I saw an App/TB unbroke listed for sale last year … he was a conservative bay with a handsome blanket. About 16.2hh and 4 yrs old. I was itching to buy him (as a resale project) and got talked out of it by 3 different trainers/farm owners in the area; saying I’d never make money on an Appy. Maybe I should start a new thread with a poll … don’t want to hijack here, but that’s the negative energy I was getting at the time.
Not too weird, since he’s mostly WB+TB, but the winner of the Young Event Horse 4 Year Old class at Rebecca Farm last weekend is a Holsteiner/Trakehner/Thoroughbred/Morgan.
There’s an Appaloosa/Standardbred I’m trying to track down due to a friend’s fondness for her sire. Couldn’t believe it when I saw the cross!
[QUOTE=sprite;7689304]
some trakhener/paint…some were nice, some not- the mares chosen more for color than ability or conformation but the stallions approved and talented. Kind of a crapshoot, they were trying to jump on the sport horse of color bandwagon in the cheapest way possible…:([/QUOTE]
This is the reason anyone uses Paints, to get color the cheapest way possible.
[QUOTE=pinecone;7691368]
This is the reason anyone uses Paints, to get color the cheapest way possible.[/QUOTE]
Or maybe to get that ammy friendly disposition and movement for their clients. You know the client who may not want “just” another bay horse.
Really, I find the assumption that just because it is a paint, QH or Appy cross it is NO good, a bit offensive.
We have bred several of these crosses over the years and EVERY SINGLE ONE of them have been very competitive and excellent partners for their owners. One of the pintos was just in a clinic with a BNT, who tried to buy him, and told his owner the horse has tremendous upper level potential.
For the record, the right kind of Appy for use in a Sport horse program is not a cheap horse. We’ve never had anyone offer us a nice Appy for free but get offered TBs and WB mares fairly often for cheap or even free.
I would love to breed a TB to this horse someday: http://www.confettifarms.com/Butterwap%20Confetti.htm
Oh God, please don’t let this thread turn into some kind of “justification” for breeding anything to anything.
One of the big problems of the U.S. based breed registries is that approvals and inspections don’t exist for the most part. Any QH stallion can breed any QH mare and get full papers, for example. Please tell me that most breeders can predict the issues that inevitably arise from this kind of utterly unorganized breeding! Sheesh!
Quarter horses used to be subject to inspections prior to registration. But then there just got to be too many of them.
That said, jdeboer01, crossing tbs with various incarnations of stock horses is nothing new. Just go look at most pedigree of performance APHA, ApHA, AQHA, etc, etc. I don’t think many would suggest those weren’t generally good choices. Those horses are very, very popular, and extremely versatile, whether they are your cup of tea or not.
Too many? That’s not a justification for not holding inspections. In fact, it should have been a financial boon to the registry. Lack of any standard with which to objectively rate a horse’s various attributes is likely what led to to why there became “too many” in the first place.
I wouldn’t argue with you on that. I think it would be fabulous if AQHA went back to inspecting horses prior to registration. I’ll go one further, as I have multiple times on the board and say I wish every WB registry in this country was more selective, particularly when it comes to approving mares for breeding. This will never happen, because of course all registries, with inspections or not, are compelled to register foals and members.
And of course, as a breeder of quality Friesian and Friesian sport horses I’m sure you are just as embarrassed by all the trash being produced on that end 
I’m a wb and welsh pony person, but I don’t feel the need to denigrate other registries such as AQHA by likening them all to back yard trash breeders, any more than I think everyone breeding Friesians is breeding trash.
The North American sister registries of some European WB registries, in particular the GOV and AHA, are extremely discerning with their inspections of foals, mares, and stallions. Stallions must undergo rigorous stallions tests in order to be licensed, or qualify on superior competition results. There are certain registries, however, that have lower standards and are a bit, ummm… less di$cerning with regi$tration requirement$.
How is pointing out the facts “denigrating” another registry? And how am I trashing all QH’s? The true, quality QH’s speak for themselves. If a given stallion is kicking butt in competition, and also has offspring that are successful, shouldn’t that be an indicator of quality? There’s a reason why some QH studs get thousands for a stud fee and others get next to zippo.
