Registration options for foals of cloned stallions.

[bornfreenowexpensive]

@JB;5598885

But you can’t train great performance if the genetics aren’t there, and it’s easy to stifle or ruin great performance with the wrong training.

I guess I disagree. I’ve seen outstanding performance results from nothing more than average horses when they were in the hands of above average riders and trainers.

Many people think that the horses were superior when those of us that knew those horses knew that they really were not all that special (not bad horses, just not outstanding) and in someone else’s hands, the results would not have been as good. And I’ve seen the opposite…outstanding horses whose performance results never reached their potential because of whose hands were guiding the reins.

[grayarabpony]

@bornfreenowexpensive;5598902

I guess I disagree. I’ve seen outstanding performance results from nothing more than average horses when they were in the hands of above average riders and trainers.

Who would that be? Can you give examples?

@bornfreenowexpensive;5598902

Many people think that the horses were superior when those of us that knew those horses knew that they really were not all that special (not bad horses, just not outstanding) and in someone elses hands, the results would not have been as good. And I’ve seen the opposite…outstanding horses whose performance results never reached their potential because of whose hands were guiding the reins.

A horse can’t be at the top of international sport for a long time and not be outstanding in a lot of ways. They have to be talented. Not saying that you’d want to breed every winning event horse (however), but the sports horses that have been cloned so far have had very impressive performance records.

Cloning could be a good tool for horses that were very talented that couldn’t produce (gelding) and have different bloodlines from the rest. Like Gem Twist. ET for his jumping lines (it doesn’t seem the E jumping lines are very prominent anymore at the top of the jumping sport??). Esprit FRH would have been a good one too…

[bornfreenowexpensive]

@grayarabpony;5599029

Who would that be? Can you give examples?

A horse can’t be at the top of international sport for a long time and not be outstanding in a lot of ways. They have to be talented. Not saying that you’d want to breed every winning event horse (however), but the sports horses that have been cloned so far have had very impressive performance records.

Cloning could be a good tool for horses that were very talented that couldn’t produce (gelding) and have different bloodlines from the rest. Like Gem Twist. ET for his jumping lines (it doesn’t seem the E jumping lines are very prominent anymore at the top of the jumping sport??). Esprit FRH would have been a good one too…

No, I’m not going to post the names on a public forum. But it is one of the reasons (although there can be many others) you will see a horse at the top of the field…sold…and not heard from again…or why one can’t be sold. John Q. Public doesn’t know it all. I’m often amazed at what the public puts on a pedestal.

My point was just I could understand the reasoning and see the benefit from performance testing a clone.

[JB]

@bornfreenowexpensive;5598902

I guess I disagree. I’ve seen outstanding performance results from nothing more than average horses when they were in the hands of above average riders and trainers.

What makes you think they were average though? Not all horses perform well for average riders. Popeye K did VERY well with a professional rider. His ammy/owner, not so well, at least not to start.

Many people think that the horses were superior when those of us that knew those horses knew that they really were not all that special (not bad horses, just not outstanding) and in someone else’s hands, the results would not have been as good.

You can’t squeeze blood out of a turnip though

And I’ve seen the opposite…outstanding horses whose performance results never reached their potential because of whose hands were guiding the reins.

That’s what I said

[grayarabpony]

[QUOTE=bornfreenowexpensive;5599061]
No, I’m not going to post the names on a public forum. But it is one of the reasons (although there can be many others) you will see a horse at the top of the field…sold…and not heard from again…or why one can’t be sold. John Q. Public doesn’t know it all. I’m often amazed at what the public puts on a pedestal. [/QUOTE]

OK, that’s sort of wierd that you won’t post an opinion of a performance horse… but you can’t take an average horse and run it around 4* level, or jump a 1.4 -1.6 m course, or compete successfully at GP dressage. No rider is that magical.

@bornfreenowexpensive;5599061

My point was just I could understand the reasoning and see the benefit from performance testing a clone.

The performance genetics of the clone have already been proven by the original. The only real concern should be about the offspring.

[MunchkinsMom]

[QUOTE=bornfreenowexpensive;5598597]
What may be interesting in requiring perfomance by the clones is to really show what is genetics…and what is environment (i.e. training and riding).

Some clones will obviously be in a similar training program as the original…but it will not be exactly the same.

I think it may say a lot as to what is genetic with the clone (and will possibly be passed on) if they show the same/similar performance levels as the original. I wouldn’t expect them to be risked as much…but I do see the value in requiring the clone to show performance levels as that may indicate that the original was good/great in large part because of their genetics (shared by the clone) and not just because it was well trained and well ridden.[/QUOTE]

I recall reading an article somewhere about some cloned mules, I think they were racing mules or something like that, and how they were tested as to speed, and came up very close. I’ll have to go find it.

Found it:

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/news/story?id=2469720

This was an interesting take on clones also:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/33681/cloned-mules-to-square-off-in-california-fair-race

[bornfreenowexpensive]

@JB;5599226

What makes you think they were average though? Not all horses perform well for average riders. Popeye K did VERY well with a professional rider. His ammy/owner, not so well, at least not to start.

