Spinoff: "Breed the best; ride the rest"

[Bayhawk]

[QUOTE=Hillside H Ranch;7510543]
Well, in all fairness, Cartani was only one of the examples I listed I stand behind my opinion, and while I’m still learning (and probably always will be), I’m happy with what I’m doing, my buyers are happy and as my oldest offspring are just now hitting the ring, time will tell if I’m way off base! Btw, congrats on your recent lovely Casall filly. I think we can all agree that she’s a filly any of us would be proud to produce :)[/QUOTE]

Thanks Liz…you know I’m not beating you up , just discussing a different philosophy. I see foals every year from good performance mares and most of the time they are not as good as from the mares that have been “selected” for breeding and inserted into the stamm.

I did breed an approved stallion from a GP jumping mare but she was from a very good line of mares and not your typical individual freak.

I’m very pleased with the Casall / Canturo / Acorado / Ramiro filly. I was expecting a good foal and got a super foal. Good wishes for your breeding.

[Hillside_H_Ranch]

No, definitely no hard feelings! I always appreciate the input And thank you for the good wishes; I wish you (and all the other breeders here) the same!

[arlosmine]

I am not a breeder, but as a rider I am interested in what goes into producing superior horses.
My question is this:
If a Stallion’s sucess in sport is valued (along with his genetic base) as a predictor of what it is hoped he will pass on, why should that also not hold true for the mare?

Of course a talented “fluke” who is superior in performance, but has undistinguished /wildly disparate lineage would possibly not be approved as a Stallion, so there may be fewer of those individuals ithe stallion pool…but why would one subject mares to a different standard of selection?

In short, my question is this:
Given a mare with a depth of pedigree and a high level sport career, why (based on Bayhawk’s statements) would a breeder pass on this mare as a brood mare?
Further, I consider the statistics to be slanted. If the best mares go to the breeding shed…WE HAVE NO WAY TO KNOW HOW THEY COULD HAVE PERFORMED. I would propose that those fantastic mares kept for breeding could have had equally fantastic performance careers…we will just never know because, unlike a stallion, the mares cannot really do both jobs to the fullest in one lifetime.

Am I missing something here? I don’t get it

[HorseKrazy]

^^^^im with you, on your thoughts. Although I’m a total newbie to breeding- greener than grass. I find this discussion very fascinating. As a rider, I personally would want to ride the best…

[Bachus]

In a breeding world where embryo transfer is becoming more common the chances for international sporthorses are becoming much more interesting. Contender was born 30 years ago the same as with many other stallions. I have have been in Belgium recently and I am going again in the end of this month. I have great respect for one of the most important Warmblood breeders from Europe and maybe even world wide, this man bred Qerly Chin in 1993 and what this mare has produced is crazy; http://www.horsetelex.nl//horses/pedigree/664459 All international jumping horses who have produced and who will produce international jumping horses and good stallions. Times are changing and it is important to understand what is going on. You breed with the best and you ride with the best! I can’t wait to see some of the finest sporthorses during several Global Champions Tour shows!!

[Centerfield_Farm]

Couldn’t agree with Bachus more.

[Ticker]

ET is a game changer I do agree. But, I think the recipe is more like keep the fillies sell the colts since not too many US breeders can promote a stallion with the general lack of support in that area. There are, of course, exceptions.

Many riders are getting very good colts/geldings to ride just because there is a lack of resources to develop some of these colts. Some breeders are selling very very good fillies just because that’s what the foal fairy brings the most of.
I just have to think, on average, it’s more a matter of economics for the breeder as to what they keep and breed and what they have to sell.

[Janeway]

[QUOTE=Bachus;7510798]
In a breeding world where embryo transfer is becoming more common the chances for international sporthorses are becoming much more interesting. Contender was born 30 years ago the same as with many other stallions. I have have been in Belgium recently and I am going again in the end of this month. I have great respect for one of the most important Warmblood breeders from Europe and maybe even world wide, this man bred Qerly Chin in 1993 and what this mare has produced is crazy; http://www.horsetelex.nl//horses/pedigree/664459 All international jumping horses who have produced and who will produce international jumping horses and good stallions. Times are changing and it is important to understand what is going on. You breed with the best and you ride with the best! I can’t wait to see some of the finest sporthorses during several Global Champions Tour shows!![/QUOTE]
I was about to ask about Qerly Chin and how she fit in with the philosophy being discussed. Glad you brought her up! Her daughter Walnut de Muze is one of my favourite all-time mares to watch compete, and she herself has now produced a 1.60 horse!

