I haven’t been on here in a few days (started a new job this week) and was surprised to find so many threads discussing potential matings in an attempt to control color genetics.
When we’re breeding sport horses, shouldn’t color be the least of our concerns?
And is there any potential danger in selecting breeding stock for color or markings over other factors?
Hardly “so many”. But in answer to your question, I prefer to assume that people have already considered the things that are more important than color, and still would like to know what color they may get, or perhaps influence the color if possible. When I was breeding, I was actually a color breeder – Paints – but I absolutely made sure the other factors were in place. Assuming otherwise about someone is a little presumptuous. and if I’m wrong, and color is the first factor, I doubt anything I say is going to make a difference! 
As tough as the market is I think “most” people are well aware that quality has to come first, then color. Plus with all the advances that have been made in genetic testing for colors, it is “pretty easy” now to breed for the color you’d like.
And there are buyers out there who want something a little different.
If all the other considerations have been made to maximize the health, conformation, and useability factors of the potential foal, there’s not a thing wrong to then consider what stallion is the best match for the mare to do all that and also “put the pretty on.”
It really hasn’t been that many threads It’s a breeding forum, it’s time for breeding decisions to be made. Some are merely curious as to what they might expect. Some have equal choices of pairings and would like the best odds of producing a color they either like better, or feel would sell better. No harm
And is there any potential danger in selecting breeding stock for color or markings over other factors?
Of course, and that’s exactly what happened in the APHA and Tobiano pattern - the pattern was chosen first, and it resulted in a lot of sub-par Tobi breeding stock. Ask almost anyone “find me a good Tobiano APHA stallion” and it’s hard. Ask about Tobi in general and many will laugh and say “there aren’t any good ones in the breed”. Not entirely true, but it’s a valid reputation. I do think that’s slowly changing though.
There’s danger in selecting for any single trait over any other, because no matter how good/desirable that one trait is, it blinds you to the downsides of what else is coming along. Select strictly for temperament (a common backyard breeding mentality) and it won’t be long before you have a lot of badly conformed horses.
the first thing you notice about anything, i think, is the color. your eyes are instinctively drawn to specific colors and patterns - thanks to a millennia of hunting prey and gathering.
and so, it is a driving force in sales, marketing, advertising. it perpetuates every market, from toothbrushes to guinea pigs. patterns are important - they are pretty - they are unique and memorable.
so long as the other homework was done (quality product) what’s the shame in having a pretty thing?
~ signed,
an unrepentant plain bay lover
OP, I was amazed to find out that people actually breed for color before conformation and performance. I never heard the term Krazy Kolor Breeder except on CoTH. But then I realized that is what one A circuit barn owner thought I believed when I was looking for a horse. I told him no, but after I got conformation and performance and breeding, I did have a color preference. I agree with you OP, that color should be way down the list of what a person should breed horses for. Bling does not compensate for conformation and performance and breeding.
Except that people will buy a horse just for the color if they do not know conformation. Then they wonder why their horses do not win in shows.
btw, I bought a horse that was not the color I preferred. Then I bought another horse that was the color I wanted to avoid. Both horses had great conformation and bloodlines and people at barns all wanted horses just like them.
Ultimately, a breeder needs to be able to sell their babies. And color sells. So many people don’t want a chestnut. Or a gray. Black sells. Bay with bling sells. Pinto sells. Hot name flavor-of-the-day sire sells.
I would hope most breeders focus FIRST on conformation, temperament, and athletic ability, THEN look at the less important qualities that still affect marketability - like color.
When I was breeding, my pinto foals always sold first. Luckily, they were mostly pretty fancy, but I found people more interested in them then the plain ol’ bay (my personal riding horse is a bay with NO white markings at all).
I have color preferences. Denying it would be like saying that I don’t care what color my car/house/clothes are. We should not all have to drive white cars and ride brown horses.
Well to be honest, I’m wondering what color I will get!
Minimal white bay (1 bay parent, one chestnut–both minimal white) to a liver chestnut. I could see a plain chestnut (so no, I was NOT breeding for color) and to be honest, that would not be my first choice (give me a blaze or something please). I think it’s natural to start wondering about these things as the mares really start to show. 
