So where do--or don't--actual American BREEDS fit?

[pintopiaffe]

Just interested, the answers in two current polls about American Registries seem to not really address this... (well, except for the same couple of us who pop up like pebbles in your shoe ;) )

It's no surprise to any of the regulars that I believe we have very useful American BREED horses who can contribute to the sporthorse endeavors. Some of them (ASB) were quite prevelant at the Olympic level back in the 50's/60's, so yes, they can/have actually reached that level...

But at any rate, where do YOU feel the Morgan, ASB, QH/APHA, Appaloosa, Spanish Colonial, Curly etc. fit in? Crosses of such?

If they make the cut score-performance-conformation-etc. wise, where should they go? Or shouldn't they?

It's OK to say you don't think they have any place at all... that's why I'm *asking* (perhaps should've done an anonymous poll).

I'm being told that *now* AWR will look at some of them. When I approached them a few years ago, was soundly told no way jose, no APHA. (two of the foals were 1/8th APHA I wanted to present.) AWS welcomes them--but not in the highest/approved for breeding book. Both AWR/AWS have their reputation issues... MY issue is that these horses AREN'T necessarily "WB". They're American Sporthorses. I hate to add to the misconception that they are "warmblood" if they are not. (some of course, are WBx-s. )

Many do NOT have half-bred/part-bred registries--one example is I have two 5/8ths Arab horses, but neither are out of a Purebred parent. BOTH parents registered (I)AHA, but they have a one-purebred-parent rule. Another example is say a Trak X Appendix APHA--might only have 1/4 or 1/8 APHA, but that prevents any sort of registration... get where I'm going? I really am not sure how I feel about it--I know I *chose* to do the crosses, *knowing* about the registration issues, but I was a bit more optimistic and naive about inspection for approval for breeding for Euro registries back then. (really, more about the cost than anything. :lol: ) The mare could go RPSI pre-book easily... (sire is RPSI) but I sure would rather have her in something American since she's 5/8 Arab, 1/4 APHA(high % TB) 1/8 ASB.

Thoughts?

[Long Shadow Farm]

I think if you are creating an American Warmblood Registry, then you need to look into allowing some of the American Breeds in it. There are some fancy fancy QH, Paints and Appys out there are are not the traditional stock horse look that would be a benefit to some of the Warmblood breeding. I have seen some really nice QH crosses that clean up but have heck getting registered in any of the warmblood books. Heck..... some of the breeders of the American breeds are breeding for a sport horse look....... why not allow the nice ones who could contribute into an American Warmblood Registry....

Just a thought..........


Bobbi

[Atlantis]

I don't think we need another registry, rather some sort of alliance of existing registries. (I've just posted a lengthy response on the other thread.) This way, there is room for all registries and all breeds under the umbrella of some sort of American conglomerate.

You asked honestly where we see breeds such as Morgan, QH, App, Curlies (?) fitting in, and I can tell you honestly I don't see them fitting into my program anywhere. BUT, that doesn't mean we couldn't pool our resources for things like databases, stallion guides, auctions, and so forth, which could have a place for both my horses/breeds, AND your preferred breeds.

[Tiki]

There are some fancy fancy QH, Paints and Appys out there are are not the traditional stock horse look that would be a benefit to some of the Warmblood breeding. How? Some of the WB registries do let some of these better horses in, but ONLY in the lower books. They have to prove themselves through their get and move their way up over 4 generations. How would they benefit or more to the point improve the WB's in the first generation?
I have seen some really nice QH crosses that clean up At what level? Dressage at Training, First and Second? Amateur Hunter or low level hunters?

The European Warmbloods have been bred to a purpose for years, as have the American breeds. The HUGE difference is in the purpose. QH's work cows, do Western Pleasure, make very nice low level amateur hunters. Morgans are pleasure horses and make very nice carriage driving horses. Some Morgans have made very big strides into 3 phase driving, but I haven't seen any in jumpers or dressage at any significant level. And DON'T point to ONE horse who has. Some Appendix QH's have made it to Training Level eventing. The WB's are even starting to kick butt in the hunter ring. Why take a giant step backwards with something that already works? With the WB's it the few who don't make it to at least some upper level, with the American breeds in the Olympic disciplines it's the few who do. THAT's the BIG difference.

The American breeds CAN make nice amateur, lower level horses. The WB's can take you farther, faster and better. That's what they're bred for. Adding horses that weren't bred for that can only hurt the sport at the upper levels.

[JMurray]

Tiki...

Can you explain this further so I understand your perspective better?

...Adding horses that weren't bred for that can only hurt the sport at the upper levels....

Thanks!

-Jill

[Tiki]

Horses that were bred for other purposes would have a very hard time adding power, lift and elasticity to a WB. I can't imagine how they would improve the breed, but would rather hurt the movement and elasticity, and for some breeds the neck set, and significantly affect their (the cross) ability to be successful at the upper levels. You would wind up with a low to mid level horse. If you tried to push it to the upper levels - as it may be quite trainable - it would more than likely not have the movement to be competitive - even if it could do the test.

[TaliaCristianna]

I'm reminded of an article I read recently on Werner Schockemohle. I'm especially fond of this quote:

"Only 0.5% of horses go to the highest level of competition, most horses must be good comfortable riding horses: good walk, good canter, clear minded - and also the horse shouldn't be too tall."

People tend to forget the fact that a very small percentage of horses (regardless of breed) ever make it to the upper levels.

American breeds are often overlooked even though many DO offer the type of mindset and movement that is desirable to the average rider.

[Long Shadow Farm]

Multiple QHs have made it to the GP jumper ring as well as the top levels in Eventing. Matter of fact, an Area V young rider ride a mexican bred QH gelding at Rolex this year. I know of several QH barns that show on the A circuit in the Hunters and do the A/Os as well as the lower stuff. Just because they weren't bred or born in Europe, doesn't mean they cannot compete. Most of the time you don't notice that they are QH.... I am asked all the time if my gelding is a warmblood. He is 16.2hh, nice heavy build and a decent mover. Plus his mind set is the winner of the bunch.

But each to their own......... I just believe a good horse shouldn't be passed up because of his/her papers. I know of several QHs that are nice and could be an asset to some Warmblood breeding programs.

Bobbi

[TaliaCristianna]

Multiple QHs have made it to the GP jumper ring as well as the top levels in Eventing. Matter of fact, an Area V young rider ride a mexican bred QH gelding at Rolex this year. I know of several QH barns that show on the A circuit in the Hunters and do the A/Os as well as the lower stuff. Just because they weren't bred or born in Europe, doesn't mean they cannot compete. Most of the time you don't notice that they are QH.... I am asked all the time if my gelding is a warmblood. He is 16.2hh, nice heavy build and a decent mover. Plus his mind set is the winner of the bunch.

Yes, very true. I too know of numerous AQHA/APHA horses that regularly show in the A-circuit as well.

But each to their own......... I just believe a good horse shouldn't be passed up because of his/her papers. I know of several QHs that are nice and could be an asset to some Warmblood breeding programs.

I agree. I also bred my APHA mare to a Trakehner this year. The stallion owner really liked my mare and is very excited about this foal. I am hoping for a versatile amateur prospect out of the cross.

[Hillside H Ranch]

I basically agree with Tiki on this one, but I suppose it depends upon what goals you have for your breeding program. I have a QH; have had him for years and love him to death. However, I don't see why we are trying to reinvent the wheel here. We know that warmbloods have been bred for years and years and years to excel at the upper level Olympic disciplines. I don't believe you can improve on that with our "native" breeds here. However, if your program is focusing on lower level, ammy friendly family horses then they might have a place in your breeding program. I have chosen to focus my program on breeding jumpers for the top of the sport. I don't believe QH, appy, morgan, saddlebred,APHA, etc. will help we achieve that goal.

I also agree that using these breeds under the label of "American Warmblood" is just silly. American Sporthorse would be more appropriate.

[siegi b.]

As small as the actual number of horses may be that make it to the top levels of the sport, fact of the matter is that every client I have ever had wanted the horse with the best conformation and movement I had to offer.

[Oakstable]

I was looking at the results of the AHA Sporthorse competition in Idaho. Two stallions competed at Grand Prix -- scores were 59% and 60%.

If I wanted to compete in endurance, I would only do it with an Arabian. They are bred for it.

If I wanted to compete at FEI dressage, I would only do it with a warmblood descended from European performance-tested bloodlines.

[Rienzi]

Oakstable -- seems like you've limited yourself an awful lot. It's too bad you wouldn't consider mustangs or Spanish Colonial horses for endurance.

[Melyni]

Some American breeds are very specialized in their physical type and thus tend to be limited to their own specialized way of being ridden/shown. There might be a few special individuals who can make it on other riding sports but the majority don't.

But dressage isn't the only sport, so just because they don't regularly appear in the top levels of dressage does not make them useless just not suitable for dressage. There are plenty in the other sports.

There's driving:- Morgans and Saddlebreds, Hackneys, and Ponies
Hunters:- QHs and TBs and their crosses. (by QH I also include all the colored varieties of QH such as Paints and Apps).
Jumpers:- QHs and TBs and crosses.
Eventing;- TBs and just about anything crossed to a TB.
Endurance:- Arabians and arabian crosses.
Polocrosse:- QHs, TBs and ponies and crosses.
HorseBall:- ditto.
Jousting:- ditto
Foxhunting:- QHs, TBs, and all kinds of crossbreds.
Trail riding: just about all of them.

Yours
MW

[Tiki]

There's driving:- Morgans and Saddlebreds, Hackneys, and Ponies
Carriage driving is not an Olympic sport
Hunters:- QHs and TBs and their crosses. (by QH I also include all the colored varieties of QH such as Paints and Apps).
Hunters is not an Olympic sport - not even A Circuit
Jumpers:- QHs and TBs and crosses.
Eventing;- TBs and just about anything crossed to a TB.
Endurance:- Arabians and arabian crosses.
Polocrosse:- QHs, TBs and ponies and crosses.
Polocrosse is not an Olympic sport
HorseBall:- ditto.
horseball is not an Olympic sport
Jousting:- ditto
jousting is not an Olympic sport
Foxhunting:- QHs, TBs, and all kinds of crossbreds.
foxhunting is not an Olympic sport
Trail riding: just about all of them
trail riding is not an Olympic sport

I never said these horses did not have a purpose, The original question was about would the crosses fit in with WB's for the Olympic sports. I actually like a number of them very much.

The answer is no.

[RiddleMeThis]

If I were looking for a top hunter, jumper, eventer or dressage horse I would not be looking at American Breeds, as proportionally the number of them (while there are some) compared to the number of WBs in the top of the sport is tiny. If I was looking for something in the lower levels I wouldnt count them out, but would still focus on WBs or TBs for the reasons above and resale value.

[ASBnTX]

A Saddlebred - Wing Tempo - actually holds the record for the most competitive endurance miles :)

[grayarabpony]

Honestly, I think it's narrow-minded to only consider certain breeds for certain endeavors, because there is a wide range of physiques and talents in every breed.

[Oakstable]

The very first horse I bred was by a Trakehner stallion out of a grade mare. He was very competitive in SoCal back in the 90s against imported warmbloods.

He was bred to be my dressage horse. He always had other riders as he had more talent than I did.

When I got the bug to breed to sell, I had to upgrade my mare base, first TBs, then imported warmbloods.

Buyers are much more sophisticated these days. You have to have everything in your favor to have a saleable horse, and even more so, in a tough market.

Of course, there is a place for the American sporthorse. It depends on what market you are targeting.

[TaliaCristianna]

As small as the actual number of horses may be that make it to the top levels of the sport, fact of the matter is that every client I have ever had wanted the horse with the best conformation and movement I had to offer.

Every 10 year old girl wants a 16H jet black Arabian stallion...

You may very well have clients that truly NEED and will USE an upper-level horse, but those riders are the minority as opposed to the majority.

I know of far too many instances where what a rider wanted was quite different from what they actually needed. That same story rings true for every breed and every discipline.

[Dawn J-L]

A Saddlebred - Wing Tempo - actually holds the record for the most competitive endurance miles :)

Wing Tempo is a great horse, but his record for competitive trail miles was just broken by the 37 year old 1/2 Arab "Elmer Bandit":
http://www.thehorse.com/ViewArticle.aspx?ID=12972 (Elmer's new mileage record)

http://www.thehorse.com/ViewArticle.aspx?ID=12880&source=rss (a recent update on Wing Tempo)

[camohn]

I think the American breeds should just be happy to call a Paint a Paint etc. but along with that if the horse is appropriate he can be presented for approval with a WB registry. That does not make the Paint a WB in any way....it just makes him a WB inspected Paint with score X. We presented our TB stallion to RPSI and AWR. He got the same scores at both places: 7.0's on gaits and an 8 on his jump. Weather he is a WB a TB or any other breed that is a decent score. It just made him a WB inspected TB though.

[tri]

Some of the WB registries do let some of these better horses in, but ONLY in the lower books. They have to prove themselves through their get and move their way up over 4 generations.

Tiki, why do you keep saying this? How many threads have you said this on and have been corrected? The BWP stallion Victory Gallop is out of a mare with Quarterhorse blood and he is in the top as in highest, as in fully approved, as in...how else can I say it? All of his foals are elegible for the highest books and there isn't a 4 generation wait.

So, again, why, after all the times this has been pointed out to you, do you keep posting it????

Hunters:- QHs and TBs and their crosses. (by QH I also include all the colored varieties of QH such as Paints and Apps).

Hunters is not an Olympic sport - not even A Circuit

So, then why has the KWPN started a "hunter" book? And, why have other euro warmbloods started with some interest in "hunters" if they only breed for the olympic disciplines?

Like it or not, but one of the top ten hunter sires in the country is a quarter horse.

I've posted this before, the way the ISR/Oldna is set up works well; books for the "Sporthorse" and then two books for the "Warmblood"

[JMurray]

Struggling to promote an unknown American breed in dressage I know I have my work cut out for me, but I am realistic about what market the Nokota fits best into and that is what I emphasize. If my life goal was to be competitive at FEI at the major shows, I would not be doing what I am doing and I would have a warmblood instead.

My Dressage Nokotas...Howakahn
http://s358.photobucket.com/albums/oo24/jmurray_010/?action=view&current=DSC_0281.jpg

Takoda
http://s358.photobucket.com/albums/oo24/jmurray_010/?action=view&current=File0011.jpg

Both are very servicable as Dressage horses for an amatuer



I understand Tiki's explanation from a breeders perspective.

There is a place for the American Breed registries because there are a lot of us who have a preference for an American breed based on finances, an attraction to their phenotype that suits us better and there is a special glow about being able say.."I did it with an American Breed". But I don't know that I personally would want to change the fact that Warmbloods are the breed of choice for upper level dressage cause I would have one in a heartbeat if I could.

I do like the idea of an American Sport Horse registry.

[RiddleMeThis]

Every 10 year old girl wants a 16H jet black Arabian stallion...

You may very well have clients that truly NEED and will USE an upper-level horse, but those riders are the minority as opposed to the majority.

I know of far too many instances where what a rider wanted was quite different from what they actually needed. That same story rings true for every breed and every discipline.
I completely agree BUT they arent going to buy what they "need" they are going to buy what they want.

[Daydream Believer]

Now can anyone honestly say that they'd be ashamed to let their kids ride into the dressage ring on one of these or even themselves if they are a smaller adult? Let me promise you, they move as well as the pics depict and they are built uphill. These are mostly youngsters and they are showing this quality of movement at 1-3...not even mature...

