Jazz is KWPN Horse of the Year for being the top producer of dressage horses. He is sickle-hocked, and produces sickle-hocks.
I’ve seen one Jazz gelding in person and he was a wow mover. And a pro ride.
So maybe sickle hocks have as much relevance as a horse being bay rather than chestnut?
Hickstead
The Verband has certain criteria they adhere to. It is a very small registry in comparison to say, the KWPN. You know the saying, “a little leaven leavens the whole loaf?” That could be applied here.
When the verband takes in a stallion on a experimental basis, he is given a certain number of mares. The resulting foals are looked at and determinations are made.
The Verband is a breed association… not a sporthorse registry.
[QUOTE=tom;3701776]
Reece, by definition every outcross sire the Verband approves and/or enters into a breeding experiment is not a Holsteiner:
Quidam de Revel
Quick Star (certainly no bigger than Hickstead)
Diamant de Semilly
Champion du Lys
Ephebe for Ever (why are so few of you concerned about “too big”?)
Cornet Obolensky
Sandro boy
Stakkato
For Pleasure
etc. etc.
– all not Holsteiners.
So saying that the Verband could not approve Hickstead because he is not a Holsteiner is, well, silly.
Did all these stallions go to Neumuenster for approval? I don’t think so.
The KWPN has one of the strictest inspection regimes in the world and they occasionally recognize/approve stallions that are not presented for approval. If it is good enough for the KWPN maybe the AHHA is not too far off base using this practice on the rare occasion.
What matters with respect to size (and every other characteristic) is not how big a stallion is himself but how big his progeny become; more precisely, for example, is the mean size +/- 2 standard deviations within the band of 16 hand - 16.3 hands.
I am not arguing that Hickstead should be approved. I have already written that reasonable arguments can be made for and against the idea. On a personal level I am indifferent. But most of the reasons given above (not only by you but by some others on this board and on the other boards) for him not to be approved are not sound from the viewpoint of a studbook that need to improve its genetics and occasionally introduce outcross genetics.
Finally, I do not think Dr. Nissen spends a lot of time thinking about the AHHA or worrying about what stallions the AHHA approves. You are making the very loose ties between the Verband and the AHHA appear to be stronger than they really are.[/QUOTE]
This is exactly where I was going with my question - I just did not understand why if other NON Holsteiners are approved why Hickstead would be any different. I truly just wanted to understand - not trying to stir the pot.
However, I did not mean to totally de-rail this thread… sorry about that.
Tom, the Verband takes some stallions on an experimental basis. This is to improve on what we have without changing it too much. Every one of them is carefully evaluated. Whether they come to the Verband or the Verband goes to them… makes no difference. They do not turn a blind eye to any stallion they accept and wouldn’t take them on based on their performance alone.
As for Dr. Nissen… Your interview with him was very good. Very informative. I doubt you know his relationships on a personal level, though. You presume too much.
Probably being picky here, but I would call the Holsteiners a breeding registry, not a breed. Because they do approve outside stallions, they are bringing in those stallions’ genetics, whatever they may be–with SFs that probably means more Arab and TB and even French Trotter. If they cross approve KWPN stallions, that might mean Gelderlander. And they STARTED with Cleveland Bays.
What I don’t quite understand about the size rule is that the final size of anything is as much determined by environmental factors as heredity. What size were Hickstead’s parents and grandparents? Did they throw other small horses?
There probably is an upper limit to the size of horse that can compete in indoor arenas anyway, and there are a lot of indoor shows. What’s needed is “the jump”, power and adjustability. Too big and it just seems to me that you could easily lose the adjustability you need.
From what I can gather (and I am sure others with more knowlege will join in and or correct), size is an historical issue with the holsteiner breed which makes me think (and I was so told) that genetically there is a recessive(?) “small” (short legged?) gene that can pop up making them ever vigilant and aggressive about not encouraging that trait. Not only small stallions are undesirable, but a small mare at inspection will be given a special (undesirable) designation (cant remember the german word) that stays with her even if she later grows three inches and she can never be the mother of a stallion candidate (??). Anyway I am thinking size and perhaps waiting to avoid slow maturing animials may be a specific issue because of the specific more closed gene pool for the holst breed/registry and therefore maybe less of an issue in other breed/registries.
Omare, thank you for your valuable insight.