Sure I’m embarrassed at all the low-end Friesian crosses out there. That’s the reason why I like to point out that I use approved Warmblood stallions from the the most successful Euro and Euro based registries. I think most people who breed Friesian crosses don’t have an actual breeding goal other than “It’s half fantasy-hairy”, or it’s “half fantasy-hairy in cool colors”. There tends to be a lack of emphasis on serious “sport aptitude”, and oftentimes, a lack of any discernible goal at all (other than $$).
[QUOTE=jdeboer01;7692905]
The North American sister registries of some European WB registries, in particular the GOV and AHA, are extremely discerning with their inspections of foals, mares, and stallions.[/QUOTE]
You mean AHS, not AHA. And I wish all registries, including those, were more selective. I’ve been presenting horses at inspections for 20 years, beginning with AHS. You may not agree with my position, which is cool, but it is my position.
I’m guess confused as to what you are disagreeing with.
2yo filly Irish Draught stallion/ ranchbred QH mare
https://www.facebook.com/pat.orgas/posts/10202533836087148?notif_t=like
[QUOTE=ladyj79;7692922]
You mean AHS, not AHA. And I wish all registries, including those, were more selective. I’ve been presenting horses at inspections for 20 years, beginning with AHS. You may not agree with my position, which is cool, but it is my position.
I’m guess confused as to what you are disagreeing with.[/QUOTE]
Yes, I apologize. I meant the AHS. I’m not “disagreeing” with anything. I’m simply stating that inspections and standards of breeding stock are a GOOD thing, and that it’s in the best interest of breed registries to HAVE standards and goals. When it comes to crossing Friesians, it’s in the best interest of breeders to have consensually established, agreed upon standards and goals to reach for. This is a difficult thing to establish in the Friesian world (although the FSA is doing a great job of trying) because among the main registries, there is so much weight put upon the false idea of “breed purity”.
But no one in anyway stated a position contrary to yours, it was the entire premise of the thread…which no one would gather from your first post, which first implies that this thread is somehow endorsing ridiculous breedings, and does in fact assert that AQHA and its “utterly unorganized breeding” would lead to problems.
It’s kind of funny, because it was in fact the incredibly systematic and premeditating line breeding that caused problems in quarter horses, which is not entirely dissimilar to the problems in Friesian breeding (that whole breed purity thing, which so many registries are prone to…hence outcrosses, for good or bad). I’m sure you and I are much closer in our positions than it might seem from this exchange
[QUOTE=ladyj79;7692969]
It’s kind of funny, because it was in fact the incredibly systematic and premeditating line breeding that caused problems in quarter horses, [/QUOTE]
Yes, and I’d go a step further - in ANY registry, once “halter” classes become the goal, the breed suffers. Arabian, Morgan, QH, any breed where the big bucks are in halter horses means breeders start carefully breeding for caricatures of the original breed.
The old style QH was bred to be a versatile, all-day ride that was sound, sane, quick, athletic, and able to do almost anything.
[QUOTE=NoDQhere;7692167]Or maybe to get that ammy friendly disposition and movement for their clients. You know the client who may not want “just” another bay horse.
Really, I find the assumption that just because it is a paint, QH or Appy cross it is NO good, a bit offensive.
For the record, the right kind of Appy for use in a Sport horse program is not a cheap horse. We’ve never had anyone offer us a nice Appy for free but get offered TBs and WB mares fairly often for cheap or even free.[/QUOTE]
Totally agree - quality horses of all registries are, well, quality. There are other ways to breed cheap color - including some ASB mares, some spotted draft crosses, Mustangs, and most commonly - the grade horse of unknown heritage. Heck, I’ve also had spotted WB mares offered for free - lame or middle-aged and not broke.
There are plenty of breeders out there turning out low quality horses - of ALL types. Not just Friesian crosses. There are also plenty of good quality breeders who are putting their time and research into doing crosses, because, as pointed out by DQ - they want to breed a sport horse with an ammie friendly mind. And sometimes that means adding something to the WB mix. And yes, sometimes the goal is also some fun colors.
There are a lot of “crazy mixes” out there that are successful horses. 
My post was in reference to the exchange between sprite, pinecone and NoDQhere. I fully realize that the intention of the thread was not to endorse ridiculous breedings!
Quote Originally Posted by sprite
some trakhener/paint…some were nice, some not- the mares chosen more for color than ability or conformation but the stallions approved and talented. Kind of a crapshoot, they were trying to jump on the sport horse of color bandwagon in the cheapest way possible…
Quote Originally Posted by pinecone
This is the reason anyone uses Paints, to get color the cheapest way possible.