Now put a plain bay coat on these and try and pretend they aren't an "American" breed...

The first one is a valid FEI prospect and one of the best movers I've ever seen and that includes WB's.

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l215/ssluss/Promise3.jpg

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l215/ssluss/Girls9.jpg

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l215/ssluss/girls6.jpg

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l215/ssluss/Autumn10-1.jpg

That is what a small scale purpose breeding program can do with an American breed and I've only just gotten started also...only 4 crops on the ground. This is a breed older than any WB that predates even modern Andalusians....the war horse of Spain of 500 years ago. WB's are relative newcomers and everytime I hear someone suggest that using some other breed as a sport horse is reinventing the wheel I have to chuckle a bit.

As a dedicated preservation breeder trying to save an already threatened breed I would not want to see them hidden or lost in a sport horse registry which is one reason I decided against that route. I want to see credit given where it is due but I am not adverse to outcrosses done intelligently. Intelligent outcrossing created some outstanding breeds like TB's and modern WB's and I think there is a place in it. However I'm not doing it...I'll stick to purebreds for now and focus my resources on them.

Right now there is not a half bred book for Colonial Spanish horses so those crosses that exist are lost to us...as are their achievements. The next best thing IMO is a performance based registry that recognizes and welcomes the value of American breeds. I would support it it if existed. I will not however take them to a registry that would put them in some sub book due to their breed or some nonsense like that.

Like JMurray said...I also have a long road ahead in promoting a nearly unknown breed for sport horse uses and I have no illusions that it will be easy. I also am realistic about my market also and have no delusions of breeding serious Olympic horses but there is a lot of room in the market for American breeds for those who want something a bit different.

[Melyni]

There's driving:- Morgans and Saddlebreds, Hackneys, and Ponies
Carriage driving is not an Olympic sport
Hunters:- QHs and TBs and their crosses. (by QH I also include all the colored varieties of QH such as Paints and Apps).
Hunters is not an Olympic sport - not even A Circuit
Jumpers:- QHs and TBs and crosses.
Eventing;- TBs and just about anything crossed to a TB.
Endurance:- Arabians and arabian crosses.
Polocrosse:- QHs, TBs and ponies and crosses.
Polocrosse is not an Olympic sport
HorseBall:- ditto.
horseball is not an Olympic sport
Jousting:- ditto
jousting is not an Olympic sport
Foxhunting:- QHs, TBs, and all kinds of crossbreds.
foxhunting is not an Olympic sport
Trail riding: just about all of them
trail riding is not an Olympic sport

I never said these horses did not have a purpose, The original question was about would the crosses fit in with WB's for the Olympic sports. I actually like a number of them very much.

The answer is no.

Actually the original question only mentioned Olympics in passing, but since horse sports won't be in the Olympics much longer anyway the suitability will shortly become irrelevant.
MW

[Fairview Horse Center]

How can some of these breeds inprove the Warmblood? Temperament, and amateur rideability. European Warmbloods get those approval scores for rideability on reactiveness and sensitivity. They are breeding for Anky. We have to sell to the rest of the world.

I know most people looking for horses dream of that Olympic athlete, but selling them one is setting many people and horses up for failure, and frustration. The fact is, that my best mover is one I can't sell. People can't ride him. The trainers come out and love him. They call him comfortable and easy to ride - light, willing, forward thinking. The students get on, and are nervous, and bounce on him. making him worried.

My goal is to make successful and happy partnerships. I just turned down an offer on one of my youngsters. He is extremely talented. The offer was from an open jumper rider that was thrilled with his talent. I didn't like the way he rode the barely 10 times under saddle 3 year old. OK, so mine won't get to the olympics, but they will make a LOT of people very happy.

[TaliaCristianna]

I completely agree BUT they arent going to buy what they "need" they are going to buy what they want.

Yes, absolutely true. My point is that American breeds are not lacking the physical ability to compete and compete well in the sporthorse disciplines for the intents and purposes of most riders.

It is an issue of buyer bias more then anything.

I DO think that is starting to change though. I've noticed more and more people looking to the US breeds in hope of finding a good prospect at an economical price.

In addition, while researching stallions for my mares I was very surprised to see how many APHA and AQHA stallions were now being dual-marketed towards "traditional" breeders and sporthorse breeders.

The sire of the two horses below is one of APHA's top reining sires. He is also listed on the International Sport Horses of Color website.

http://www.cphorses.com/5cea3770.jpg

http://www.cphorses.com/5cc9e730.jpg

[FriesianX]

I think there ARE reasons to include American lines, and reasons to cross horses of Euro registries in "non-traditional" crosses.

From an American standpoint - I know of a few Morgans and Morgan crosses that are cleaning up in the mid levels in Eventing, and a few of them have already gone to the upper levels. Dragonfire Kublekahn showed advance level eventing - how many Warmbloods or Tbreds can make than claim? There is also a Taproot stallion who made it that far. I know a junior rider who's already at the mid-levels on her Morgan, and they are both young and climbing. There have been several Morgans that have made it to the FEI levels in dressage. And Combined Driving is an international sport - and is often won by Morgans.

As for untraditional crosses, INCLUDING crosses to breeds such as Morgans, Arabians, Saddlebreds, etc. Don't get me wrong - I understand the athleticism of the Warmblood, which is exactly why I (and many other breeders) cross those bloodlines. But I also understand their short falls - they are NOT as sturdy, they often have feet issues, not enough bone to safely support their body mass, they have grown too large, they have OCD and other joint issues at a much higher rate than smaller breeds. They are NOT easy horses - tend to have a more stubborn temperment, tend to not be as people oriented as some breeds. I'll repeat now - I understand their athletic abilities, heck, I own several WBs, have ridden many in my life. BUT...

My next point - many breeders are trying to preserve that athletic quality, but breed a sturdier, easier keeping horse with a more people oriented mind. A horse that stays sounder longer, that is less likely to have OCD, that has better feet, and that truly LIKES their rider. A horse that is less reactive and more foregiving. And for those qualities, we look to other breeds - Morgans, Friesians, Andalusians, Lippizans, Spanish Colonials, etc.

Can such crosses succeed at the higher levels? I think carefully bred horses CAN. And - the nice thing, if we have a horse that has a gentler mind and is sturdier, the same horse with a less talented rider can make a nice mid-level show horse too. MOST horses don't end up with Olympic riders - so it seems vital we are able to breed a horse who doesn't get tense and worried when they are ridden by a typical lower level rider. A horse that attempts to do the best they can for their rider - and that is NOT what most WBs do. They shut down if poorly ridden - they either turn into shuffling, rein lame horses, or they become reactive and unpredictable. And I think that more "forgiving mind" is the goal for many American breeders - our market is different - MOST riders in the U.S. are not pros, and they are not top level ammies.

I look at my foals - and realize that if a top level pro bought some of them, I'd see them competing at the top levels. But, I'm happy that a less skilled rider can also do well with them, and have a horse that they truly LOVE.

I don't think the WB is a perfect horse - they may be the perfect sport horse for a top pro rider, but how many of us can really claim to be that rider? Maybe a FEW here on COTH. The numbers that came out of the Performance Standards just confirm, most riders are not top pros. We should focus on breeding nice horses for those riders, and be grateful that those riders make it possible for our sports to exist in the U.S.!

[grayarabpony]

Dragonfire Kublekahn showed advance level eventing - how many Warmbloods or Tbreds can make than claim?

I agree with your post wholeheartedly, except for this part -- a large portion of the horses competing training through advanced in eventing in the US have got to be TBs, usually OTTBs. Eventing is their thing. :)

[NoDQhere]

If I wanted to Barrel Race, do Cutting or Reining, I would buy a "stock horse" of bloodlines suitable for the discipline I wanted to "do".

If I wanted to do endurance: ditto above, except Arabian.

Same for "Saddleseat". I would not "shoot myself in the foot" by jumping into a discipline for which my Pookykins was unsuitable.

I don't think American Breeds can bring anything to the table that isn't already there from the right WBs. IF we are talking the sports of Dressage and Jumping. That doesn't mean that NO nontraditional horses should ever be used, but I think you need to be VERY careful of what you do use, especially with the nontraditional breeds because they simply do not have the genetics behind them.

I'm not claiming that ALL WBs are wonderful. But to suggest that just because it is a WB it DOESN'T have an Ammy suitable disposition is preposterous. Over the years, I've met many more "rank" American breeds than I ever have WBs.

I evented a nontraditional breed to Intermediate level. He was a wonderful horse but I doubt her would have reproduced himself.

[NoDQhere]

TRI, you said "The BWP stallion Victory Gallop is out of a mare with Quarterhorse blood and he is in the top as in highest, as in fully approved, as in...how else can I say it? All of his foals are elegible for the highest books and there isn't a 4 generation wait."

This is one horse in one registry. Where can one see Victory Gallop's pedigree? How much QH is actually in there? Are breeders using him?

[pintopiaffe]

Always interesting how your original intent behind a question is interpreted and morphs. I guess that's why I'm addicted to BB's more than any other form of internet, it's good brain candy. ;)

A few folks have touched on the original intent behind my question--and I'm not entirely sure I worded it as such. *I* knew what I meant! :lol:

I didn't entirely want to argue whether American breeds/crosses are *appropriate*, but rather, where the ones who *ARE* fit in. How do we track them? Where do they go?
The answers, which digressed more toward the usual 'WB vs. Non... " (and very politely, I might add! Thankyou! This has been thought & conversation provoking rather than "us vs. them." ) seem to imply that the pre-books are what we should want. But sometimes I thinkt that does quite the disservice to the actual ancestry of the horse. I am proud of the APHA, ASB & Morgan heritage, how the Colonial Spanish helped explore then build the western frontier, etc.

I guess if I had the money & the time, I would think about starting a registry for the American SPORTHORSE. I don't honestly think we need yet another registry, but I feel like there isn't really the place for the Sporthorse who 'qualifies' movement, score and typewise... but has the wrong accent. ;)

[RiddleMeThis]

Dragonfire Kublekahn showed advance level eventing - how many Warmbloods or Tbreds can make than claim?
LMAO TONS. We had two OTTBS in the Olympics this year, plus a decent amount of WB and TBS, along with ISHs.

[Tiki]

Tiki, why do you keep saying this? How many threads have you said this on and have been corrected? The BWP stallion Victory Gallop is out of a mare with Quarterhorse blood and he is in the top as in highest, as in fully approved, as in...how else can I say it? All of his foals are elegible for the highest books and there isn't a 4 generation wait.

So, again, why, after all the times this has been pointed out to you, do you keep posting it????

Well, fine. Let's go back to OLD/ISR and look at their requirements. You see the 4 generations have already taken place in your example before the BWP took the horse.

For the top 2 books of OLD/ISR, the foal must have MORE THAN 75% approved sport horse bloodlines.That means less than 1/4, for example, QH. So if your example had less than 1/4 QH and more than 75% approved sport horse bloodlines (European sport horse bloodlines of registries in the WBFHS) than it would have been in the highest books of OLD/ISR IF it met the other criteria.

So, what part of that don't you understand??? That's the way most of them do it IF they even allow 'outside' breeds in.

I have nothing against American breeds. But most of them have been bred for pleasure and comfort and they are great at what they do. Why try to make them into something they are not. If you don't have the time or money to get to PSG or higher and want to do Training through 2nd, some of these horses are great. Lots of people want to do more and want to do it with a horse that won't have such a hard time, or take a long time, getting there.

[grayarabpony]

http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/victory+gallop2

I have seen a few QHs that equal or surpass many of the warmbloods I've seen, both in jump and movement.

[RiddleMeThis]

seem to imply that the pre-books are what we should want. But sometimes I thinkt that does quite the disservice to the actual ancestry of the horse. I am proud of the APHA, ASB & Morgan heritage, how the Colonial Spanish helped explore then build the western frontier, etc.

The WB registries arent there for your (general your) breeds ancestry. They are there for the promotion of upper level jumper/event/dressage prospects. And if your (again general) horse/breed doesnt comform to the highest standard they have set for achieving their goal than they go into the lower books, as will any WB who doesnt fit into their goals.

They dont care about a breeds ancestry just how well they are going to be able to achieve their goal.

[tri]

Why, nodqhere - you can look at the BWP site, you can look at allbreeds, you can look at the owners website.....all the typical places to look at an approved stallion. Did you not know that? Here: http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/victory+gallop2 I think it is accurate all the way back but the first generations look like they are.

This example was just to show that the euro registries have accepted non-traditional blood. Then look at Galoubet with his trotter blood. The AWR has a strong hunter focus and has accepted some stallions with QH blood too - one of which is almost all TB and as I said, one of the top hunter sires in the country is a QH.

Then the KWPN has the driving horse book and the Dutch still consider them warmbloods even though a good bit of saddlebred blood is being used. So a saddlebred blooded KWPN driving horse is considered a 'warmblood' but the same horse used for dressage isn't????

[Fairview Horse Center]

I think there ARE reasons to include American lines, and reasons to cross horses of Euro registries in "non-traditional" crosses. From an American standpoint - I know of a few Morgans and Morgan crosses that are cleaning up in the mid levels in Eventing, and a few of them have already gone to the upper levels.

Morgan stallions placed 4th in one 100 Day Testing, and 3rd in another. This was against abut 20 imported Warmblood stallions. Non-traditional breeds definitely have the ability, but like with any breed, Warmbloods included, you have to develop an eye, knowledge of bloodlines, and be selective. There ARE people purpose breeding these for Olympic sports, Hunters, etc.


D Don't get me wrong - I understand the athleticism of the Warmblood, which is exactly why I (and many other breeders) cross those bloodlines. But I also understand their short falls - they are NOT as sturdy, they often have feet issues, not enough bone to safely support their body mass, they have grown too large, they have OCD and other joint issues at a much higher rate than smaller breeds. They are NOT easy horses - tend to have a more stubborn temperment, tend to not be as people oriented as some breeds.

Them are fightin' words :winkgrin:
It totally depends on WHO the Warmblood IS. I breed using a lot of older Hanoverian and Gelderlander blood. I CHOOSE to breed Warmbloods that have great feet, very hardy, good bone, no joint issues, and mature between 15.3-16.1 hands. Running a boarding barn for LOTS of different breeds and crosses, I have a lot to compare to. My youngsters are super easy, and EXTREMELY people oriented. That IS why I started to breed. I wanted to improve what I saw my boarders & myself riding. I have ZERO of my horses in shoes. They do dressage, jump, trail ride, give lessons, even show, all barefoot.

My next point - many breeders are trying to preserve that athletic quality, but breed a sturdier, easier keeping horse with a more people oriented mind. A horse that stays sounder longer, that is less likely to have OCD, that has better feet, and that truly LIKES their rider. A horse that is less reactive and more foregiving. And for those qualities, we look to other breeds - Morgans, Friesians, Andalusians, Lippizans, Spanish Colonials, etc.

You CAN find these qualities in those breeds, but selected Warmbloods too. The point is that people need to breed what they like, and what they have a passion for. The Warmbloods at this point are generally more consistent producers of certain traits for Olympic sport, but with good breeders carefully selecting their lines from these non-traditional breeds, They will and are developing excellent horses.

[TaliaCristianna]

http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/victory+gallop2

I have seen a few QHs that equal or surpass many of the warmbloods I've seen, both in jump and movement.