You can’t squeeze blood out of a turnip though

That’s what I said

I thought they were average based on sitting on them and based on the opinion of the rider competing them.

But then again…my definition of average may not be everyone’s definintion;) Don’t get me wrong…these were not turnips by any means but just not as talented/special as the general public seemed to think. The riders made them special.

Please note that I have known some truly special horses…Gem Twist was one of them. (and if I have the right mare for him…I’m very interested in his clone)

And Gray…no it is not weird that I don’t want to spill opinions based on inside information on horses that are or were competing on a forum such as this. It is called having tact. And that information isn’t necessary for my point that I can see the beneficial use of performance testing a clone. I think there can be more insight gained as to the strength of the genetics v. the training. But the REAL proof and REAL importance would be in the offspring anyway.

[JB]

@bornfreenowexpensive;5599409

But the REAL proof and REAL importance would be in the offspring anyway.

And this we can definitely agree on

[grayarabpony]

[QUOTE=bornfreenowexpensive;5599409]
I thought they were average based on sitting on them and based on the opinion of the rider competing them.

But then again…my definition of average may not be everyone’s definintion;) Don’t get me wrong…these were not turnips by any means but just not as talented/special as the general public seemed to think. The riders made them special.[/QUOTE]

OK then, let’s take your average GP horse, such as one that wins a GP such as the Duke Children’s Classic.

Such a horse would probably have to literally swim through an Olympic course, unless he finds the course at the Duke Children’s Classic to be a walk in the park. The scope that is asked for at the very top level is in a different ballpark.

[QUOTE=bornfreenowexpensive;5599409]
Please note that I have known some truly special horses…Gem Twist was one of them. (and if I have the right mare for him…I’m very interested in his clone)

And Gray…no it is not weird that I don’t want to spill opinions based on inside information on horses that are or were competing on a forum such as this. It is called having tact. And that information isn’t necessary for my point that I can see the beneficial use of performance testing a clone. I think there can be more insight gained as to the strength of the genetics v. the training. But the REAL proof and REAL importance would be in the offspring anyway.[/QUOTE]

Or it’s called being evasive. Sorry but your posts don’t make a whole lot of sense to me. A rider can’t spirit a horse over a fence, keep him sound etc. A good horse can be undone by bad management but a good rider can’t make an average horse into a star. I don’t care how good that rider is. A pair might click to create something very special, but put that rider on a less talented horse and watch the fences come down.

The problem with the performance testing of a clone is that there is going to be more to differ between the clone and the original than just training. A freak accident, for example. That could hamper any horse’s ability.

If you think the real proof is in the offspring why bother performance testing the clone? After all the genetics HAVE already been proven.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on this point too.

[buschkn]

@grayarabpony;5599572

Sorry but your posts don’t make a whole lot of sense to me. A rider can’t spirit a horse over a fence, keep him sound etc. A good horse can be undone by bad management but a good rider can’t make an average horse into a star. I don’t care how good that rider is. A pair might click to create something very special, but put that rider on a less talented horse and watch the fences come down.

I am with BFNE. A super rider can do a LOT with a horse that other people couldn’t even dream of. Obviously said rider can’t take any old nag out of a field and win Olympic gold, but you’d be surprised what a talented person can do with a horse. A horse that may appear extremely talented or may have a lot of competitive success, might not be as much the “whole package” as it would appear on the surface.

I have had the privilege of sitting on some very talented UL horses, and some of the most successful were not the most talented. And like BFNE, I DO think it is tactful, not evasive, to not mention names on a public forum, especially so when this is a general discussion, not a discussion of anyone specific.

I guess I would liken this to people. You could have someone with an IQ of 150 who was raised by wolves get their arse handed to them in a contest of intellect by someone with an IQ of 110 who had always had fantastic teachers.

Let’s use GAP’s example- A competitive and relatively scopey horse that can jump around a national standard GP course but for whom it isn’t a complete “walk in the park”. Put me on him, a good rider but very rusty over the bigger sticks anymore, and we might get around, but would probably swim through the Duke GP. Put Phillipe LeJeune on him, and he could probably jump around an Olympic course.

Anyway, I guess I am not sure if it’s even relevant anymore to the OP, but I would say, to me, I would like to see basic movement and athleticism exhibited by clones prior to breeding, such as free movement and free jumping, but it wouldn’t bother me if nobody ever threw a saddle over them. The genes are what they are cloned for, usually.

The offspring will be the only ones who can tell the story we want to hear.

[grayarabpony]

[QUOTE=buschkn;5599714]

I have had the privilege of sitting on some very talented UL horses, and some of the most successful were not the most talented. And like BFNE, I DO think it is tactful, not evasive, to not mention names on a public forum, especially so when this is a general discussion, not a discussion of anyone specific. [/QUOTE]

Whatever… some of the most successful are still going to be very talented. And success is due to a total package, not just a specific ability. I think most people are aware of that. For those who say “heart” can’t be cloned, who knows? If personality and rideability have strong genetic components, well heart is part of that.