[showjumpers66]

There are some very nice Grand Prix mares (and stallions) in sport, but most do not have qualities that I would want to reproduce. While it is nice to have breeding stock prove themselves in sport, that is not a guarantee of good production. Some get so caught up in the show record that they don’t look at what it took to get the horse to that level … a great training program and special rider can really make a horse. Nor do they look at the horse as an individual. Character, conformation, correctness, gaits, rideability, natural talent, jumping technique as well as scope, etc. are all things that can be lacking in a horse competing at Grand Prix, so those show results are far from a guarantee that the horse is breeding quality. A breeder should look at the whole picture. Pedigree, family sport results, interior and exterior qualities, and then sport results of the individual should be last.

I recently viewed an in-utero ad for a retired Grand Prix mare in foal to an International Grand Prix stallion. The sire, while successful on the International stage, has not produced much. The mare had a poor jump (inverted, hanging legs) and looked difficult on course. Her canter was an up/down pogo stick. Her conformation was coarse and heavy, with long back and upside down neck. But, she had upper level performance results.

I would much rather have a mare or stallion who is not competing but has siblings, aunts/uncles, offspring, etc. who are successful. This shows me that the family is strong rather than it was a one off occurrence. I want a mare who is exceptional in her type, character, conformation, gaits, pedigree, etc. who is also from a strong family. I would prefer to not waste our special mares in sport as their biggest value is in breeding. That said, we do have two exceptional young mares that are going into sport as Summer’s personal mounts and we will do ETs with those mares. If their offspring are fabulous, the mares will be retired to the herd.

[Donella]

I am struggling to understand why it is assumed that a top performing mare automatically comes from a poor family??

Maybe it is different breeding jumpers but something unsuitable or lacking quality simply is never going to be competitive in today’s GP dressage competitions. Just isn’t going to happen.

[eniskerry]

[QUOTE=Donella;7511141]
I am struggling to understand why it is assumed that a top performing mare automatically comes from a poor family??

Maybe it is different breeding jumpers but something unsuitable or lacking quality simply is never going to be competitive in today’s GP dressage competitions. Just isn’t going to happen.[/QUOTE]

Agreed - it seems like this discussion has polarized into an either/or scenario … as if a horse successful in sport must come from a poor/unproven family not worthy of subsequently breeding. It seems a bit of a chicken or the egg argument to me.

I think to categorically say mares proven in sport aren’t good breeding candidates is an over-generalization. If we’re always striving to improve each generation, and we are ultimately breeding for sport after all, then at some point it seems unavoidable (not to mention a testament to a breeding program) that you’ll have horses successful in both sport and breeding.

[showjumpers66]

It is not that the top performing mares come from a poor family. It is that people assume they are the “best” mares because of their performance. So many of them have conformation faults, lack of type, poor gaits, jumping style, behavioral issues, etc. that should keep them from being used in a breeding program but that is being overlooked because they were in sport. On the flip side, I see breeders doing the exact same thing with pedigrees. You can’t successfully breed on paper alone. I don’t care how the mare was bred, if she lacks quality.

Jumpers are different than dressage in that if you have a scopey horse that is careful, you can still be successful with an unorthodox jumping style. You can have a quick, catty horse with terrible gaits. The right rider can even work around difficult rideability. Yes, jump is heritable, but also in a negative way if you are bringing poor jumping technique to the table.

You want to keep the mare who is the whole package. If you can find one that was also successful in sport, than that is icing on the cake. It is just tough to find them because smart breeders keep them for themselves or they are snatched up by someone when they are young. I always look at the horse first … interior (character, rideability, etc.) and exterior (type, correctness, gaits, etc.) first. If I don’t like what I see, then I don’t go any further. I then look at the motherline family before I look at the entire pedigree. I want to see a good history of upper level jumpers in the first 3 generations. I want to see niches that work. Performance history should come after that.

[showjumpers66]

As a breeder, our eye and feeling for breeding matures and evolves as we go. I have much stricter standards for a mare that enters our program than I did 20 years ago. Breeding goals change with the market as well as competition needs. I think we all need to take into consideration that our view points are going to vary based on this alone.