I agree. It's not as if these horses have their breed advertised on the back of their riders jacket while in the show ring. I bet a number of the "naysayers" have probably been impressed by (or been beaten by) a yucky American breed horse and not even known it!

Oh yes, RPSI is another association that allows "American" blood in the mix.

Some popular Warmblood/APHA cross stallions:

http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/state+of+the+art3

http://www.cocolallacreeksporthorses.com/sport_horses_wolkenzauber.html

http://www.cocolallacreeksporthorses.com/sport_horses_radikal.html

http://www.huntmasterfarms.com/stallion.htm#

http://www.coloredhorses.com/goldcard.html

[pintopiaffe]

They dont care about a breeds ancestry just how well they are going to be able to achieve their goal.

:no: see, that's not true at all. Or a horse with 1/4 or 1/8 or 1/16th Morgan, ASB, APHA, whatever, would be eligible for the highest books based on type, performance, scores etc. They simply are not. They go in lower books and are not approved, merely registered.

[RiddleMeThis]

:no: see, that's not true at all. Or a horse with 1/4 or 1/8 or 1/16th Morgan, ASB, APHA, whatever, would be eligible for the highest books based on type, performance, scores etc. They simply are not. They go in lower books and are not approved, merely registered.I meant ancestry as far as how you were describe it. The fact that they had helped build the frontier and the heritage involved with other American. That does not matter to them.

But it works in this way as well. There goal is to have an international competitor, with x amount of x kind of blood, or X amount of acceptable generations.

[Daydream Believer]

And if your (again general) horse/breed doesnt comform to the highest standard they have set for achieving their goal than they go into the lower books, as will any WB who doesnt fit into their goals.

They dont care about a breeds ancestry just how well they are going to be able to achieve their goal.

If that is so...if they really are all about performance...why then do they force horses of "unapproved breeds" like QH's into lower books? If it truly was on an equal standing and based only on physical ability, you should be able to show up with an exceptional horse of any breed and be given equal status. My understanding is that is not so if your breed is not one that is "accepted" by the WB registries for outcrossing like TB's and Arabs.

I am not opposed to registering my stallions with a performance based "Warmblood" registry but I'll be damned to do it and see them (regardless of their quality or scores) be put in some lower sub book because they are an untraditional breed. I see no point in that at all.

I do now also realize PP's original intent with this post. WHERE should our American Sport horses be recognized and counted? It's very clear that they don't fit in the Euro WB registries....and it seems as if they are not wanted or welcome either from the polls on this forum. I also wish I had time to create a real American Sporthorse Registry that is truly performance and not bloodline based and that did not discriminate against any bloodlines as long as performance standards are met or exceeded.

[RiddleMeThis]

If that is so...if they really are all about performance...why then do they force horses of "unapproved breeds" like QH's into lower books? If it truly was on an equal standing and based only on physical ability, you should be able to show up with an exceptional horse of any breed and be given equal status. My understanding is that is not so if your breed is not one that is "accepted" by the WB registries for outcrossing like TB's and Arabs.

I am not opposed to registering my stallions with a performance based "Warmblood" registry but I'll be damned to do it and see them (regardless of their quality or scores) be put in some lower sub book because they are an untraditional breed. I see no point in that at all. Ditto to my above post.

And as far as bloodlines and why they are needed, you are always going to have a few that pop up out of nowhere, out of off blood bloodlines that are going to be good at something there breed or lines arent known for.The problem with approving them for breeding is THERE offspring. Are they going to have the same greatness as their sire/dam or are they going to be throw backs to their grand parents?

With the WBs they have generations of documented performance stallions and dams proving themselves through the 100 day test and performance and than offspring. That is another reason why they arent accepted.

[Equilibrium]

I just sort of got a tickle out of the part where warmbloods aren't friendly, have bad feet, grow too big and have OCD.

Terri

[Oakstable]

With the Euro bloodline registeries, there is an emphasis on the mother lines in the stallion's pedigree.

The sire line is the side that is often better known, but discriminating breeders also want to know what the mother line has produced, and the grandmother, and on back through the pedigree.

I have two Dutch mares, one is rated Star, the other studbook. Their mother was an imported Star mare. Then there are no "predicates" or special recognitions for one generation, but it opens up to loads of predicates thereafter.

On their sire's side (B. Rolando), his mother, Terma, was a Keur Preferent Prestatie mare. His sire was a Keur stallion. Again loads of predicates in the paternal pedigree.

TB breeders also track the mother lines, BTW. Look at a page from a sales catalog ... first dam, second dam, third dam.

American sporthorse breeders may not have that kind of history on what's in the pedigree particularly the dam line.

[Daydream Believer]

Ditto to my above post.

And as far as bloodlines and why they are needed, you are always going to have a few that pop up out of nowhere, out of off blood bloodlines that are going to be good at something there breed or lines arent known for.

What you are missing though is that the ONLY reason some of our American breeds seem to pop out of nowhere as sport horses these days is that hardly anyone is purpose breeding and campaigning them as such. If someone really was focusing on producing these horses as a breeding goal like so many are with WB's, I think you'd see way way more of them. In the 1980's and earlier we were nearly all riding American horses in the Olympics and doing quite well actually! Now, due to the focused and excellent breeding/marketing strategies of the Europeans, Americans have abandoned the American horses and acquired European ones and now shun the American bloodlines as unacceptable. Now, when a nice American horse/pony shows up at the international level like Teddy O'Connor, people consider it a freak thing rather than give credit where it is due.


The problem with approving them for breeding is THERE offspring. Are they going to have the same greatness as their sire/dam or are they going to be throw backs to their grand parents?

Seems to me like F2 and F3 crosses are more predictable than F1's. The point is that the WB registries would let this blood in because they "want" it...but obviously it needs to be tested to make sure only the quality descendants are approved for breeding. I think I've seen plenty of not so nice WB's that popped out of the WB registries of acceptable bloodlines to know that lower than average quality offspring happen even from two very nice parents also. I agree completely with the concept of performance based registries but I don't agree with limiting the bloodlines to just certain breeds if you are truly stating that your goals are performance based.

With the WBs they have generations of documented performance stallions and dams proving themselves through the 100 day test and performance and than offspring. That is another reason why they arent accepted.

Well, you have to start somewhere. What about the Morgans and other breeds stallions that did so well at the performance tests? If that was all that was required for proof of their ability they would be accepted. WB's have only been breeding for "sport" for a few decades really...less than 100 years for certain. The horses were cavalry and light draft/carriage horses until the mid 1900's for the most part (with a few exceptions). Morgans as a breed go back to the 1700's and there is plenty of consistency in what they produce. No worries about freaks popping out of those bloodlines I don't' think. :)

I really have no problem with WB registries giving papers and accepting what they want...but I do have a problem with hypocrisy and not recognizing the contributions of American horses like the QH in that one Belgian WB.

Pintopiaffe I really don't see, with the thinking that is prevalent that American breeds have any real future in Euro registries. If there is to ever be an American Sport Horse it will have to be developed by Americans for American's and not put into the hands of people with horses to sell from their own country. We need a registry that will recognize and applaud the American bloodlines in the horses and not hide them in sub books.

[ASBJumper]

Jeez... why is it that so many people think that the the ability to be "selectively bred" for a purpose is limited to WBs only? Are you guys so narrow-minded that you don't think there are plenty of other breeds that are being "selectively bred" for sport as well (albeit on a smaller scale)?

I am sorry, but TBs and Arabs should be considered "non-traditional" breeds. They have not been "selectively bred" for hundreds of years to be Olympic Dressage and Jumper mounts. Not even close. But there are sporthorse breeders out there breeding Arabs and TBs for sport, right?

Do you honestly think there aren't people out there breeding Saddlebreds for sport? Morgans? Quarter horses?
Throughbreds and Arabs did not have to "prove themselves" as sporthorse sires or dams before they were used as refining/improvement stock. They were used because they were lighter in build, simple as that. And the ones that didn't produce what the Europeans wanted, were not used again. But the ones that DID - became breeding stock.

The primary foundation breed used to develop the American Saddlebred, was the Thoroughbred. So why on earth is it SOOO farfetched that a good Saddlebred stallion, built for sport and producing offspring that are being used for sport, like Flight Time Gold for example, be included in Warmblood books??? Why?? A lot of them are elegant, more uphill versions of the Thoroughbred!!

My idea? I think exceptional stallions and mares of "non-traditional" breeding, if inspected and approved, should be allowed into the higher books with some sort of provisional breeding license. And if after x number of years, they have not produced x number of approved offspring, then their breeding license is revoked.
This would give stallions, at least, the chance to prove that they can and do reproduce their qualities.

I only have personal experience with Saddlebreds, but I'm sure this applies to other breeds as well: there are certain lines in ASBs that consistently produce the conformation and movement and, more importantly, the TRAINABILITY and MIND to be upper level sporthorses.
The hard part is getting these horses into the right hands. A freakishly talented horse is almost always going to putter around the lower levels if it's not trained and ridden by the best.

Europeans have State funding and the best breeder/trainer/rider network in the world.
I spent 4 years living, riding and competing in Europe. I rode at one of the fancier show barns in Brussels. There was ONE horse there that had ever competed in a GP - and we all knew about him. The rest? Mostly papered Belgian WBs (some Hanos and KWPNs too), all low-to-mid-level ammie or pro horses, of obscure bloodlines.

Breeding for the Olympic disciplines and breeding for the Olympics are two very, very different things. Most of the WB peeps on here have admitted that many "off-breeds" can and are very successful at low and mid levels of Dressage, Jumping and Eventing. Which are all, last I checked, Olympi disciplines... therefore... why shouldn't they be included? :)
Because we're breeding for the Olympic *disciplines*, right? Not simply the Olympics? Because if the only goal is to breed Olympic horses, then I think it's safe to assume 95% of the WB breeders in North America have not, and will not, achieve that goal.
Olympic horses are freaks. Any horse that makes it to the Olympics is a freak. You cannot breed for freakish ability, just good ability. And once in a while, among the good ones, you will get lucky and produce a freak.
And that is not something that applies only to Warmbloods. That applies to any horse.

[TaliaCristianna]

ASB, I like your post so much that I'm going to post a smiley for the first time in my forum-using history.

:yes:

[RiddleMeThis]

What you are missing though is that the ONLY reason some of our American breeds seem to pop out of nowhere as sport horses these days is that hardly anyone is purpose breeding and campaigning them as such. If someone really was focusing on producing these horses as a breeding goal like so many are with WB's, I think you'd see way way more of them. Of course, but the fact that they HAVENT been is the reason that you have such a hard time getting htem into the WB books. They havent been until recently purpose bred for this.Teddy O'Connor, people consider it a freak thing rather than give credit where it is due. Teddy OConnor was I believe 3/4th TB 1/8 Arab, hardly "off" bred.

Seems to me like F2 and F3 crosses are more predictable than F1's. The point is that the WB registries would let this blood in because they "want" it...but obviously it needs to be tested to make sure only the quality descendants are approved for breeding. I think I've seen plenty of not so nice WB's that popped out of the WB registries of acceptable bloodlines to know that lower than average quality offspring happen even from two very nice parents also. Of course you are going to get some ok or bad quality from two nice parents and the reverse is also true as well. But you are more likely to get something REALLY good from to really good parents.



Morgans as a breed go back to the 1700's and there is plenty of consistency in what they produce. No worries about freaks popping out of those bloodlines I don't' think. But most morgans arent going to be at the top of the sport, and most morgans have not been bred to get to the top of the sport. (and sport as in olympic level dressage eventing and jumping)

[RiddleMeThis]

Jeez... why is it that so many people think that the the ability to be "selectively bred" for a purpose is limited to WBs only? Are you guys so narrow-minded that you don't think there are plenty of other breeds that are being "selectively bred" for sport as well (albeit on a smaller scale)? Not at all, but the WBs are the ones that have been selectively bred for the Olympic disciplines. And while there are some breeds that are working towards this now, they have not been for the same amount of time, nor with as much success.

I am sorry, but TBs and Arabs should be considered "non-traditional" breeds. They have not been "selectively bred" for hundreds of years to be Olympic Dressage and Jumper mounts. Not even close. But there are sporthorse breeders out there breeding Arabs and TBs for sport, right? 1. TBs and Arabs have been used in WBs since the beginning to get them to the type they are now. TBs are closer in type to the WBs than almost all the other breeds, as a whole. There are some exceptions of course, but for most that is true.

Do you honestly think there aren't people out there breeding Saddlebreds for sport? Morgans? Quarter horses? Nope I dont. But I doubt they are breeding for Olympic level sports.

Breeding for the Olympic disciplines and breeding for the Olympics are two very, very different things. Most of the WB peeps on here have admitted that many "off-breeds" can and are very successful at low and mid levels of Dressage, Jumping and Eventing. This goes back to the Why breed for an Ammy thread. Because we shouldnt be TRYING to produce low to mid level horses.
Because if the only goal is to breed Olympic horses, then I think it's safe to assume 95% of the WB breeders in North America have not, and will not, achieve that goal. Nope but that should be the goal. To breed the BEST horses we can.
And once in a while, among the good ones, you will get lucky and produce a freak.
And that is not something that applies only to Warmbloods. That applies to any horse.Yes. But breeding for low to mid level horses that will never happen.

[Equilibrium]

Warmbloods have not been selectively bred for HUNDREDS of years to produce olympic horses. Also, where concerning TB's and Arab's, where do you think the term warmblood came from? Crossing a cold draught type horse with a hot blooded horse such as TB and Arab.

I probably shouldn't contribute to this thread, but I'd just like to say many good points have been brought up here.

I guess it doesn't matter what you are using, the goal should be the same. By breeding this to this does it have a purpose? Will it be good at anything? What am I trying to achieve with this cross?

A good all around athlete who can do a variety of things well is always going to sell and be worth their weight in gold. So I would say, yes American breeds can make a contribution. Are the Morgan and Saddlebred warmblood crosses going to make the olympics, probably not, but most riders will never get there either.

We have a variety of breeders here aiming for different goals so I'm not sure one registry is going to cure that issue. But from those who breed olympic type horses to those who breed for the ammy friendly market, all have good information here. And I find it all very helpful.

Terri

[Hillside H Ranch]

I get so TIRED of people trotting out the excuse of using QHs, Morgans, etc because of temperament and rideability. You can breed warmbloods and not sacrifice "ammy friendly" temperament or rideability. If you ask a pro whether they want the talented but "crazy" horse, or the talented but rideable horse, of course they are goiong to pick the latter. Just because some top horses are "hot" doesn't mean they all are, or have to be. For instance, in the jumping world horses like Indoctro throw incredible talent, and are known for having good temperaments (actually, most of the Capitol I horses have this). Again, I think it goes back to your breeding goals. You want to breed a lower/mid level, "amateur friendly" horse fine, but don't think you can't do that with a warmblood. If you want to use an off breed, great go for it. But if your program is going to focus on breeding for the top of the sport, then you are going to get there quicker with what is already proven to work.

[Atlantis]

Morgans as a breed go back to the 1700's and there is plenty of consistency in what they produce. No worries about freaks popping out of those bloodlines I don't' think.

You're addressing throwbacks, right? Here's how I see it. You're right that breeds like Morgans and QH's have been bred for a very long time and have pretty consistent types, but all those generations of breeding hasn't been specializing in a sport type like the warmbloods have been doing. Typically when you come across a sportier Morgan or QH it's an exception, it's not the rule, and so if you were to breed it you'd have a much bigger chance of a throwback, with throwback meaning you'd have more of the traditional Morgan or QH characteristics return. For this reason, I can see why the warmblood registries shy away from non traditional breeds or put them into lower books.