My question is, why don’t the owners take him to the KWPN for approval? They list him as KWPN, so I would think it just makes sense that would be the first place they would go rather than the AHHA.
Just an observation. My inquiring mind wants to know… what’s up with this? Anyone know?
So maybe sickle hocks have as much relevance as a horse being bay rather than chestnut?
No, what it means is that the studbook is AWARE and they can then strategize that information for better breeding - such as telling breeders to only use “stallion A” with a mare that has very good forelegs", or “use stallion B with mare’s with a lot of blood” or “use stallion C with mares with good movement because he doesn’t improve movement” or “use with mares with size because he throws small.”
well we will see how valuable it is after others are done with it 
I always stand to be corrected and frequently have that happen!
(I have two borderline small nonholst mares myself that I knew, regretably, may not fit on that criteria alone the AHHA main book requirements.)
[QUOTE=tom;3701780]
Terri, Hickstead is approved by the NRPS and the AES and both studbooks require x-rays. The fact that he is not approved by a plethora of other studbooks is probably more a testament to his busy competition schedule, his success in the ring, and the realities of standing a showjumping sire in North America rather than to any defects in the stallion.
Hickstead was exported to Canada early in his international career (as a 7-year-old, if my memory is correct). How many mares would the have gotten in Canada and the USA if he had been promoted and approved by other studbooks? Even if he were 16.3 and a perfect model it probably would not have been worth the effort on the part of the owners.[/QUOTE]
I would love to use him to be honest. I’m really only on about most registries decision in not approving anything which isn’t 16 hands or over. It’s not just Holsteiner, it’s most of the “big” Euro registries.
The horse should be in any major studbook considering his criteria.
And as always, GrayandArab, here’s a big eye roll righ back at you miss know it all breeder who doesn’t breed. I’m sick really of being nice to you and trying to be politically correct while you blast anyone who doesn’t agree with your opinion. Here, here’s another eye roll coming back at you, actually loads of them. Eye roll, eye roll, eye roll. For the love of Pete, get over it all ready.
Terri
I’m sick really of being nice to you and trying to be politically correct while you blast anyone who doesn’t agree with your opinion.
Its not even those that disagree with her - ITS EVERYONE and I’m sick of it too.
I always have to laugh when feeding my mares- it reminds me so much of the Middle School cafeteria drama- “You can’t sit at our table…” etc.
Sometimes BBs conjure similar pictures in my mind.
This has been a MOST useful thread with much information and many insights. Can we keep it at that level - for everyone’s sake?
[QUOTE=tom;3701776]
Reece, by definition every outcross sire the Verband approves and/or enters into a breeding experiment is not a Holsteiner:
Quidam de Revel
Quick Star (certainly no bigger than Hickstead)
Diamant de Semilly
Champion du Lys
Ephebe for Ever (why are so few of you concerned about “too big”?)
Cornet Obolensky
Sandro boy
Stakkato
For Pleasure
etc. etc.
– all not Holsteiners.
So saying that the Verband could not approve Hickstead because he is not a Holsteiner is, well, silly.
Did all these stallions go to Neumuenster for approval? I don’t think so.
The KWPN has one of the strictest inspection regimes in the world and they occasionally recognize/approve stallions that are not presented for approval. If it is good enough for the KWPN maybe the AHHA is not too far off base using this practice on the rare occasion.
What matters with respect to size (and every other characteristic) is not how big a stallion is himself but how big his progeny become; more precisely, for example, is the mean size +/- 2 standard deviations within the band of 16 hand - 16.3 hands.
I am not arguing that Hickstead should be approved. I have already written that reasonable arguments can be made for and against the idea. On a personal level I am indifferent. But most of the reasons given above (not only by you but by some others on this board and on the other boards) for him not to be approved are not sound from the viewpoint of a studbook that need to improve its genetics and occasionally introduce outcross genetics.
Finally, I do not think Dr. Nissen spends a lot of time thinking about the AHHA or worrying about what stallions the AHHA approves. You are making the very loose ties between the Verband and the AHHA appear to be stronger than they really are.[/QUOTE]
Tom , are you just hell bent on twisting my words at every oppurtunity ? I never said that every outcross stallion the Verband approves or enters into the breeding experiment was a Holsteiner.
