US Olympic Trials: less than perfect conformation doesn't matter at the top

[oneyequine]

[QUOTE=RyTimMick;6394302]
All due respect, but the vast majority of Racing sires retired before they even hit maturity. Why do you think the eventing world who has used mostly TB’s are the ones that complain about soundness. It is because they are stuck with the results of breeding that was intended for being successful at 2, not 8 or 10 or 16. I would not use the TB breed industry as a testiment on how to breed sound horses.

Tim[/QUOTE]

blah blah blah…

[grayarabpony]

@RyTimMick;6394291

You too quickly disregard the dam, who rarely is a top performer, because she never gets the opportunity to perform.

I don’t see anyone disregarding the mare here, and the mare doesn’t have to be a top performer. She just needs to be capable of being a very good performer. It’s up to the breeder to determine her quality before turning her into a broodmare.

It’s already been noted that talented horses are not always the best producers. Or need to be crossed to a particular type of horse. Neverthess, if a horse doesn’t have it (whatever quality you’re looking for), they can’t pass it on. That’s the very basic point I’m trying to make here.

As far as which stallions are the best producers – in reality there’s more to the situation than just the ability to be a producer. In most registries the “flavor du jour” is a big factor (after all, everyone wants to be successful!), and this determines the mare base a stallion gets. No doubt there are stallions who may not rank at the top in a particular year but whose influence continues to shine through in further generations.

[RyTimMick]

Hi GAP,

I would argue that they need to have it, to give it. Phenotype is the expression of 1/2 the genes in the Genotype. The half they choose to give, the haploid, when mixed with the haploid of the other horse creates a unique mixture of the two. During this joining of genomes, different expressions may be opened up and others closed. So the children don’t always look like the parents, more often then not they look like the grandparents. So yes, what you are looking for must be there in one way shape or form ie: quickness, power, etc., but it doesn’t have to be expressed in the individual standing in front of you to be there.

In addition, we do not ask everything from our stallions. We only ask them to improve a few things, and let our mare do the rest. So when a stallion is known for bringing blood, but maybe hasn’t competed at the top of the sport, and my mare only needs blood, then that stallion might be the best choice for my mare. So we don’t necessarily need the whole package, just the items we are looking for.

So when I look for a stallion, I try to choose stallions that are both inheritors and progenitors, but the latter is the most important. So when breeders choose Cassini II, who was injured and not able to compete, then they are doing so because of how he breeds and nothing more. When breeders see 100 or so good Connor’s on the ground out of mares like their own, they pick him because of the way he breeds. He wasn’t chosen because he was a good performer, although he now appears to be that too. That is after the fact though.

It is much easier to tell someone why a stallion is a good breeder after they have bred many mares, then to predict if they will be a good breeder because they jumped at the top of the sport. I say make it easy.

Tim

[grayarabpony]

[QUOTE=RyTimMick;6395420]
Hi GAP,

I would argue that they need to have it, to give it. Phenotype is the expression of 1/2 the genes in the Genotype. The half they choose to give, the haploid, when mixed with the haploid of the other horse creates a unique mixture of the two. During this joining of genomes, different expressions may be opened up and others closed. So the children don’t always look like the parents, more often then not they look like the grandparents. So yes, what you are looking for must be there in one way shape or form ie: quickness, power, etc., but it doesn’t have to be expressed in the individual standing in front of you to be there.

In addition, we do not ask everything from our stallions. We only ask them to improve a few things, and let our mare do the rest. So when a stallion is known for bringing blood, but maybe hasn’t competed at the top of the sport, and my mare only needs blood, then that stallion might be the best choice for my mare. So we don’t necessarily need the whole package, just the items we are looking for.

So when I look for a stallion, I try to choose stallions that are both inheritors and progenitors, but the latter is the most important. So when breeders choose Cassini II, who was injured and not able to compete, then they are doing so because of how he breeds and nothing more. When breeders see 100 or so good Connor’s on the ground out of mares like their own, they pick him because of the way he breeds. He wasn’t chosen because he was a good performer, although he now appears to be that too. That is after the fact though.

It is much easier to tell someone why a stallion is a good breeder after they have bred many mares, then to predict if they will be a good breeder because they jumped at the top of the sport. I say make it easy.

Tim[/QUOTE]

These statements in bold contradict each other and don’t really make sense according to how genetics works, unless you are speaking of qualities that are recessive. (And more likely in horses that are highly inbred, since an individual only shares 25% of a grandparent’s genes.) Power, quickness etc would have to be controlled by recessive alleles. Do most breeders believe this to be the case?

Naturally pick the best match for your mare, which may not be the stallion that won the WEG. I think we agree there.