Seems to me like F2 and F3 crosses are more predictable than F1's.

This is true. Characteristics become more reliable with each generation, and the chances of throwbacks decreases.

If there is to ever be an American Sport Horse it will have to be developed by Americans for American's and not put into the hands of people with horses to sell from their own country. We need a registry that will recognize and applaud the American bloodlines in the horses and not hide them in sub books.

This brings up a great question. Is the goal to have an American association meaning European quality and standards but coordinated and controlled by Americans in America, or is the goal an American association meaning American breeds, like the more traditional "American" breeds? Maybe there's a need for TWO organizations, with the other being something like the Sport Coalition of Traditional American Breeders?

Riddlemethis, you make some good points.

[grayarabpony]

Warmbloods have not been selectively bred for HUNDREDS of years to produce olympic horses. Also, where concerning TB's and Arab's, where do you think the term warmblood came from? Crossing a cold draught type horse with a hot blooded horse such as TB and Arab.

I probably shouldn't contribute to this thread, but I'd just like to say many good points have been brought up here.

I guess it doesn't matter what you are using, the goal should be the same. By breeding this to this does it have a purpose? Will it be good at anything? What am I trying to achieve with this cross?

A good all around athlete who can do a variety of things well is always going to sell and be worth their weight in gold. So I would say, yes American breeds can make a contribution. Are the Morgan and Saddlebred warmblood crosses going to make the olympics, probably not, but most riders will never get there either.

We have a variety of breeders here aiming for different goals so I'm not sure one registry is going to cure that issue. But from those who breed olympic type horses to those who breed for the ammy friendly market, all have good information here. And I find it all very helpful.

Terri

Here we go again. Warmbloods have been selectively bred for hundreds of years, it's true, but for different things in those hundreds of years. Plus, the numbers in most registries went down precipitously during the World Wars. Warmbloods have been bred for the Olympic desciplines only in the last 75-90 years, including Selle Francais.

[FriesianX]

I just sort of got a tickle out of the part where warmbloods aren't friendly, have bad feet, grow too big and have OCD.

Terri

OK, I did NOT say ALL WBS - but they have a higher incidence than, say, a Morgan... There are plenty of lovely WBs - but in general, they are TALLER than other breeds. And with TALLER comes higher incidence of OCD. I've read a few recent studies - one in Equus for those who subscribe - that pointed out that horses bred taller tend to have more soundness issues. And - NO ONE will deny, many Tbreds have feet problems, and the more and more Tbred infused into the WBs, the more and more we see the feet problems popping up. Special shoes, clips to hold on to shoes that keep coming off, etc.

As for friendly - again, there are friendlier and less friendly ones, but on average, if you look at a Baroque horse breed, you'll find them MORE tuned in to people.

There is no 100% in any breed. We ALL know this, don't we? Part of the reason we can't have reasonable discussions on this topic is people quickly take something out of context :no:

[canticle]

Funny that Morgans should be used as an example. What breed do you think is on the cover of the advanced pony club manual? And no, Kublakhan is not a fluke.

Honestly, I would rather not see Morgans crossed with WBs. I don't think the traditional Morgan can be improved by anything that a WB has to offer. Likewise, there is nothing in the Morgan that would make the WB a better WB.

People do start to lose credibility when they say that NOT ONLY are their WBs in the Olympics, but they are also the kindest, smartest, soundest, hardiest, easiest to train, etc. Just as there are many reasons to choose a WB, there are also many reasons NOT to choose one. Let's please cut the BS of them, or any breed, being the perfect horse.

[Tiki]

Uhhhh, one of the highest percentages of OCD is in the American Standardbred. I don't think they're all that tall.

[NoDQhere]

I get so TIRED of people trotting out the excuse of using QHs, Morgans, etc because of temperament and rideability. You can breed warmbloods and not sacrifice "ammy friendly" temperament or rideability. If you ask a pro whether they want the talented but "crazy" horse, or the talented but rideable horse, of course they are goiong to pick the latter. Just because some top horses are "hot" doesn't mean they all are, or have to be. For instance, in the jumping world horses like Indoctro throw incredible talent, and are known for having good temperaments (actually, most of the Capitol I horses have this). Again, I think it goes back to your breeding goals. You want to breed a lower/mid level, "amateur friendly" horse fine, but don't think you can't do that with a warmblood. If you want to use an off breed, great go for it. But if your program is going to focus on breeding for the top of the sport, then you are going to get there quicker with what is already proven to work.

I couldn't have said it better myself :yes:. I've never known a Pro that didn't appreciate an "easy" horse or an Ammy that didn't appreciate a talented one :lol:.

Years ago I tried to reinvent the wheel. It didn't take me long to figure out how much more sense "going with the proven" made.

[FriesianX]

Jeez... why is it that so many people think that the the ability to be "selectively bred" for a purpose is limited to WBs only? Are you guys so narrow-minded that you don't think there are plenty of other breeds that are being "selectively bred" for sport as well (albeit on a smaller scale)?

I am sorry, but TBs and Arabs should be considered "non-traditional" breeds. They have not been "selectively bred" for hundreds of years to be Olympic Dressage and Jumper mounts. Not even close. But there are sporthorse breeders out there breeding Arabs and TBs for sport, right?

Do you honestly think there aren't people out there breeding Saddlebreds for sport? Morgans? Quarter horses?
Throughbreds and Arabs did not have to "prove themselves" as sporthorse sires or dams before they were used as refining/improvement stock. They were used because they were lighter in build, simple as that. And the ones that didn't produce what the Europeans wanted, were not used again. But the ones that DID - became breeding stock.

The primary foundation breed used to develop the American Saddlebred, was the Thoroughbred. So why on earth is it SOOO farfetched that a good Saddlebred stallion, built for sport and producing offspring that are being used for sport, like Flight Time Gold for example, be included in Warmblood books??? Why?? A lot of them are elegant, more uphill versions of the Thoroughbred!!

My idea? I think exceptional stallions and mares of "non-traditional" breeding, if inspected and approved, should be allowed into the higher books with some sort of provisional breeding license. And if after x number of years, they have not produced x number of approved offspring, then their breeding license is revoked.
This would give stallions, at least, the chance to prove that they can and do reproduce their qualities.

I only have personal experience with Saddlebreds, but I'm sure this applies to other breeds as well: there are certain lines in ASBs that consistently produce the conformation and movement and, more importantly, the TRAINABILITY and MIND to be upper level sporthorses.
The hard part is getting these horses into the right hands. A freakishly talented horse is almost always going to putter around the lower levels if it's not trained and ridden by the best.

Europeans have State funding and the best breeder/trainer/rider network in the world.
I spent 4 years living, riding and competing in Europe. I rode at one of the fancier show barns in Brussels. There was ONE horse there that had ever competed in a GP - and we all knew about him. The rest? Mostly papered Belgian WBs (some Hanos and KWPNs too), all low-to-mid-level ammie or pro horses, of obscure bloodlines.

Breeding for the Olympic disciplines and breeding for the Olympics are two very, very different things. Most of the WB peeps on here have admitted that many "off-breeds" can and are very successful at low and mid levels of Dressage, Jumping and Eventing. Which are all, last I checked, Olympi disciplines... therefore... why shouldn't they be included? :)
Because we're breeding for the Olympic *disciplines*, right? Not simply the Olympics? Because if the only goal is to breed Olympic horses, then I think it's safe to assume 95% of the WB breeders in North America have not, and will not, achieve that goal.
Olympic horses are freaks. Any horse that makes it to the Olympics is a freak. You cannot breed for freakish ability, just good ability. And once in a while, among the good ones, you will get lucky and produce a freak.
And that is not something that applies only to Warmbloods. That applies to any horse.


Thank you ASB - you put in words what I've been mulling over. Part of the problem we run into is that many don't take the time to understand non-WB bloodlines. I have friends who breed Morgans - and they breed for SPORT - they understand that not all Morgan bloodlines are good for sport.

I spent years researching Friesian lines and found the same thing - certain bloodlines are good for dressage, others aren't. Some canter well, some don't. Some lines cross well, some don't. Some lines consistently throw good minds, some don't.

Funny thing - this bloodline research isn't a whole lot different with Warmbloods, so why are people NOT aware that there are breeders doing it in the non-Warmblood world?

I do think there is a place in the U.S. for non-Euro/traditional sport horse breeding - and I do think we need a registry that supports that concept. AWS might be a step in the right direction. And it is pretty obvious we need help with the PR side of things as well, otherwise we'll always be fighting an uphill battle, with too many people throwing out misinformation. How often do we see someone post "Can a X-Breed do dressage" only to have someone else respond, if you want to ride dressage, you need a Warmblood. Or, people post that only the "freaks" from non-traditional breeds can be successful at the sports, instead of realizing there is talent available in those "alternative breed" horses.

I agree, there is a certain amount of pleasure in going to a big show and beating the Warmbloods with an American bred horse (although I use Euro lines, my horses are definately not "traditional" :D). I have no great delusions that our American non-traditional breeders are going to "kill off" the Warmblood industry - but I have hopes that some day traditional WB breeders will admit that there are other options, and that someday, there will be a U.S. Registry for American-bred Sport Horses! And I do believe, when that day comes, there WILL be a place in it for more than just Euro bred Warmbloods, certain approved Tbreds, and even fewer approved Arabs - I think we'll see Morgans, Saddlebreds, Paints (heck some of them are pure Tbred anyway), Appies, and other lines mixed in there. And each horse will be accepted based on their individual ability, and the ability to pass on positive attributes to their offspring!

[canticle]

I get so TIRED of people trotting out the excuse of using QHs, Morgans, etc because of temperament and rideability.
Now you know how it feels when people trot out the excuse of using WBs for athleticism! :winkgrin: I prefer to stick with the purebreds, because as others have said, there is no need to reinvent the wheel.

[quietann]

Opinion of a smurf here, but I suppose that part of the question is what is the purpose of the registry? Breeds with "closed" books like Arabs and TBs aren't going to let other breeds in... because what really matters is the purebred lineage. (And yes, this leads to some people using less than ideal horses of these breeds because of what's in the pedigree.)

Yet AFAIK (and I am not a breeder, and don't ever intend to be one), for a lot of the WB registries, you can get horses into the book based on performance, as long as they are from a *related* breed. People talk so much about which WB registry to use for a given horse -- what will add the most value, be the most respected etc. I am wildly overgeneralizing here, of course! But in a performance breeding program, it's good to not have a completely closed book. There are other circumstances when this is good, e.g. breed preservation... as with the Morgan breed during the Great Depression, where the numbers dropped very low, and the AMHA decided to let in some "ranch bred" mares who were almost certainly not pure Morgans. My own Morgan mare traces back in tail female to one of these "X mares."

(Question: with all the upheaval in Europe during WW1 and WW2, and the number of horses lost, were any of the WB books "relaxed" in a similar way?)

As a Morgan aficionado, it does surprise me that the Morgan stallions who did so well in the 100-day testing are not allowed into the WB books (as far as I know.) I don't think these horses are flukes, and in most cases they come from several generations of "sport-bred" horses. Morgans have some characteristics that sporthorse breeders could really appreciate -- really good hooves (many compete barefoot), lots of bone, long-term soundness etc. The sport Morgan breeders also have bred for size, so they aren't exactly ponies, either.

(OK, off the Morgan soapbox, except to link to a photo of my mare, from a show a few years ago. She's far from perfect, and doesn't have a lot of Morgan type, but she's pretty nice IMNSHO! 15 hands, knows her low-level dressage, loves lateral work, jumps 3'6" willingly and quickly (with a rider up.) No push required to get her to a Training level eventing gallop for a couple thousand meters. I've had a couple of WB folks tell me they want one like her, "but bigger."http://annsrats.com/horses/feronia/mythic_feronia_01_01.jpg)

[tri]

First of all, there has only been the equestrian events in the Olympics since 1912 so NO ONE has been breeding for the olympic diciplines for 100s of years. Pure BS.

Second of all, only military was allowed to compete until 1952 when civilians & women were allowed to compete.

Thirdly, as I've posted before, a registry like the ISR/Oldna that has the ISR books for "sporthorses" and the two books for strict european standards would work for this country.

Too bad, EB decided he had to call his two strict euro books "Oldenburg" limiting it to only people who wanted to call their horses oldenburg instead of having the vision to create an all encompassing American registry that could have been a world force in the industry.

[NoDQhere]

Funny that Morgans should be used as an example. What breed do you think is on the cover of the advanced pony club manual? And no, Kublakhan is not a fluke.

Honestly, I would rather not see Morgans crossed with WBs. I don't think the traditional Morgan can be improved by anything that a WB has to offer. Likewise, there is nothing in the Morgan that would make the WB a better WB.

People do start to lose credibility when they say that NOT ONLY are their WBs in the Olympics, but they are also the kindest, smartest, soundest, hardiest, easiest to train, etc. Just as there are many reasons to choose a WB, there are also many reasons NOT to choose one. Let's please cut the BS of them, or any breed, being the perfect horse.

This farm has been breeding WBs for over 20 years now. We have virtually no unsoundness no colic no "hard to get along with"! We produce horses that come along quickly with training and are easy and fun for their mostly Ammy owners. I won't say all WBs are perfect, but in my experience of 40 years involved with horses, the WBs have been head and shoulders above the other breeds I have worked with. And they are the most suitable for the disiplines we "do".

If someone asks me which horse is going to be the most suited for Dressage and Jumping I am going to say a good WB, because that is what my experience has taught me.

I was into Dressage and Jumping long before I sat on my first WB. It was after starting with the WBs that I realized how much easier the appropriate horse made the job!

And, yes, I was riding "good" horses, just not horses purpose bred for what I wanted to do.

[quietann]

Uhhhh, one of the highest percentages of OCD is in the American Standardbred. I don't think they're all that tall.

Standardbreds are actually pretty big -- 16 to 17 hands seems to be around the norm.

[Daydream Believer]

Of course, but the fact that they HAVENT been is the reason that you have such a hard time getting htem into the WB books. They havent been until recently purpose bred for this. Teddy OConnor was I believe 3/4th TB 1/8 Arab, hardly "off" bred.

Yes, and 1/4th Shetland pony also.(and 1/4 Arab not 1/8th) That is most definitely not traditional sport horse or pony breeding.

[RiddleMeThis]

Yes, and 1/4th Shetland pony also.(and 1/4 Arab not 1/8th) That is most definitely not traditional sport horse or pony breeding.3/4 plus 1/4 plus 1/4 is 5/4...bit over 100% there. And according to allbreed it is 1/8 Arab and 1/8 shetland.
http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/theodore+oconnor
TB/Arab is most definitely traditional sport horse. The only off thing is the 1/8 shetland.

[Daydream Believer]

Thank you ASB - you put in words what I've been mulling over. Part of the problem we run into is that many don't take the time to understand non-WB bloodlines. I have friends who breed Morgans - and they breed for SPORT - they understand that not all Morgan bloodlines are good for sport.

Good good post. Yes, same thing in our registry. Not all CS horses are the right type for sport. Some are even gaited (God forbid!) and some are too chunky...but if you breed the right ones together, you can produce some very fancy and nice little horses. i am sure that is the same with any breed and by focusing on what you are trying to produce, you can get consistent good results.