[Amoroso]

Having stepped back from breeding myself and now buying quality youngsters instead, it is amazing how my perspective has changed. I’m getting foals from a mare that I could probably never have afforded to buy (she is from holland, proven producer from a really good dam that is in the top 250 dressage producing mares). I looked around quite a bit, and chose the farm I’m working with because they have superior mares and they have a proven track record. The fact that their mares really haven’t done much in the way of sport means abosolutely nothing to me because of what the mares are. They are outstanding candidates, no horse is perfect, and they have produced amazing foals.
I agree that people tend to look at a performance record with awe and think it means a superior mare. I don’t feel this is generally correct at all, Europe has been doing the breed the best and ride the rest for years!

[stoicfish]

[QUOTE=arlosmine;7510761]
I am not a breeder, but as a rider I am interested in what goes into producing superior horses.
My question is this:
If a Stallion’s sucess in sport is valued (along with his genetic base) as a predictor of what it is hoped he will pass on, why should that also not hold true for the mare?

Of course a talented “fluke” who is superior in performance, but has undistinguished /wildly disparate lineage would possibly not be approved as a Stallion, so there may be fewer of those individuals ithe stallion pool…but why would one subject mares to a different standard of selection?

In short, my question is this:
Given a mare with a depth of pedigree and a high level sport career, why (based on Bayhawk’s statements) would a breeder pass on this mare as a brood mare?
Further, I consider the statistics to be slanted. If the best mares go to the breeding shed…WE HAVE NO WAY TO KNOW HOW THEY COULD HAVE PERFORMED. I would propose that those fantastic mares kept for breeding could have had equally fantastic performance careers…we will just never know because, unlike a stallion, the mares cannot really do both jobs to the fullest in one lifetime.

Am I missing something here? I don’t get it [/QUOTE]

Right.
A good performing mare may or may not have the pedigree to be a good producing mare, but should not be discredited because they preform.
Honestly, an excellent mare may make her way to the performance ring because someone with money purchased her and used her as such. She should be given a chance.
There is not some sort of difference in genetic material in what constitutes a successful competing mare and a producing mare. Dimorphism does exist in some breeds but you do not want to create that in horses to any great extent. In some breeds the females are carriers of positive traits but they are not expressed except through male offspring. This would be a horrible thing to do to horses as you cut your product in half for sport sales. In other words, the females would not be as good. That is always a risk if you concentrate on the males having the expressed desirable traits. Those brood mares should be able to be competitive, whether they are used or not.

[arlosmine]

Thank you stoicfish! It just seems odd to me to toss a mare with BOTH pedigree and performance into the same “don’t breed” pile with a mare who is an athlete but comes with a questionable pedigree and/or conformation flaws.

[showjumpers66]

Let me pose a what would you do scenario based on an actual mare … would you breed this mare and why?

Mare competed successfully through 1.50 meters in Europe first and then here in the US

Mare has a very nice pedigree with well known sire and dam sire who produce good sport horses

Motherline is nice solid performance line

Mare is long backed, short in leg, old fashioned, heavy bodied, neck is set too deep and low

Carriage horse type trot with a lot of action but no swing or elasticity to her gaits, stiff and hollow in her back, canter is stilted and short strided, does not have a natural / easy lead change

Jump is deer-like with neck upright, back hollow, and legs are not tight or quick

Rideability on course looks difficult with a lot of fussiness in the bridle, drives like a Mac truck as she is very heavy on her forehand

[arlosmine]

Nope. I wouldn’t. Though I would if the mare was bred the same, AND had type, temperament and ridability.
I just see the possibility of some nice mares who were good enough to breed, and somehow were ridden instead. I would think they would perform well, and if they met all the other criteria, would be a good option for breeding when they were done competing due to injury or other reasons.

[stoicfish]

I would try one foal to see if she could pass on the jump and improve some of the other traits.
If she were true to her family lines in all aspects then you would think that her faults are not in the way of her being a 1.5m horse. If her faults are not indicative of her family lines, it is possible she may not pass them on reliably or they are an injury related.
There is not that many horses that can be competitive at 1.5m and if she is not a freak in her family in terms of jumping talent then she is worth trying to improve. IMO

[Foxtrot_s]

But isn’t that the philosophy of Zangersheide - to breed the best jumpers to the best jumpers, without necessarily sticking to a specific breed. Leon Melchoir was criticized for that when he started.

ET changes everything, too.