Quote Originally Posted by NoDQhere
[I]Or maybe to get that ammy friendly disposition and movement for their clients. You know the client who may not want “just” another bay horse.
Really, I find the assumption that just because it is a paint, QH or Appy cross it is NO good, a bit offensive.
We have bred several of these crosses over the years and EVERY SINGLE ONE of them have been very competitive and excellent partners for their owners. One of the pintos was just in a clinic with a BNT, who tried to buy him, and told his owner the horse has tremendous upper level potential.[/I]
I’m sure it’s quite likely! 
Sure, but that doesn’t mean it’s always a good idea to cross them to each other. A cross between a world champion TWH and a world champion Clydesdale is really not a good idea if one is breeding for quality and sales.
But there are many more that are not. 
[QUOTE=jdeboer01;7693595]
Sure, but that doesn’t mean it’s always a good idea to cross them to each other.([/QUOTE]
It is never a good idea to “always” cross or breed anything. As you are well aware, it means going into it with some research, knowledge, and enough money and/or training skills to make whatever you breed (be it Warmblood, Arabian, or Cockapeekapony) a useful citizen. Even when breeding warmbloods (which are suppose to have a level of quality control through inspection and breeding approval), there are plenty of ill conceived breeding programs out there.
But there are people who know what they are doing, and are purposefully breeding crosses for sport or other purposes. If you look at NoDQ’s program, they have several “stock horse” crosses that are nice horses. Cocolalla is another successful program. There are some nice Appy Warmblood crosses bred by a few breeders. I know two breeders who have done very successful Morgan/Tbred crosses. But these are all breeders who went into it educated and prepared. I myself have bred nice quality Friesian crosses, and have gotten good prices for them - but again, with research, education, and willing to put the time and money into getting them trained properly. And of course, using mares and stallions that were quality horses. There are plenty of good breeders out there - and plenty of disasters.
We run into trouble with the person who knows very little about horses, but thinks they are going to get rich breeding beautiful animals. Hahaha, I am sure most on this breeding forum will agree, this is NOT a way to get RICH:eek: And they get in over their heads, don’t know how to handle foals (forget put 3 year olds under saddle), and voila, we have a rescue in the making…
And we’ve all seen it happen - Arabians were the “hot thing” in the 70s, and a few people made big bucks on Arabian halter horses, then everyone jumped on the bandwagon. Then the Paints in the 80s, the Morgans in the 90s, the Warmbloods in the 90s and early 2000s. The hairy horses (Friesians, then Gypsies) in the early 2000s. Now the PREs - I predict the next market to drop out within the next few years. The minute a breed or type gets too popular, everyone is going to make a fortune breeding them, and the market goes to hell.
hand raise I would like a Cockapeekapony, please!
[QUOTE=MysticOakRanch;7693959]
It is never a good idea to “always” cross or breed anything. As you are well aware, it means going into it with some research, knowledge, and enough money and/or training skills to make whatever you breed (be it Warmblood, Arabian, or Cockapeekapony) a useful citizen.
But there are people who know what they are doing, and are purposefully breeding crosses for sport or other purposes. If you look at NoDQ’s program, they have several “stock horse” crosses that are nice horses. Cocolalla is another successful program. There are some nice Appy Warmblood crosses bred by a few breeders. I know two breeders who have done very successful Morgan/Tbred crosses. But these are all breeders who went into it educated and prepared.[/QUOTE]
I think you’re overreacting to my point. You cut off the second half of my quote. Here it is again:
Sure, but that doesn’t mean it’s always a good idea to cross them to each other. A cross between a world champion TWH and a world champion Clydesdale is really not a good idea if one is breeding for quality and sales.
But even then, I’m sure there are people out there who would disagree and insist that, with their extreme knowledge of TWH and Clydesdale pedigrees, they know what they’re doing. They’ll say that when they cross these two, their resulting “Clydewalkers” make great “sport horses”.
I still think it’s a bad idea to cross them though. That’s my opinion. Because to me, it makes no sense to cross non-sport (dressage, jumping) breeds and expect the result to excel at those sports. It’s like mixing yellow and blue, and thinking you’ll get purple.