I spent years researching Friesian lines and found the same thing - certain bloodlines are good for dressage, others aren't. Some canter well, some don't. Some lines cross well, some don't. Some lines consistently throw good minds, some don't.

Funny thing - this bloodline research isn't a whole lot different with Warmbloods, so why are people NOT aware that there are breeders doing it in the non-Warmblood world?

It's true and it's also true that every WB born is not automatically a perfect dressage horse or a perfect hunter or a good jumper. While there are many nice WB's, there are many very average and even low quality ones. Just being born a WB doesn't necessarily make it a perfect sport horse...but the belief seems to be that it is. Not all QH's are good reiners or cutters either. Some are total duds and that will apply in any breed. Every horse is an individual and will have individual talents.


I do think there is a place in the U.S. for non-Euro/traditional sport horse breeding - and I do think we need a registry that supports that concept. AWS might be a step in the right direction. And it is pretty obvious we need help with the PR side of things as well, otherwise we'll always be fighting an uphill battle, with too many people throwing out misinformation. How often do we see someone post "Can a X-Breed do dressage" only to have someone else respond, if you want to ride dressage, you need a Warmblood. Or, people post that only the "freaks" from non-traditional breeds can be successful at the sports, instead of realizing there is talent available in those "alternative breed" horses.



I agree with this also. We American breed breeders have an uphill battle and the Euro marketing machine still has people convinced that they have to go to Europe to shop for a good WB! So how to begin?

[Daydream Believer]

3/4 plus 1/4 plus 1/4 is 5/4...bit over 100% there. And according to allbreed it is 1/8 Arab and 1/8 shetland.
http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/theodore+oconnor
TB/Arab is most definitely traditional sport horse. The only off thing is the 1/8 shetland.

Yes, but he wasn't a WB or a Euro import but an American unregistered pony and he was called a freak by many. My point remains that he was the product of a focused purpose breeding program for sport ponies and not a freak at all.

[RiddleMeThis]

Yes, but he wasn't a WB or a Euro import but an American unregistered pony and he was called a freak by many. My point remains that he was the product of a focused purpose breeding program for sport ponies and not a freak at all.
Sure but he isnt the "off" breeds that most are talking about on this thread.

[Daydream Believer]

Sure but he isnt the "off" breeds that most are talking about on this thread.

Well Shetlands are definitely NOT traditional sport ponies so I think you can figure on that being "off" but it sure worked for Teddy.

Again, read what these folks are saying. Wynn "reinvented the wheel" with Teddy. She should have just gone shopping in Europe and taken the easy path since the Europeans have done it already and done it better than anyone else. :no:

I'm so glad she did not do that and so glad she's still breeding. Hopefully we'll get another Teddy one day from her program.

[canticle]

This farm has been breeding WBs for over 20 years now. We have virtually no unsoundness no colic no "hard to get along with"! We produce horses that come along quickly with training and are easy and fun for their mostly Ammy owners. I won't say all WBs are perfect, but in my experience of 40 years involved with horses, the WBs have been head and shoulders above the other breeds I have worked with. And they are the most suitable for the disiplines we "do".

If someone asks me which horse is going to be the most suited for Dressage and Jumping I am going to say a good WB, because that is what my experience has taught me.

I was into Dressage and Jumping long before I sat on my first WB. It was after starting with the WBs that I realized how much easier the appropriate horse made the job!

And, yes, I was riding "good" horses, just not horses purpose bred for what I wanted to do.
Wow, no unsoundness or colic! They must never die then! :lol:

Seriously, don't you realize that everyone believes their breed of choice to be head and shoulders above the other breeds they have worked with? That is why they chose that breed in the first place.

[canticle]

Sure but he isnt the "off" breeds that most are talking about on this thread.
What exactly is an "off" breed? To me, Morgans are the "on" breed and everything else is "off" ;-)

[NoDQhere]

Wow, no unsoundness or colic! They must never die then! :lol:

No Canticle, it just might mean we are doing something right. Does that ever even occur to you??? The last horses to "die" on this place were put down due to the "issues" of old age. You do realize that not ALL horses die of colic, don't you???

Seriously, don't you realize that everyone believes their breed of choice to be head and shoulders above the other breeds they have worked with? That is why they chose that breed in the first place.

Of course success couldn't have a durn thing to do with that???? DUH!

[JMurray]

"Off" Breed? Yikes now I feel like I have been sent to the back of the room. I have always used the term "alternative", "non-Traditional" or "American" breed. Calling them "off" breeds is marginalizing us which the American breeds don't deserve. They prove over and over that they have a lot to offer and are worth a look.

I understand your meaning, but I really don't feel "off" using a non- Warmblood.

If we think our chosen breed is hand's down the best it is because of certain traits common to our breed of choice that just suit us and not necessarily that we win every dressage class we enter.

Though that would be nice come to think of it.

[EqTrainer]

I haven't read this entire thread so I apologize if this point has already been covered, but this really caught my attention:

"Of course, there is a place for the American sporthorse. It depends on what market you are targeting."

My thought on that is - the under $20k buyer. The careful buyer knows that they can get wayyyyy more for $20k buying an "off" breed then they can spending $20k on a WB.

Then they tell nobody what their new horse really is, and if pushed, say it's a WB. :lol: That's why everyone thinks everyone else has a WB!

The second part of that may only be a half truth but the first part is quite accurate.

[canticle]

No Canticle, it just might mean we are doing something right. Does that ever even occur to you??? The last horses to "die" on this place were put down due to the "issues" of old age. You do realize that not ALL horses die of colic, don't you???
WBs are great horses, but no sane person would claim them to be paragons of soundness and hardiness. I congratulate you on your flukes, but they are not the norm. Why try to reinvent the wheel when you could instead choose a breed that has bred for certain characteristics for hundreds of years? I really do appreciate your passion, but some of the claims you make just do not ring true.
Of course success couldn't have a durn thing to do with that???? DUH!
My point is that everyone thinks that their breed of choice is the best! This passion is admirable! But please do not lose sight of reality. Do you not realize that the everyone is passionate about their breed of choice? And there are hundreds of breeds! Do you really believe that everyone else except you is unenlightened?

I will say again that I don't see the point of Morgan crosses, particularly Morgan-WB crosses. I don't think a WB person like NoDQhere would appreciate what the breed has to offer. I also can't think of a single thing a WB would add to the original Morgan. There is nothing wrong with separate gene pools. Different strokes! :)

[FriesianX]

"Off" Breed? Yikes now I feel like I have been sent to the back of the room. I have always used the term "alternative", "non-Traditional" or "American" breed. Calling them "off" breeds is marginalizing us which the American breeds don't deserve. They prove over and over that they have a lot to offer and are worth a look.

I understand your meaning, but I really don't feel "off" using a non- Warmblood.

If we think our chosen breed is hand's down the best it is because of certain traits common to our breed of choice that just suit us and not necessarily that we win every dressage class we enter.

Though that would be nice come to think of it.

No, you misunderstand, it is O.F.F. which means Other Fabulous Foals, doesn't it? :lol:

[ASBJumper]

No, you misunderstand, it is O.F.F. which means Other Fabulous Foals, doesn't it? :lol:

It may just! :D
In my case my *gasp* half-Saddlebred colt has shown at two line shows, been in 5 classes and has placed first or second every time, also nabbed a Reserve Junior Champion (beating out a gorgeous yearling) and got a First Premium (81%) rating with the CSHA. And the bloodlines of the foals he's beaten? All WB and TB bloodlines - he's beaten foals by Rotspon, Ariadus, Asher, Ironman, Cabardino.
He was in VERY good company. And the judges (one of them was Randy Roy, the Canadian equivalent of George Morris), LOVED him. ;);)

But I'm sure he's just a fluke. :winkgrin:

[Dressage_Diva333]

I don't feel like there is a place for ASBs, QHs, Morgans, etc.... in Sporthorse breeding.

I think it's wrong that registries are approved QH stallions, as they are western animals. Thats what their bred to do.

[RiddleMeThis]

What exactly is an "off" breed? To me, Morgans are the "on" breed and everything else is "off" ;-)
"off" (and it IS in quotes for a reason) is a breed that is not currently being used as the mane horse for a certain competition. Just like a WB would be an off breed in a reining competition, or a gaited class.
Yikes now I feel like I have been sent to the back of the room. I have always used the term "alternative", "non-Traditional" or "American" breed. Same thing different word. Tomato tomato. They prove over and over that they have a lot to offer and are worth a look. Of course, but not for Olympic level. I think most American breeds would be fine for low to mid level in most discaplines, but most American breeds will never see the inside of an Olympic ring.
I understand your meaning, but I really don't feel "off" using a non- Warmblood.Its not about feeling anything.

[not again]

Given the qualifying system being proposed and implemented by the USEF Dressage Committee, a limited number of US riders on any breed will get to show at third level or beyond.

[EqTrainer]

I don't feel like there is a place for ASBs, QHs, Morgans, etc.... in Sporthorse breeding.

I think it's wrong that registries are approved QH stallions, as they are western animals. Thats what their bred to do.

Nothing personal - but do you live under a rock?

All sorts of breeds are competing under the Sporthorse umbrella.
And QH's are hardly only western animals. This is not exactly a news flash. My own QH is *routinely* mistaken for a dutch or danish WB. QH hunters - when ridden to be so - can be some seriously nice dressage and open hunter horses.

[canticle]

"off" (and it IS in quotes for a reason) is a breed that is not currently being used as the mane horse for a certain competition. Just like a WB would be an off breed in a reining competition, or a gaited class.
So now it's about what everyone else is doing? :lol: Anything but a Morgan is an "off" breed to me. ;) It all comes down to perspective. I do think it is insulting to continuously use the term "off" breed, since it implies that you are looking down your nose at someone else's choice. Of course we know that Morgans are best, but it is best to smile and nod at the preferences of others.
Of course, but not for Olympic level. I think most American breeds would be fine for low to mid level in most discaplines, but most American breeds will never see the inside of an Olympic ring.
Most people couldn't care less about the Olympics. It is a very limited set of disciplines, so why use that as your standard? Such a minute percentage of riders will ever go to the Olympics, and most riders do not have that as a goal in the first place. And what happens when equestrian sports are dropped?

I don't see particularly good overall quality coming from "Olympic-bred" horses. It sounds impressive, but they can have a lot of things wrong with them. I think it is wiser to breed for specific traits and characteristics rather than to breed for something as silly as a horse show. Some of the nicest WBs I have seen have come from those awful ammy-friendly breeding programs!

[NoDQhere]

I haven't read this entire thread so I apologize if this point has already been covered, but this really caught my attention:

"Of course, there is a place for the American sporthorse. It depends on what market you are targeting."

My thought on that is - the under $20k buyer. The careful buyer knows that they can get wayyyyy more for $20k buying an "off" breed then they can spending $20k on a WB.

Then they tell nobody what their new horse really is, and if pushed, say it's a WB. :lol: That's why everyone thinks everyone else has a WB!

The second part of that may only be a half truth but the first part is quite accurate.

Sorry, but there a many nice WBs out there for under $20K. You may need to "beat the bushes" a little, but they are out there, especially in this economy.

[canticle]

Sorry, but there a many nice WBs out there for under $20K. You may need to "beat the bushes" a little, but they are out there, especially in this economy.
Yes, of course they are out there. But you will get the most bang for your buck by looking elsewhere.

[EqTrainer]

Oh sure.. they are indeed out there. But why should a buyer beat the bushes to find a WB when they can easily find something super nice in that price range without having to dig for it?

The cachet of having a WB is over. People are getting clued in - a nice horse is a nice horse, no matter what his papers say. And if they can save some $$$ and time to get a nice horse, more power to them :)

And this is not an anti-WB statement, it is just the facts. I have TB's, I have QH's and I have WB's and WBx's. They have more in common than they do NOT have in common. A good moving, good minded horse is what I am looking for - I look at individuals, bloodlines might invite me to look at a horse but if the conformation, movement and mind I want is not there NOTHING on a pedigree will make me buy it or recommend it to a client.

[NoDQhere]

Yes, of course they are out there. But you will get the most bang for your buck by looking elsewhere.

So Canticle, in your opinion, IF you were interested in being competitive in Dressage or Jumping and had $20K to spend, you would be better off buying a Morgan, ASB, or whatever, rather than buying a WB? Is that really what you are saying?? :eek::eek::eek:

[CurlyLindsay]

Bottomline? 90% of buyers in america don't want a horse to take them to the elite levels of competition. They want a horse they or their child can have fun with, be safe on, keep sound, bring home blues at local, regional, lower level competition, and that other people will think is pretty or special. :) THAT is where the american breeds star.

Market research in tack stores indicate re-riding baby boomers and young riders make up the vast majority of the market. Nearly without fail, educated Re-riders and informed parents will pick the cute, tolerant, FUN to ride horse over the sensitive, high maintenance, demanding athlete. And the majority of the market simply cannot find what they need in the culls of the elite programs- the things that MAKE an elite horse elite, and an elite program elite, are the things that riders like me wouldn't ride or own if paid to. :)

[EqTrainer]

Not Canticle, but I can tell you that if I had $20k to spend and the horse were for me, if I had to start w/breed as my first criteria it would go:

TB
Appendix QH
welsh cob/WBx
ASB/WBx
TB/WBx
QH/WBx

I would consider an Arab/WBx.

I do scout around quite a bit and for under $20k, there are some superlative horses to be had in those breeds and those crosses. It would be much harder to find a superlative WB in that price range. If I stayed away from straight WB's I might even have enough left to buy a new custom saddle to fit my new beastie :)

[canticle]

So Canticle, in your opinion, IF you were interested in being competitive in Dressage or Jumping and had $20K to spend, you would be better off buying a Morgan, ASB, or whatever, rather than buying a WB? Is that really what you are saying?? :eek::eek::eek:
Yes, *I* would be better off buying a Morgan no matter how much money I had to spend.

That is my personal preference. I imagine some people would go with a WB or a cross, others would choose a QH, etc. etc.

[Daydream Believer]

I think the point she is trying to make is that you can buy a better "off breed" horse for the same money than you can find in a WB. I think that is a very good point and pretty accurate at least here in the East...unless you are wiling to buy a youngster and wait on it to grow up. Unless prices for WB's come way down, the American breeds will always be a more economical mount. The good thing (for us American breed fans) is that due to American breeds are now being purpose bred for sport more than ever so you can find just as "nice" and just as talented a horse as the majority of the WB's....maybe not a horse going to the Olympics... but one that is very suitable for 95% of the needs of most riders...and for way less $$ most of the time.

I think it's about time the WB's had some real competition personally! I celebrate the diversity of having many choices of breeds and thank goodness there's something other than one breed or type to choose from. ;-) I love that ASB's half Saddlebred baby has gone out and defeated a number of fancy well bred youngsters. Good for her! :D

I've told this story before but I was at the Duke Children's Classic Grand Prix some years ago (2004 I think) in Raleigh and the lady behind me had to announce to her friends loudly every time a new horse came in the arena how it was bred and who it was by...how much it had cost, etc... They were all WB's. One of the last horses to come in was a gray draft/TB cross. I heard her pause and say "Oh, a school master...how NICE." She was very condescending and I was getting really tired of her at this point. We sat there and watched this draft cross jump the ONLY clear round for the entire evening and it won. There was a deafening silence from behind other than the gasps of horror as he won! I thought it was truly poetic justice! A lowly despised draft cross of dubious pedigree had beaten the well bred sport horses at their own game and this very narrow minded woman got to see it. I'm sure it was just a "freak" or it was explained as such...:no:

Don't write off the "off" breeds. They are here to stay and they have a place in sport.:yes:

[NoDQhere]

Bottomline? 90% of buyers in america don't want a horse to take them to the elite levels of competition. They want a horse they or their child can have fun with, be safe on, keep sound, bring home blues at local, regional, lower level competition, and that other people will think is pretty or special. :) THAT is where the american breeds star.