Unrelated, but I’ve always been attracted to a QH red roan with a true black mane and tail. Or a chestnut with four white socks and a blaze. I imagine everyone has a favorite color.
A bay with a bay and chestnut parent means the bay is Ee, though the Agouti status is unknown. Bred to chestnut, it’s a 50/50 chance at a chestnut, then either 25% chance each of black or bay/brown, or 50% chance black. Whether you’d get liver in the chestnut is unknown, since we can’t see the “liver genetics” of the bay.
Red roan is a chestnut roan, so no black mane/tail That would be a bay roan. But yeah, pretty snazzy I agree.
[QUOTE=DarkBayUnicorn;8505811]
I haven’t been on here in a few days (started a new job this week) and was surprised to find so many threads discussing potential matings in an attempt to control color genetics.
When we’re breeding sport horses, shouldn’t color be the least of our concerns?
And is there any potential danger in selecting breeding stock for color or markings over other factors?[/QUOTE]
It should be but people are wacked and so many are clueless about genetics.
If you want to see insanity, get around some Paint people.
[QUOTE=JB;8506561]
Red roan is a chestnut roan, so no black mane/tail That would be a bay roan. But yeah, pretty snazzy I agree.[/QUOTE]
Duh, that makes sense.
Runs off to look up the word Agouti…
Yes, color is one of the many factors that goes into breeding. I happen to be involved in a breed that has a lot of color in it and you can not use any breeding stock other than bay, chestnut and black (Knabstrupper/KNN). I did not know that at one time and almost made a huge mistake (I wanted a dilute resulting foal). Everything goes into consideration when breeding… EVERYTHING
I got color as an added bonus. I really liked the stallion that I bred to (Saphiro) and knew that I would get a buckskin with a bay mare (no red gene in her). Saphiro is a perfect match with my mare conformationally and I am in total love with the filly that I got out of the cross. I could easily sell her at this point, but she was bred not for resale, she is 3rd generation mare line for me and quite treasured.
Buckskin happens to be the only color that really turns me on, in fact I tend to have plain bays usually. I do have a couple of chestnuts scattered in. One color I never want is a gray and I will never breed to a gray because of this.
And if your favorite color is plain minimal bay, aren’t you drawn to stallions that happen to be bay? And don’t you look past the good performing Chestnut or Gray sire, or the high socks and big blaze? Even finding something ‘not right’ in their pedigree to justify your plain bay choice?
K-k-k-krazy kolor breeding, folks.
While we are on the ‘appearances’ subject:
How many prefer a certain head type or profile and think less of horses with ‘other’ types of head.
-Because we ride the head, right?
Face it, humans are fickle and visual responders.
Fortunately the horses don’t seem to care or perform poorly just because they aren’t tops in the fashionable looks department.
and then there was my bay mare, bred to a brown stallion (?, or dark bay - Zarr) who had a bay, a chestnut and then a bay with pinto markings (big old white boot of Italy across his side). Didn’t breed for color but I sure love them (and they are purty, score!)
Caveat- my most athletic, best jumping mare is the one many people overlook because she is a plain bay. They get all caught up in all the chrome on my others.
[QUOTE=DarkBayUnicorn;8505811]
I haven’t been on here in a few days (started a new job this week) and was surprised to find so many threads discussing potential matings in an attempt to control color genetics.
When we’re breeding sport horses, shouldn’t color be the least of our concerns?
And is there any potential danger in selecting breeding stock for color or markings over other factors?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;8507165]And if your favorite color is plain minimal bay, aren’t you drawn to stallions that happen to be bay? And don’t you look past the good performing Chestnut or Gray sire, or the high socks and big blaze? Even finding something ‘not right’ in their pedigree to justify your plain bay choice?
K-k-k-krazy kolor breeding, folks.[/QUOTE]
Nope. I love bays…love them. Picked some chestnut stallions because of all the other reasons. If I ever had a favorite horse that happened to be chestnut…I would probably be attracted to chestnuts.
Bay happens to be my favorite color, and I used to dislike blingy white markings and high leg white, or actually any leg white.
However, over the decades I have bought a dilute black, a chestnut, a grey, even a (gasp) pinto.
All good riding horses because that was the primary selection criteria.
But I still, I do admire a good rich bay.
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