@buschkn;5599714

I guess I would liken this to people. You could have someone with an IQ of 150 who was raised by wolves get their arse handed to them in a contest of intellect by someone with an IQ of 110 who had always had fantastic teachers.

Poor example. A jumping course is not just an IQ test, but an athletic endeavor. An IQ test is not solving a complex problem in physics, or the Olympic games. Your example would be more relevant to a 3’6" or 4’ course.

[QUOTE=buschkn;5599714]
Let’s use GAP’s example- A competitive and relatively scopey horse that can jump around a national standard GP course but for whom it isn’t a complete “walk in the park”. Put me on him, a good rider but very rusty over the bigger sticks anymore, and we might get around, but would probably swim through the Duke GP. Put Phillipe LeJeune on him, and he could probably jump around an Olympic course. [\QUOTE]

With a bunch of faults… you can’t make scope out of air. Especially when you add all of the rounds together. Some of those Olympic and WEG combinations are huge! There was a triple in Sydney that only 3 horses made it across. The gold medal winner and Baloubet du Rouet were not among them.

I get the point of the most talented jumper not always winning… but think that everyone acknowledges that a good jumper is more than his straight jumping ability to jump a big fence… carefulness, smarts, try, rideability, the horse needs all of that. What I’m saying is that you still need a good amount of talent to success at the very top… certainly better than average.

[QUOTE=buschkn;5599714]
The offspring will be the only ones who can tell the story we want to hear.[/QUOTE]

Amen to that.

[Molly_Malone]

Why would you choose a clone over the original if you had the choice? I can see wanting to use a gelding clone or a stallion with zero fertility clone, or a dead stallion with no frozen left, but not otherwise. Unless the clone is $200 a breeding and the original is $5000, say, but as it costs so much to produce a clone that seems an unlikely scenario?

And don’t you think it might drive breeding backwards?

[DownYonder]

But the REAL proof and REAL importance would be in the offspring anyway.

The offspring will be the only ones who can tell the story we want to hear.

And to go back to the OP’s question - are the registries going to be willing to take a chance on licensing the clones when they know it will royally tick off the owners of the original stallion? How long do you think Paul Schockemoehle, for instance, will continue to keep his stallions activated for Oldenburg and Hanoverian breeding, or will put colts forward for licensing/testing, when he knows the registries will license clones of his stallion without any type of inspection/testing?

Sorry, but I think the licensing of clones would be a bad, bad, bad business move by the registries. Maybe for performance proven GELDINGS (as already suggested), but even then I think there would be enormous pushback by the big SOs who own stallions that are close relatives of the gelding.

[grayarabpony]

[QUOTE=DownYonder;5599990]

Sorry, but I think the licensing of clones would be a bad, bad, bad business move by the registries. Maybe for performance proven GELDINGS (as already suggested), but even then I think there would be enormous pushback by the big SOs who own stallions that are close relatives of the gelding.[/QUOTE]

I certainly hope there’s isn’t anything like with Smart Little Lena… it seems every reining horse has SLL in his pedigree already! And there are what, 4 or 5 clones of him…

Cloning would be most useful if it was used to increase diversity… but what are the odds of that happening…

[JB]

I agree - there is zero, none, zilch, point in cloning a stallion who had a zillion kids. No point.

[Equibrit]

COMPLICATED subject.
Harvard Journal of Law and Technology.
http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v19/19HarvJLTech413.pdf

[BC5098]

It costs about $160,000 to clone a horse - and it is not done from pulling out a few mane hairs - it requires a core sample of tissue. It would be virtually impossible to clone a horse you do not own. As to why - for the same reasons stallions are frozen for long term use - if something happens to your stallion, he is still available, genetically , through his clone.

The science is there - the results are to be determined - but why not at least give it a try. Or make the options available for those who do want to try.

[sniplover]

[QUOTE=grayarabpony;5599029]

Cloning could be a good tool for horses that were very talented that couldn’t produce (gelding) and have different bloodlines from the rest. Like Gem Twist. ET for his jumping lines (it doesn’t seem the E jumping lines are very prominent anymore at the top of the jumping sport??). Esprit FRH would have been a good one too…[/QUOTE]

They did clone ET

[grayarabpony]

[QUOTE=sniplover;5602408]
They did clone ET :)[/QUOTE]

I know ET was cloned. Always a fan of that horse, he was so durable and had so much try. I just thought Esprit would have been a nice addition too, if someone wanted to spend the big bucks to do it!

[Tasker]

I know this going to sound terrible but it is only $150,000 to clone a horse…so it is not that much $$$, really. (not saying that I have it lying around in a mattress or anything but…)

ET was cloned, Rusty was cloned…there were some other BN geldings that were in the Olympics that I heard about. Most of them should be getting to breeding age/maturity soon.

There are some upper level event horses that have been cloned a few years back by their rider/owners for their own purposes, not necessarily for breeding.