Market research in tack stores indicate re-riding baby boomers and young riders make up the vast majority of the market. Nearly without fail, educated Re-riders and informed parents will pick the cute, tolerant, FUN to ride horse over the sensitive, high maintenance, demanding athlete. And the majority of the market simply cannot find what they need in the culls of the elite programs- the things that MAKE an elite horse elite, and an elite program elite, are the things that riders like me wouldn't ride or own if paid to. :)

But that is exactly "who" 90% of our buyers are, too. Just because a horse has the talent to get to FEI, for instance, doesn't make it unsuitable for the person who doesn't want to go above training level or do local level hunters or whatever. Like I said on a previous post, I've NEVER met a Pro who didn't appreciate an easy horse and I've NEVER met an Ammy who didn't appreciate a talented horse.

I won't flatter our program by calling it "elite", but I'm pretty sure that the elite farms like Hill Top and ISF are producing many horses that can be ridden by "less than elite" riders just fine.

[canticle]

But that is exactly "who" 90% of our buyers are, too. Just because a horse has the talent to get to FEI, for instance, doesn't make it unsuitable for the person who doesn't want to go above training level or do local level hunters or whatever. Like I said on a previous post, I've NEVER met a Pro who didn't appreciate an easy horse and I've NEVER met an Ammy who didn't appreciate a talented horse.

I won't flatter our program by calling it "elite", but I'm pretty sure that the elite farms like Hill Top and ISF are producing many horses that can be ridden by "less than elite" riders just fine.
Funny you should mention ISF. One of their stallions is known for having a not-so-great temperament and passing it on! :rolleyes:

Buying a WB specifically for temperament, soundness, and longevity is like buying a Morgan specifically for jumping ability. That is not to say that there is anything wrong with either breed that precludes them from having the aforementioned traits. But why buy a $30000 "less than elite" horse from ISF when you spend half that on a different breed altogether? The same thing applies the other way.

If you are a non-Olympic rider, the only reason to choose a WB is personal preference. Not that there is anything wrong with that! We should have respect for others, no matter what their breed of choice is.

[NoDQhere]

Funny you should mention ISF. One of their stallions is known for having a not-so-great temperament and passing it on! :rolleyes:

Buying a WB specifically for temperament, soundness, and longevity is like buying a Morgan specifically for jumping ability. That is not to say that there is anything wrong with either breed that precludes them from having the aforementioned traits. But why buy a $30000 "less than elite" horse from ISF when you spend half that on a different breed altogether? The same thing applies the other way.

If you are a non-Olympic rider, the only reason to choose a WB is personal preference. Not that there is anything wrong with that! We should have respect for others, no matter what their breed of choice is.

This makes about as much sense as buying a Trakehner for Cutting or Barrel Racing because it would be so much cheaper than the right kind of Quarter Horse. :rolleyes:

[RiddleMeThis]

So now it's about what everyone else is doing? Considering that is my definition of how I have been using "off" yes. since it implies that you are looking down your nose at someone else's choice. Not at all, but if you feel the need to feel that way, feel free.

It is a very limited set of disciplines, so why use that as your standard? Such a minute percentage of riders will ever go to the Olympics, and most riders do not have that as a goal in the first place. And what happens when equestrian sports are dropped? Because that is what most Euro registries ARE striving for. Horses that CAN and WILL reach Olympic level, and if and when they are not an Olympic sport it will the top international level of the sport.

awful ammy-friendly breeding programs!No has said that an Olympic level horse cant be ammy friendly, or that a top horse couldnt be ammy friendly. They are not mutually exclusive.

[Fairview Horse Center]

Top level horses are super sensitive, and reactive. That is not a good combination for most amateur riders. Many threads too on the dressage board about people buying horses with such big gaits, that they can't ride them. Combine that with a very sensitive horse, and it will get upset at the "abuse" from a rider in survival mode.

[pintopiaffe]

eek... careful guys... Most of this was pretty eye opening and constructive. Now it's getting... um... not so much. ;)

Please, PLEASE remember in *all* of these discussions, people are passionate about their breed, because they LOVE their breed!

I think it's awesome to be completely devoted to ONE breed. I'm not so lucky. I have several passions...

Please, let's keep that in the back of our minds as we discuss... don't make it personal, or degrading... I LOVE that people are so passionate about their breeds and goals. But sometimes that comes out wrong in defending them or promoting them... ;)

[pintopiaffe]

I think the point she is trying to make is that you can buy a better "off breed" horse for the same money than you can find in a WB. I think that is a very good point and pretty accurate at least here in the East...unless you are wiling to buy a youngster and wait on it to grow up. Unless prices for WB's come way down, the American breeds will always be a more economical mount. The good thing (for us American breed fans) is that due to American breeds are now being purpose bred for sport more than ever so you can find just as "nice" and just as talented a horse as the majority of the WB's....maybe not a horse going to the Olympics... but one that is very suitable for 95% of the needs of most riders...and for way less $$ most of the time:yes: :yes: <clapclapclap> SO well said.

I do scout around quite a bit and for under $20k, there are some superlative horses to be had in those breeds and those crosses. It would be much harder to find a superlative WB in that price range. If I stayed away from straight WB's I might even have enough left to buy a new custom saddle to fit my new beastie :)

In my area, if the papers aren't in English (Dutch, German, Swedish, heck--in English but from Oz or NZ!), add at least one comma or zero to the pricetag. But for the same price you can get an EXCEPTIONAL 'non-traditional' horse who is still PURPOSE BRED for sport and competitive as far as the rider has the talent and dedication to bring it.

Affordability IS an issue. I think it's probably the elephant in the livingroom, really.

Don't get me wrong. I adore Trakehners. I have a colt who I would sell my soul for him to be eligible for registration, but he has 1/32 of ASB back in the woodpile, where he gets his pinto colour. I am hoping to some day be able to breed him to the right OSB mare, and in a couple generations, have one of his grandchildren or great grandchildren who has 1/64th, or .02% of that pinto--and yet kept the TO gene and continue the tradition of great pinto Trakehners which is dying out completely. So no way Jose am I bashing Euro breeds.

It's been a really enlightening thread. Definitely the consensus is most WB breeders don't want American breeds anywhere near their books. That's ok--it was in the title ;) Don't let that disintegrate into an "American breeds are useless for sport" idea though... :no:

SO where do we go? I agree in part with the poster who said don't crossbreed Morgans--find a sportbred Morgan. Yet I am always intrigued and compelled by Hybrid Vigour. Some of the best horses I've ever known have been deliberate, well executed crosses. Then you go back to one side or the other--you don't keep crossing, that's not the point. You outcross once, for a reason, then go back. I have a mare who would be an ideal candidate for a Morgan cross. Or a Lipp, or an Iberian or a baroque APHA. TYPE TO TYPE. ;)

For those who think that APHA/AQHA are only stock horses, you need to see some cutting/reining lines who are super uphill, with loft and suspension and a very nice neckset... Very Spanish in phenotype. Fabulous cross with baroque types for dressage. What do you think Lusitanos and Andalusians are bred to do? Fight bulls. Sit & spin. Lift off the front end, around the hind. Collect on a dime and give you a nickle's change--then take off like a shot and lengthen the frame and extend... One of my favorite High School schoolmasters is a bullfighting bred Luso. I would throw a western saddle on him in a heartbeat and work cows--though I suspect he'd duck right out from under me because he's GOT so much cow. :lol:

I dunno. Maybe I don't have enough focus. Maybe I should find the absolutely perfect APHAs or Iberians... and breed only purebreds. But what I'm doing is working. My kids are out there competing & winning, against the Euro breeds. And of *course* I am proud that they include American breeds. If they are out there doing it, they certainly aren't inferior... but where do they fit in the grand scheme of things?

[Astraled]

What does it matter, as long as they fit into your scheme? Keep your own studbooks ala Zangersheide.

Keep looking for that seal of approval from clients and judges (sounds like you are doing fine there, BTW), not so much from registries not geared to your horses.

[camohn]

I also don't really care where my Paint/WB crosses "fit" as long as they do their job. Some of my crosses are AWR and some Book II in RPSI. Their pedigree is documented either was so that is good enough for me unless I am raising a stallion candidate.

[JWB]

While there are exceptions to the rule, most QH, Arabian, SBs are not bred to perform at the highest level of Olympic sports. Since that is what the warmbloods are bred for, adding outside breeds is not going to help them.

Conversely, I don't think that a Hanoverian is going to help the QH breed at all either. It could never match the speed and agility and "cow sense" that a good working QH was bred for. If I breed an Oldenburg to an Appaloosa and the baby is born with spots, that alone does not make it an Appaloosa. I'd be fooling myself to try and win an endeurance ride on a Holsteiner. If that was my sport of choice, an Arabian would probably be a much better fit and I'd add nothing to my prospects of winning a 100 mile ride by crossing the Hosteiner in. Most of the fox hunters in my hunt ride draft crosses. They're steady and athletic in the hunt field and the perfect horse for the job - but they don't call them warmbloods. They're field hunters and they're very good at it. They'd never keep up as top level eventers though.

There is nothing wrong with not being a warmblood if you're not breeding for Grand Prix something...

Perhaps the AWS or some other organization could become the American Sport Horse society... There are some VERY nice sport horses out there that are not warmbloods. Perhaps some of these sport horses could even compete at the top levels and give the warmbloods a run for their money. Competition is good for everyone after all.

As for adding "ameture" quality horses to the warmblood pool, I'm sorry but if only .05% of horses make it to the top level of sport, that does not justify breeding horses that you KNOW will produce at a lower level. Shoot for the best possible horse you can get and the fact is, .95% will be ameture horses anyway - even with FANTASTIC bloodlines. Why intentionally breed lower quality when even breeding the best to the best you may get lower quality?

[canticle]

As for adding "ameture" quality horses to the warmblood pool, I'm sorry but if only .05% of horses make it to the top level of sport, that does not justify breeding horses that you KNOW will produce at a lower level. Shoot for the best possible horse you can get and the fact is, .95% will be ameture horses anyway - even with FANTASTIC bloodlines. Why intentionally breed lower quality when even breeding the best to the best you may get lower quality?
I don't think ammy horses are lower quality at all. It is a different market altogether. The top level horse may very well have traits which make him lower quality to the ammy. It isn't all about show results -- people use many criteria when evaluating horses.

Why does everyone have to breed for the Olympics? Especially when the vast majority of buyers don't want that.

I've seen quite a few "cast offs" from big breeding programs such as ISF. You would be much better off buying a purpose bred ammy horse. Traits that ammys value do not occur by accident! :)

[Waterwitch]

It's been a really enlightening thread. Definitely the consensus is most WB breeders don't want American breeds anywhere near their books. That's ok--it was in the title ;) Don't let that disintegrate into an "American breeds are useless for sport" idea though... :no:

Thanks for bringing the thread back on topic pintopiaffe. I think the biggest elephant in the room besides cost (and it is relevant to the other thread) is that most WB breeders will not associate themselves with any registry that allows in non-WB breeds, even if strict performance and phenotype qualifications are met to enter the studbook.

So there really is no point in arguing about it at all - or trying to develop a new registry that will do both - those WB breeders will never support it.

Time for something entirely different that is NOT privately owned.

[TaliaCristianna]

For those who think that APHA/AQHA are only stock horses, you need to see some cutting/reining lines who are super uphill, with loft and suspension and a very nice neckset... Very Spanish in phenotype. Fabulous cross with baroque types for dressage. What do you think Lusitanos and Andalusians are bred to do? Fight bulls. Sit & spin. Lift off the front end, around the hind. Collect on a dime and give you a nickle's change--then take off like a shot and lengthen the frame and extend...

THANK YOU.

These horses are known as "western" mounts because their owners MADE them western mounts. It's not because they have a "western" conformation. They weren't born with a western saddle permanently attached to their back.

People are just now starting to realize that athleticism is athleticism. Many of the traits that are considered assets in the western performance rings are also assets in the sporthorse rings.

[Daydream Believer]

So there really is no point in arguing about it at all - or trying to develop a new registry that will do both - those WB breeders will never support it.

Time for something entirely different that is NOT privately owned.

That was my point to Fairview on her thread. I am not sure that it would ever fly. The Sporthorse Association that tries to be the one all registry for both WB's and American breeds for Sport will never make the majority of the WB breeders happy by allowing the "lowly imperfect" American breeds or crossbreds in. :no:

It is so disappointing in reading some of the replies on this thread. I miss the 1980's when a good horse in Sport was a good horse and not just a WB...it was a TB, an appaloosa, a Conn/TB cross...and whatever else could do the job and do it well.

So where do we start? I admit to knowing NOTHING about starting a registry however I do know some folks who have done it recently. Obviously this registry would need inspectors that are unbiased and open minded also. I do know they recently applied for and got 501c status so if that is of interest I can pick their brains on that one.

[NoDQhere]

THANK YOU.

These horses are known as "western" mounts because their owners MADE them western mounts. It's not because they have a "western" conformation. They weren't born with a western saddle permanently attached to their back.

People are just now starting to realize that athleticism is athleticism. Many of the traits that are considered assets in the western performance rings are also assets in the sporthorse rings.

These horses are known as western mounts because they have been PURPOSE BRED for the western disciplines. They, for the most part, are built to work "close to the ground" as that is what stock horse work requires. (I'm not talking about the 17.2 hand "angel fish" that are bred for the HUS classes). They have heavy hindquarters, straight hind legs and short front legs and a low neck set. Sure, you can put an english saddle on them but that doesn't make them something they are not. This in no way makes them bad or lesser quality, just different. They are very good at what they have been PURPOSE BRED FOR!

[cloverlone]

I have an interesting case on this subject...

I've bred a 'western' horse into Holsteiner.. not that I would personally classify that first mare as western at all. She was a national champion hunter with Max Tapero; former Bedford Hunt master. She was mostly TB but a registered appaloosa nonetheless. First generation was pretty amazing - Locksley Spotlight. He was massive and a very talented jumper; noted by Jeff Marsh that Morton 'Cappy' Smith saw this horse as one of the best raw talents he'd ever seen. OF course, Cappy wanted to see black shoe polish across that blanket! :)

So next generation is out of a Holsteiner mare; old blood. Three full siblings; mare (colored) fully approved OLD (ISR/OLD) with branded daughter (no color). One brother that was a champion hunter on the A circuit, plain bay. The stallion sibling (colored) got injured and is RPSI II.

Next generation has a German verband stam and is blanketed with only 4% outcross blood. So, the color has come forward and the pedigree is built. Next generation is even better at 2%!

Why do this???? Same reason as the pinto.. it's fun to walk across the show grounds and turn heads. I think it's very American to have old western color on our fancy show horses. It's just a statement in style and takes nothing away from the horse's ability. I showed around 17 years ago in the amateur hunters on Spotlight and got ribbons I did not expect in large classes. The color caught everyone's eye ... he jumped on the buckle and I just sat and pointed; he had a perfect step. Maybe the judge would not have paid as much attention if I was on a plain bay??? We were easy to remember...

