1989:
âEasy Goer won the one mile Grade II Gotham Stakes by thirteen lengths in record time while conceding nine pounds and five pounds to the second and third place finishers respectively, including future world record holder (on turf at one mile) Expensive Decision.
won handily and his winning time of 1:32 2/5 for the mile set a new track record, a second faster than Secretariatâs stakes record, the fastest mile on a dirt surface by any three-year-old Thoroughbred in history, and a fifth of a second off Dr. Fagerâs world record.â
[QUOTE=stoicfish;8119415]
I think part of the issue with Tbâs is that the talented ones do not necessarily have the depth of pedigree or the consolidation of genetics to be able to be great breeding horses, like Ladykiller xx who was very strong genetically.
And this is not because they are not wonderful horses but because they are not being bred for it. âŠ
Pointing out all the Tbâs that are the exception in competition is pointless, unless there was several in the same family that were also talented. That is the difference of a F1 animal and a good breeding pedigree. This is as true of Wbâs also, many great jumpers did not turn out to be great sires.[/QUOTE]
First of all, the TB as a genetically consistent animal is considered to be quite highly inbred: inbreeding concentrates genes in the sense of the probability of being able to pass on groups of like genes to the offspring or homozygousity.
I agree, Thoroughbreds are not being bred for/from show jumping-proven stock in the majority of cases. Ladykiller himself was not of showjumping stock and was said to be chosen âon looksâ; not the ideal selection process for an outcross sire. Selecting a TB as sire that has proven itself or offspring in GP Jumping might be a better idea.
There is a huge gulf between testing all offspring of a horse in discipline J and saying bb% are good at J and that is significantâŠ
âŠand NOT testing any but 1 offspring of a horse in discipline J and saying .0001% are good at J and so dismiss that horse as a fluke.
If you try 2 and 2 are successful, that is a very good percentage and might make one want to look for #3 of that sireâs get as another potential J discipline prospect or look at the sire as a possible outcross even though not âbred for discipline Jâ as the genes have proven to be there serendipitously and a good breeder ought to be able to consolidate that into an existing J breeding program.
F1s are by definition first outcross of distinct breeds or bloodlines. F1 are not found within the TB breed: that book is long closed. A TB that can do well in discipline J is not an f1; it is an example of a long chain of already existing genes brought into use by a trainer/rider.
[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;8119773]
First of all, the TB as a genetically consistent animal is considered to be quite highly inbred: inbreeding concentrates genes in the sense of the probability of being able to pass on groups of like genes to the offspring or homozygousity.
I agree, Thoroughbreds are not being bred for/from show jumping-proven stock in the majority of cases. Ladykiller himself was not of showjumping stock and was said to be chosen âon looksâ; not the ideal selection process for an outcross sire. Selecting a TB as sire that has proven itself or offspring in GP Jumping might be a better idea.
There is a huge gulf between testing all offspring of a horse in discipline J and saying bb% are good at J and that is significantâŠ
âŠand NOT testing any but 1 offspring of a horse in discipline J and saying .0001% are good at J and so dismiss that horse as a fluke.
If you try 2 and 2 are successful, that is a very good percentage and might make one want to look for #3 of that sireâs get as another potential J discipline prospect or look at the sire as a possible outcross even though not âbred for discipline Jâ as the genes have proven to be there serendipitously and a good breeder ought to be able to consolidate that into an existing J breeding program.
F1s are by definition first outcross of distinct breeds or bloodlines. F1 are not found within the TB breed: that book is long closed. A TB that can do well in discipline J is not an f1; it is an example of a long chain of already existing genes brought into use by a trainer/rider.[/QUOTE]
I know everyone didnât get a minor in genetics but you might want to be more open minded about others opinions.
F1 just mean First generation. A F1 hybrid is a cross. So of course you can have an F1 in a breed. I was using it to define a horse that is the first generation to display a skill set not previously bred for. http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/f1%20generation Think characteristics instead of âbreedsâ, which are just a grouping of characteristics. Fruit fly experimentsâŠ
And just because TB is a breed, doesnât mean the genetics are uniform. Obviously they are not or you could interchange a NH horse with a sprinter and such. Or they would all have similar speed and enduranceâŠand they donât.
Obviously a 500k stud fee, they think some horses have different genes than others.
LK âmightâ have been chosen originally on looks but he was tested before he was widely used and he was the one that made the cut unlike many others that went through a similar process and didnât make the cut.
PS-did you know there is more genetic variation within the human âracesâ than between? That we tend to judge genetics on traits we ânoticeâ and assume they make up the majority of the differences.
Ummm what?
Human races are a folly that has been discredited, and I really donât know what random-bred humans have to do with very restricted domestic animal breeding.
" the first generation produced by a cross and consisting of individuals heterozygous for characters in which the parents differ and are homozygous
We are not counting Mendelâs peas, here.
Is it your contention that WB are homozygous for certain genes affecting sport while TBs are homozygous for certain other genes affecting sport?
Or that certain TBs are homozygous for genetic characters affecting racing while others are homozygous for other characters (that they have been âbred forâ)?
Iâd love to see backup for that.
And I disagree with having a F1 âin a breedâ.
F1s are to create new breeds by bringing in genetic variation not present in the discrete parent stocks, or more often found in the âoutcross parentâ stock.
Within breeds, people speak of ânicksâ, families,bloodlines and outcrossing within a breed.
Well, I guess I ought to put in the yabbut: closed breeds vs. open registry breeds
If you want to have an F1 Holsteiner x Kwpn where the bloodline origins are different and you then create an f1 Holsteiner I wonât argue with that.
inbreeding in TB is a bit closer, though.
http://www.horsetalk.co.nz/news/2012/01/230.shtml#axzz3YAQSRrUx
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22486509
[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;8119917]
Ummm what?
Human races are a folly that has been discredited, and I really donât know what random-bred humans have to do with very restricted domestic animal breeding.
" the first generation produced by a cross and consisting of individuals heterozygous for characters in which the parents differ and are homozygous
We are not counting Mendelâs peas, here.
Is it your contention that WB are homozygous for certain genes affecting sport while TBs are homozygous for certain other genes affecting sport?
Or that certain TBs are homozygous for genetic characters affecting racing while others are homozygous for other characters (that they have been âbred forâ)?
Iâd love to see backup for that.[/QUOTE]
No, that is your creation but I am saying that if you use certain Wb horses you will have a much higher chance of getting the characteristics you are looking for because they have been bred for it. And Tb are faster because they have been bred for it and have a higher rate of carrying genes that are beneficial for that sport.
And in my University genetics classes we used used F1 in an experiments to denote the first generation of a multigenerational experiment. With the definition I gave. Nothing to do with Mendel and peas.
Did your University genetics class use the term differently?
Or are you using the version that gets tossed around on COTH.
PS actually letâs not waste everyoneâs time by channeling GAP. If you want to discuss definitions, PM me.