What I said was… every outcross stallion the Verband APPROVES for breeding is considered as a 100% Holsteiner for the calculation of Holsteiner blood pertinent to AHHA registration.
You twisted my words again when you said " so saying the Holsteiner Verband could not approve Hickstead because he is not a Holsteiner is silly " . What I said was…they WOULD not approve Hickstead because 1) he is tiny , 2) there is no way to evaluate him in a breeding experiment and 3) he is not a Holsteiner ( the latter would not proclude him if they really wanted him, just like it didn’t proclude QDR ).
You said …“if it is good enough for the KWPN”. Tom, he is not approved with the KWPN and I would be surprised if he ever is.
You said " Finally, I do not think Dr. Nissen spends a lot of time thinking about the AHHA or worrying about what stallions the AHHA approves. You are making the very loose ties between the Verband and the AHHA appear to be stronger than they really are "…
Once again Tom , you have no clue as to what you are talking about. You will find out very shortly about what Dr. Nissen and the Holsteiner Verband think about what stallions the AHHA approves. The ties that bind are the name Holsteiner. The Holsteiner Verband is in complete control over what can be called a Holsteiner and what cannot. Stay tuned…we will revisit your last paragraph soon enough and then we will see who is being silly.
The owners list him as KWPN because he IS KWPN. He was born into the KWPN. He will always be a KWPN Dutch Warmblood. He can be nothing else. He is one of the reaosns the KWPN was the number 1 ranked showjumping studbook in 2008. Nothing else is possible, no matter what studbooks he becomes approved by. Remember that I explained this to you about Cornet Obolensky, who will always be a BWP Belgian Warmblood horse no matter what studbooks approve him?
[QUOTE=tom;3690973]
Only certain international shows (basically big shows with big prize money) are counted in the WBFSH/FEI points and rankings. A small 1-star show, and even 2-star shows, are not calculated in the rankings to the best of my memory. There is no grand conspiracy against the US.
The ranking of the marelines is meaningless without a denominator. Some mare familes are huge while others are small. What should be calculated is the number of international competitors per 100 animals.[/QUOTE]
In racing this type of success/offspring is the Proficiency Index. WBs need to the same thing. All of the indeces are skewed to production, and 776 is a huge stamm population wise.
Well then, it stands to reason the KWPN would approve him for breeding, doesn’t it? That hasn’t happened yet, has it? We’re not talking about registration, Tom, we’re talking about APPROVAL.
I will quote you exactly.
Reece wrote in one post on this thread: “The Holsteiner Verband is not going to approve Hickstead for obvious reasons. He is not a Holsteiner.”
Reece wrote in a second post on this thread: “This is the issue though Tom. The Verband would not have approved Hickstead , period. He is not a Holsteiner …”
So at least two times you said the Verband would not approve him because “He is not a Holsteiner.”
Case closed on the allegation that I am twisting your words.
In terms of twisting words, what I said was that the KWPN sometimes, on the rare occasion, approves a stallion it has not inspected. I said it that was a good enough policy for the KWPN it might be a good enough policy for the AHHA, which is certainly in need of more outcross sires and hgh-performance sires then the KWPN. Your post insinuates that I said he is approved KWPN. He is not. I have listed on this board (perhaps) but definitely on two other boards what studbooks he is approvd by. The KWPN was never on my list.
The Holsteiner Verband is in control only to the extent that studbooks in the USA, Australia, etc., which are indpendent studbooks and not daughter studbooks or sister studbooks, cede control or influence to the Verband. The AHHA is governed by its memorandum of association, bylaws, and the governance that comes from the board of directors. Not the Verband’s board, which has no standing, but the AHHA’s board.
Why does it stand to reason that the KWPN would approve him? Because he has KWPN papers? I don’t think that would factor into their decision very much.
In any case, whether or not the KWPN or the Verband takes a particular stallion has no relevance as to whether that stallion could make important contributions to another studbook.
No, they wouldn’t want to be the first to approve their own product? It would seem to me, if he was going to be approved by any of the larger studbooks, it would be his own KWPN. I stress, I am saying it “seems to me.” You are certainly free to have your own opinion but, please try to refrain from trashing other’s opinions.
And, while I’m at it, it may be of some interest to you to know the Verband doesn’t follow the KWPN model, nor does the AHHA. Your words indicate you seem to have some confusion about that.
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