I have witnessed great German judges look of surprise of pedigree to talent to color. I will keep pressing the issue, patiently. If you have a breeding goal I think you should follow it. This is America and if you know how to get them in the show ring and win, that is what matters here. Germany makes a lot of money off us and our own breeders struggle. Of course if we could organize a system to get 100 horses under saddle in a barn to bring in riders, sure they would buy here. The head salesman would still probably have to have an accent... :) I do very much admire their system of breeding, training and selling. We just need our own that works for us here.

gail

www.cloverlone.com

[FriesianX]

That was my point to Fairview on her thread. I am not sure that it would ever fly. The Sporthorse Association that tries to be the one all registry for both WB's and American breeds for Sport will never make the majority of the WB breeders happy by allowing the "lowly imperfect" American breeds or crossbreds in. :no:

It is so disappointing in reading some of the replies on this thread. I miss the 1980's when a good horse in Sport was a good horse and not just a WB...it was a TB, an appaloosa, a Conn/TB cross...and whatever else could do the job and do it well.

So where do we start? I admit to knowing NOTHING about starting a registry however I do know some folks who have done it recently. Obviously this registry would need inspectors that are unbiased and open minded also. I do know they recently applied for and got 501c status so if that is of interest I can pick their brains on that one.

OK, here are some thoughts - and I have worked with a small registry (as one of the core volunteers), so I have a few ideas and thoughts.

1. Inspections are wonderful - but they are expensive. How much of a start up registries budget can you pour into inspections. For members, how far are they willing to go to be inspected? A couple of options - what about video inspection? Allow an independent videographer to video the horse, both for conformation and for movement, sign off that they are not the owner or relative of the owner, and the tape was not edited in any way, and mail that in. Saves the travel costs for both inspectors and owners who have to haul their horses from everywhere. Hire a USEF Sport Horse (DSHB?) judge to come in a few times a year and review and grade the videos. Alternatively - use the AWS model of performance = acceptance, but maybe bump up the requirements a bit.

2. DNA - in this day and age, it is probably necessary. Some registries don't require it, but I think the time has come for all horses to be DNA'd.

3. Approval for breeding - while the 50 or 100 day stallion testing is a great test, it is NOT realistic. Cost is crazy, and for many people, they don't WANT to turn their horse over to a grueling test with riders they are not familiar with, and usually in a location they can't get to easily. Use performance for breeding approval - and include some of the popular sports in the U.S., including Hunter, Reining, and Endurance (along with the international sports of Dressage, Eventing, Combined Driving, and Jumping). You can create different books for different sports if people are worried about that concept - even two different books, one for the traditional international sports, one for the North American Sports.

4. Data Base - start it early on so you don't have to go back later. You need a data base on bloodlines, offspring, performance results. Will probably have to PAY someone to develop that beast.

5. Awards - USDF, USEF, CT, etc - people LOVE awards. It costs money, but it is a necessary part of any registry.

Those are just some initial ideas. I agree, the time has come where we might need such a registry. It is a hard climb though - a registry doesn't gain membership without years of hard work and public relations. You spend a lot of time in the Catch-22. No one wants to pay to be part of a small registry, and a small registry doesn't have the money to promote and attract members.

[TaliaCristianna]

They have heavy hindquarters, straight hind legs and short front legs and a low neck set.

It's REALLY hard to take your opinion on the matter seriously after reading this statement.

[NoDQhere]

It's REALLY hard to take your opinion on the matter seriously after reading this statement.

And it was difficult to lend much credibility to your comment that they are only western horses because they have a western saddle on :lol:. I was trying to at least be polite. We are in the heart of "big time" QH country so see more than a few of them. I did try to make it clear that I was talking about QHs PURPOSE BRED for the stock horse disciplines.

[ASBJumper]

Talia - don't bother. :lol:

I will use the same argument yet again, with caps and bold font, since condescending cyber-yelling is apparently the only way to get your point across.

Thoroughbreds have been PURPOSE BRED FOR RACING for centuries. And still are, 90% of the time. Not for jumping, not for piaffing, FOR RACING. The fact that Europeans used them to lighten their horses DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT THEY WERE ALL, AND STILL ARE, BRED FOR RACING.

Arabs have been PURPOSE BRED FOR ENDURANCE AND HALTER for centuries. And still are, 90% of the time. Not for jumping, not for piaffing, FOR ENDURANCE AND HALTER. The fact that Europeans used them to lighten their horses DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT THEY WERE ALL, AND STILL ARE, BRED FOR ENDURANCE AND HALTER.

But... there are *some* who are purposely breeding PURE TBs and Arabs for sport. Just like there are *some* breeding Saddlebreds, Morgans, QHs etc for sport.

TBs and Arabs do not have some sort of magic gene that makes them cross well with Warmbloods while nothing else will. Sorry. ;)


Okay, so moving on....


Can anyone offer a theory as to why it happens so often that people label their backyard Percheron/Arab/Appy an American Warmblood? That just doesn't seem to happen up here.... I don't know of, nor have I ever *heard* of, anyone in Canada breeding Perchaloosarabs and calling them Canadian Warmbloods on Equine.com or whatever.. :confused: It just doesn't seem to happen up here all that much!! So why is it so common down south? I agree it hurts the credibility of the AWR and AWS, but.. why does it happen so often?? How can you stop it?

I still say provisional breeding licenses should be considered... the only argument that opposing people have to including exceptional examples of non-trad breeds is that they feel they won't reproduce their qualities. Well why not let them prove themselves? What is so unappealing or threatening about that?

[grayarabpony]

And it was difficult to lend much credibility to your comment that they are only western horses because they have a western saddle on :lol:. I was trying to at least be polite. We are in the heart of "big time" QH country so see more than a few of them. I did try to make it clear that I was talking about QHs PURPOSE BRED for the stock horse disciplines.


When I think of QHs for sport I don't think of horses purpose bred for western disciplines, but I've seen some reiners (and I haven't seen that many reining horses, only I spent a year at a reining barn) that would have been good for other types of sport. One was being wasted as a reining horse; his legs were just too long and he was always going to have some difficulty with the sliding; I kept seeing him as a dressage or jumping prospect. He was a lovely elegant horse who could have easily passed as a TB or modern refined warmblood. Another was a very well-proportioned horse who probably could have done just about anything, including being a very good reining horse. He had a real talent for true collection, and was simply a really good athlete. Three good gaits. He made anyone who rode him look good.

[tri]

Really, Nodqhere, I don't have quarterhorses, but I know that there are many different types of qhs. The ones you describe do exist but so do the uphill reiners with nice angles in their hips, longer higher necksets with trim throatlatches who can engage and lengthen quite well.

Remember, one of the top ten hunter sires in the entire country is a quarterhorse and he is NOT a short, straight legged, low neckset, downhill horse.

[ASBJumper]

Here here... case in point - I am not a QH person.. at all.. no interest. But I know a nice horse when I see one, and I know a prepotent sire when I see one. Go to DreamHorse and search for progeny of "Skys Blue Boy".

I was floored. :eek: I wouldn't kick ANY of those horses outta my barn. DAMN!!!

[TaliaCristianna]

Thanks everyone. I knew I wasn't the only person here that would find that statement preposterous!

[EqTrainer]

And to add to Tri's post, there are a lot of QH stallions who no one breeding sport horses would think to use, because they have only seen their babies rolling peanuts. I will never forget seeing a video of Artful Move and thinking Holy Crap... someone needs to cross him to make dressage horses...

AND - regarding TB sporthorses - let's not forget that TB stud fees alone stop most people from using them to breed sporthorses. Stud fees in the 20's, 30's, 40k range are not going to be regularly used by anyone but people breeding for race horses...

There is more going on here than meets the surface.

And someone asked why there were so many horses labeled AWB at one time, but not so much anymore? Because at one time, it was so cache to own a WB that sellers would do anything to imply that the horse they were selling was a WB. Now they are getting MORE response from listing their horses as what they really are, because people are *looking* for those horses now.

Everything has trends. The trend will undoubtably swing around to something else at some point but now it's pointing towards the "off" breeds. I see a lot of people who had TB's or QH's at some point, switched to WB's and now are looking to go back, because the huge difference they thought they would experience simply is not there. And yes, that is for all sorts of reasons - people think buying a new, better, horse will make them better riders - it doesn't. People think you need a flamboyant moving horse to do dressage and then they find out they don't, and they cannot ride it anyway. People think they want a forward horse and realize they really don't. But it is also because they find, in the end, that all nice horses have more in common than less, and that they would rather spend the same amount to get a really nice "off" breed than spend the same to get a common WB. And on that note - I really do have to wonder sometimes what inspections and registries are really doing for WB's. Premium baby.. Elite baby.. really, it means so little in the end. So many of those babies turn out to be badly conformed, bad movers with bad temperaments. People are starting to see that a brand on a butt does not guarantee them a nice horse and they are not amused. Naive at one point, oh yes. But that is the *idea* that has been put out there - that the WB grading systems ensure something to the buyer and they don't. Of course they CANNOT.

I would love to see a tracking system for sport horses. I could care less about a registry. But a good tracking system would be helpful... think of how many people on this board alone can tell you all about certain lines of TB's.. of QH's... of Morgans, Arabs, ASBs, etc. etc. etc.

And I am not even going to get into - AGAIN - why breeding for Olympic horses really does not produce ammy horses if you fail.

Apologies for the run-on sentences and somewhat random thoughts tied together, I have very few minutes to devote to COTH today but this is a subject that I really find interesting.

[TaliaCristianna]

Can anyone offer a theory as to why it happens so often that people label their backyard Percheron/Arab/Appy an American Warmblood? That just doesn't seem to happen up here.... I don't know of, nor have I ever *heard* of, anyone in Canada breeding Perchaloosarabs and calling them Canadian Warmbloods on Equine.com or whatever.. :confused: It just doesn't seem to happen up here all that much!! So why is it so common down south? I agree it hurts the credibility of the AWR and AWS, but.. why does it happen so often?? How can you stop it?

I think it happens because some people here feel that if you throw a fancy word like "warmblood" into the description of a grade horse you can somehow make triple the money you would if you just labeled it a regular grade horse or draft-cross.

For a while I think it worked for them. Now people like that quickly come under fire for misrepresentation.

We also have a surplus of grade horses here. People are always coming up with creative ways to market them...

[TaliaCristianna]

EqTrainer, your entire post is GENIUS.


I would love to see a tracking system for sport horses. I could care less about a registry. But a good tracking system would be helpful... think of how many people on this board alone can tell you all about certain lines of TB's.. of QH's... of Morgans, Arabs, ASBs, etc. etc. etc.

ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY AGREE.

My mares are both Q Ton Eagle bred. While researching APHA stallions I saw many examples of APHA registered horses that were very much the good sporthorse-type. I was shocked to see how many of them had Q Ton Eagle in their pedigree.

This is my mare Angel. She is 16 years old in these photos. She is also a proud mother of 8 foals to date. As you can see, she is not a "peanut roller" by any means.

http://www.horsegroomingsupplies.com/pictures/gphoto-g151089.html

http://www.horsegroomingsupplies.com/pictures/gphoto-g151090.html

http://www.horsegroomingsupplies.com/pictures/gphoto-g171427.html

http://www.horsegroomingsupplies.com/pictures/gphoto-g178843.html

[grayarabpony]

AND - regarding TB sporthorses - let's not forget that TB stud fees alone stop most people from using them to breed sporthorses. Stud fees in the 20's, 30's, 40k range are not going to be regularly used by anyone but people breeding for race horses...



There are some TBs who would be superb for sportshorse breeding for inexpensive stud fees -- around $2500 -- unfortunately, without a good performance tracking system, these TBs are mainly known as mediocre or failed racing sires. Plus, the live cover/ registration issue is a problem for mare owners.

[FriesianX]

Thanks everyone. I knew I wasn't the only person here that would find that statement preposterous!


I think there are many here who agree, but are tired of shouting down a rabbit hole :lol:

If people really took a look at bloodlines, they'd see that many Appaloosas and Paints are actually almost pure TBRED! In fact, go visit the local track and take a look at the race horses in the Appy classes. They look like Tbreds (with spots, of course).

I wish I could find a picture of Kublekahn over an advanced 3 day obstacle - no one would deny that little 15.1 hand Morgan was an elite sport horse! And I've seen a few showing FEI and beating out the Warmbloods. I figure ANY horse who makes it to FEI qualifies as a sport horse, don't they?

Here is a link to a photo album of some horses from my own ranch - all are Friesian/Warmblood crosses. I blend Euro lines to Euro lines - Friesian to Warmblood (European WB - my mares are by Galoubet, Wolkenstein II, Lehnsritter, Diamont, well known WB lines) with a VERY specific goal in mind. This is a non-traditional blend, I realize, but my horses are pretty eye opening - non-traditional can work. I think some of us non-traditional (hehehehe, O.F.F.) breeders have specific goals and have carefully planned out their breeding plans.

Many of the horses shown are youngsters - this concept of crossing Friesians to Warmbloods is in its infancy, so only a few of these horses are in the top levels, but no one can really say these are an inferior amateur's horse. These guys can MOVE, they have great minds, they are sturdy, and are already starting to make their marks in USDF Regionals and USDF Awards, even though there are very few of these horses! I've converted a few "Warmblood" fans already.

http://share.shutterfly.com/action/welcome?sid=0AZsmrZs4cOWLHYA

Do I claim that my horses are going to the Olympics? No, but only a handful of horses go to the Olympics every four years. Are these horses capable of showing in the upper levels of dressage? Yes, there is no doubt about it. They have the movement, they have the mind - all they need is the right rider. AND - if they don't end up with an FEI trainer/rider, they still have the movement and mind to do well with a less ambitious or less skilled rider. They are smart horses, but easily toned down (ie non-reactive), they LOVE people and are very tuned in to pleasing their person. And they are sturdy, easy keepers, good bone, strong feet, healthy, stoic, happy horses.

Oh, for you Morgan fans - the chestnut pictured about halfway through the album is a Morgan/Friesian - a young horse shown at about 5 years old.

Because of these horses and the other non-traditional horses I"ve had the pleasure to know throughout the years, I firmly believe there is a place in the sport horse world for the American Bred and other non-Traditional horses. And maybe we need to give up on trying to bring the Euro-registry people into our camp - heck, it is NOT in their business interests for people to discover that there is an alternative to the Euro-registered WB - and we need to pool our talent, knowledge, and resources toward creating our own organization (whether that is a registry or an advertising cooperative or a breeders group, I don't know).

[TaliaCristianna]

FriesianX, a person would have to be insane to suggest that your horses are anything BUT fine examples of true sporthorses...

[grayarabpony]

I don't know why people don't want to use the sportshorse talent that is here in our breeding programs. :no: If the horse was in Europe and could do the job, he/she would be used in their breeding programs.

[Fancy That]

(OK, off the Morgan soapbox, except to link to a photo of my mare, from a show a few years ago. She's far from perfect, and doesn't have a lot of Morgan type, but she's pretty nice IMNSHO! 15 hands, knows her low-level dressage, loves lateral work, jumps 3'6" willingly and quickly (with a rider up.) No push required to get her to a Training level eventing gallop for a couple thousand meters. I've had a couple of WB folks tell me they want one like her, "but bigger."http://annsrats.com/horses/feronia/mythic_feronia_01_01.jpg)

I'm a Morgan person too, but enjoy the "sport disciplines" and grew up doing the Hunter thing w/ TB's, etc.

I think the American breeds, Morgans, ASBs, QH/Paint, etc *CAN* do well in the sport world - we've all seen it!

BUT - I have to point out - what is the BREED STANDARD OF PERFECTION??

A Morgan that excels at near-the-top of the sport disciplines doesn't look like this:
Morgan Breed Standard of Perfection, stallion:
http://www.equinepost.com/breedquest/morgan1.jpg

Morgan Breed Standard of Perfection, mare:
http://www.equinepost.com/breedquest/morgan2.jpg

Regarding QuietAnn's example of her mare....she's very sport-like, and looks to be the type that can excel in the Open World. But is she super typey for a Morgan? No. My own Morgan mare is 15.3 hands, and very sporty-looking. If it weren't for her long mane, she'd blend right in at an open show. I don't consider her typey, either. Here she is:

My Morgan Under Saddle:
http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk150/elaineshickman/HunterPace_082507.jpg

Under Saddle Again:
http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk150/elaineshickman/IMG_5813.jpg

Standing:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/85/246017883_30c2ea6df8.jpg?v=0

To me, she looks like a small Warmblood more than a classic Morgan. So, though there are Morgans that can do really well, they aren't necessarily "classic, typey Morgans"

I think the trend in many breeds (just like what has happened with the Quarter Horse), is that there are different types being bred. So ONE breed standard is less and less adhered to.

If I were a Morgan breeder (which I'm not), I'd be trying to breed to the standard of perfection. That standard does not create a top-level-Olympic type horse. If I wanted a top-level Olympic-type sporthorse, but liked the Morgan traits...I may be inclined to breed a TB x Morgan :) (putting my flak jacket on now!)

BTW - Morgans of all types are fantastic for ammies and for what the majority of riders like to do! My own mare does everything from Hunter Paces (will try foxhunting soon), Eventing, local H/J shows, trails, camping etc. She's perfect for me!

[FriesianX]

FriesianX, a person would have to be insane to suggest that your horses are anything BUT fine examples of true sporthorses...

Thank you - yet there are people in this thread (and other threads, hahaha, do a search on AWS for example) who say that there is no reason to "change" the Warmblood, and no way that non-traditional horses can ever compete with the Warmblood in the sport disciplines. So I offer up my horses as just one of many examples where maybe there is a way, a reason...

[FriesianX]

I've dabbled with Morgans over the years - I think of them as mini-Warmbloods - the sport bred ones are pretty darn nice. Here are a few that I've had (or currently have). Other than the chestnut (who is only 1/2 Morgan, and 1/2 Friesian), the others are purebreds, and are typical Morgan size, 14.3 to 15.2 hands. Hehehehe, they are also all bays - typical of a Morgan :winkgrin:

http://share.shutterfly.com/action/welcome?sid=0AZsmrZs4cOWLHjg

I've seen Morgans, Welsh Cobs, and Haflingers that really were outstanding sporthorses. Also Andalusians and Friesians that would give a NICE quality Warmblood a run for their money. Oh, while I'm at it - Irish Draughts and Irish Sporthorses, Connemaras, and a POA, all of whom consistently beat the fancy Warmbloods at big shows. I've seen nice Warmbloods, I've seen poor quality ones - so, my big question is WHY do we exclude horses based on their breed? Why can't each horse be evaluated for their own quality? All Warmbloods are not good quality sport horses, but some are. The SAME exact statement can be made for almost EVERY breed.

We need to educate horse people everywhere on HOW to evaluate a horse for its own merit. Unfortunately, good education is expensive - USDF has some great programs for dressage education - the L program (great sessions on evaluating the gaits) and the DSHB Symposiums (for evaluating conformation). But they are way too expensive (and not easily available) for the average horse person.

Perhaps, part of the need we have in the U.S. goes back to education?

[Fancy That]

[QUOTE=FriesianX;3618127]<SNIP> Other than the chestnut (who is only 1/2 Morgan, and 1/2 Friesianhttp://share.shutterfly.com/action/welcome?sid=0AZsmrZs4cOWLHjg
<SNIP>[QUOTE]

FriesianX - love your open attitude! And your horses are gorgeous. Of course, I love that dark chestnut Morgan/Friesian...yummy!

This has been a really interesting thread.

PintoPiaffe - thanks for starting it!

[Foxtrot's]

Back in the day, as they say, Bill Steinkrause said that the best jumpers were TBxSaddlebreds. There are lots of good American bred horses that would offer soundness, flexibility, talent, good minds, interior and exterior qualities - yet they remain oddities, flukes, or second class citizens because they are not in an established registry. Marketing, record keeping, longsightedness and plain old aura have made us believe that the European bred horses are "it". Too bad.

[Foxtrot's]

EqTrainer - in your post about crossbreds you would like, you didn't mention Irish x. (You did mention Cob cross). Did you forget or deliberately ignore?? Please discuss your views and just call me Irish Admirer!
thanks :) :)

[pintopiaffe]

Marketing, record keeping, longsightedness and plain old aura have made us believe that the European bred horses are "it".I tell you, some of us could learn a lesson from the Gypsy Cobs. If you go to Equine Affaire, be SURE to do the barn tour and see the displays and stall fronts etc. They do it RIGHT. The horses are damn cute to start with, but it's the incredible marketing machine that has allowed them to get the prices they're getting. Exploiting the 'romance' while really promoting the kind, unflappable nature of these guys. There were only 1 or 2 that I'd take home with me, and yeah, I said those two times, "I'd put that one on the trailer" ;) ; But the marketing machine was stunning.

I was there with folks from Horse of America... they have romance, they have history (god, look at the Choctaw ponies from the Trail of Tears, just to name one! ) but just not (yet) the marketing genius.

I'm using Iberian now in my program, as 1/2 Iberian can be registered, very similar to 1/2 Arab. No fuss, no muss, papers in hand. Of course it helps that it's type-to-type, and improves each generation in the direction of my focus... but a couple years ago I really wanted to go back to some ASB. (my foundation mare is NSH, my stallion is 1/16th ASB). While I can go AWS with them, they can't make the Elite book. At the time AWR said 'Nope, nada. Won't look at 'em.' And while I am ALL FOR the registration process for recording horses (i.e. AWS) as a *breeder* I feel like it's a waste of my time and money to go through it if I can't make the BREEDING books despite Blue Preferred and Gold, Silver & Bronze medals for three presented who were 1/4 ASB.

And I'm not enough of an ASB fanatic to want to do purebreds. I really like and value their contribution... but I don't want to breed purebreds. They're just not my *passion.*

I guess I don't know where I'm going with these thoughts... just more thoughts... ;)

p.s. I'm *far* from being Eqtrainer, but I'll hazard a guess it was mere oversight vs. slight. :winkgrin:

[FriesianX]

I And while I am ALL FOR the registration process for recording horses (i.e. AWS) as a *breeder* I feel like it's a waste of my time and money to go through it if I can't make the BREEDING books despite Blue Preferred and Gold, Silver & Bronze medals for three presented who were 1/4 ASB.

:winkgrin:

Hey Pinto - you actually CAN get breeding approval from AWS, you just can't get in the "Elite" books. I just had that discussion with them yesterday about Cadence. Because he has one horse in his 4th generation out that doesn't have a performance record, he doesn't qualify as "Elite", but he is still Approved For Breeding - we qualified based on our show record. I wanted to try to get him in the Elite book as well, but that one mare out there is the hold up. It is funny, because the next generation out of that mare was AWS approved for breeding, and the mare was owned by a big name, reputable Warmblood breeding facility, but, well, that's life in the horse world :cool:

[Dressage_Diva333]

Nothing personal - but do you live under a rock?

All sorts of breeds are competing under the Sporthorse umbrella.
And QH's are hardly only western animals. This is not exactly a news flash. My own QH is *routinely* mistaken for a dutch or danish WB. QH hunters - when ridden to be so - can be some seriously nice dressage and open hunter horses.



Name 10 horses of American breeding (Stock horse, morgan, etc..) that have been successful in Grand Prix Dressage. There is no way, IMO, that American bred horses can influence WB's in any way, except negative. They are not better jumpers, their temperments are not better, their movement is most definately not better, their conformation is not better (all of those being as a whole, I'm not saying there arn't exceptions).

Sure, just about any horse can do the lower levels of just about any sport, but to actually be successful and competitive, you have to have more than that. I've never looked at a Quarter Horse, or Morgan and said "Now thats an animal I would like to own". Never. I do have a QH mare, she was used for all around, she did everything, in the lower levels. She is bred to a Welsh stallion, as she is a cute little jumper, and will be able to produce a quick little pony jumper. But she is also for sale.

Warmbloods come from many generations of breeding for uphill, athletic sporthorses. Quarter Horses come from many generations of being bred for cow work, which is where they are needed, they need to be built downhill to get low and work the cow.. just MHO.

It would never occur to me to cross any animal with QH, Morgan, ASB, Paint, Appaloosa, Curly, or any cross of those with an animal of Warmblood breeding and ancestory.

[EqTrainer]

How many horses out of every 100 of ANY breed get to GP?

Out of 1,000?

Very, very few horses ever get to GP.

I hardly consider getting to GP, given the odds, proof of much of anything, other than sheer perserverance.

Given the number of downhill horses I have seen who DID get to GP, and the number of downhill WB's I have seen who did or did not, I am not even entirely sure that THAT is relevant.

The truth is, what makes a horse and rider combination get to GP is intangible under most circumstances. I have more than one horse in my barn right now who is physically capable of doing the work - one is full QH, one is WB/QH.. will either of them ever? Probably not.. because no one around here is going to devote their existance to making that happen.

American horses influencing WB's for the better? The QH/WBx in my barn is a perfect example. He has a better brain/work ethic/rideability than his siblings out of the same sire. His mother, the QH, excelled in everything she was asked to do.. he has her mind, thank God. He also happens to have her ability to sit down, which his WB sire did not give him. He does have his sire's G-line jump and neckset. Also his coarse head, his mothers head was beautiful.

I do not know anyone who has seen this horse who was not impressed.

I would repeat that breeding again, but I might breed the mare to a higher quality WB ;)

[JWB]

FriesianX, you say "no one would deny that little 15.1 hand Morgan was an elite sport horse!: I agree. He's a fantastic sport horse - but he's not an Oldenburg or DWB or Holsteiner or whatever books people would ultimately like to see American breeds accepted into, any more than they are Morgans.

I would FULLY support an American Sport Horse Society that allowed outside breeds. I would also like to see a strong American Warmblood registry taht followed European breeding rules. I think there is a place for both and a market for both, but they are not the same thing.


There have been some FANTASTIC non-WB sport horses out there.

Threes and Sevens was an amazing little QH that jumped at the grand prix level. George Lindeman Jr rode him before he got himself banned for killing horses....

Seldome Seen (http://www.archive.org/details/RalphLConnerDressageSeldomSeen)was a grand prix dressage horse ridden by Lendon Gray. He was a Connemara/TB cross

Erin Go Bragh (http://www.hideawayconnemaras.com/erin.html)was a fantastic upper level eventer and full Connemara.

This list could go on and on.... There have been some FANTASTIC sport horses of non-warmblood descent- but getting to the top levels did not automatically morph them into warmbloods. There is ABSOLUTELY a place for them in sport horse breeding but I don't think it's in a European warmblood registry.

[EqTrainer]

EqTrainer - in your post about crossbreds you would like, you didn't mention Irish x. (You did mention Cob cross). Did you forget or deliberately ignore?? Please discuss your views and just call me Irish Admirer!
thanks :) :)

I admire Irish horses.. from afar :lol: I am not a galloping across terrain, jumping big solid jumps, kindagirl. I like to gallop on TB's, who IMO excell at moving at speed in a way that I feel comfortable with. I like to jump fences that will fall down, again, mostly on TB's, because I like the quickness and reactivity. I am willing to trade the hotness for the accuracy.

If I wanted to hunt I would definately go Irish. Otherwise, I just watch them and their riders and go :eek: I am just not that bold!

[Dressage_Diva333]

There have been some FANTASTIC non-WB sport horses out there.

Threes and Sevens was an amazing little QH that jumped at the grand prix level. George Lindeman Jr rode him before he got himself banned for killing horses....

Seldome Seen (http://www.archive.org/details/RalphLConnerDressageSeldomSeen)was a grand prix dressage horse ridden by Lendon Gray. He was a Connemara/TB cross

Erin Go Bragh (http://www.hideawayconnemaras.com/erin.html)was a fantastic upper level eventer and full Connemara.

This list could go on and on.... There have been some FANTASTIC sport horses of non-warmblood descent- but getting to the top levels did not automatically morph them into warmbloods. There is ABSOLUTELY a place for them in sport horse breeding but I don't think it's in a European warmblood registry.



Those arn't American horses.

I love Connemaras, I think they are awesome ponies :)

[ASBJumper]

http://www.tstonramp.com/~wendy/press.html : 3 Morgans

http://www.rowestables.com/new-aboutus.html : 1 Lipp/Appy, 1 QH

http://www.horsesdaily.com/market/horsemarket/100plus/harry-callahan.html 1 Saddlebred

http://www.shineabit.com/sa03007.htm 1 Appy

http://www.jrlazyday.com/larkascending2.htm 1 QH

http://www.morgandressage.org/scholarships/2008_scholarships.html 2 Morgans (see Sally Anderson – she’s ridden at least 2 to Grand Prix)

:winkgrin: .... and that's just from, oh, 6 or 7 minutes of Internet browsing. Safe to assume, there's many more who aren't necessarily mentioned on the net, or who were around before the Internet.

And this WAS just strictly searches for horses doing "Grand Prix" - if I had included all the 4th level / Prix St Georges horses I found, the list would be much longer. Teehee.. :p :D

[grayarabpony]

Name 10 horses of American breeding (Stock horse, morgan, etc..) that have been successful in Grand Prix Dressage. There is no way, IMO, that American bred horses can influence WB's in any way, except negative. They are not better jumpers, their temperments are not better, their movement is most definately not better, their conformation is not better (all of those being as a whole, I'm not saying there arn't exceptions).




Now you're narrowing it down to dressage?

TBs have been successful in dressage, eventing, and showjumping. American Thoroughbreds. So have many other American breeds. There are most definitely individuals in many breeds that are better movers or better jumpers than your average warmblood. The warmblood at Olympic level is not your average warmblood.

The WB temperment can be improved. There tends to be some "make me" in it.





It would never occur to me to cross any animal with QH, Morgan, ASB, Paint, Appaloosa, Curly, or any cross of those with an animal of Warmblood breeding and ancestory.

Which is why, if American breeders retain that attitude, European breeders will be the cutting edge breeders and all American breeders will be able to do is ride their coattails.

[Daydream Believer]

:winkgrin: .... and that's just from, oh, 6 or 7 minutes of Internet browsing. Safe to assume, there's many more who aren't necessarily mentioned on the net, or who were around before the Internet.

And this WAS just strictly searches for horses doing "Grand Prix" - if I had included all the 4th level / Prix St Georges horses I found, the list would be much longer. Teehee.. :p :D

Moga ridden by Jaye Cherry in 1984 Olympics...an appaloosa!

I believe there was a wild born BLM mustang that also competed at Grand Prix successfully but his name won't come to me now.

I knew a PSG QH schoolmaster down in NC. He was not a great mover but he could do the movements correctly.

[JWB]

I believe there was a wild born BLM mustang that also competed at Grand Prix successfully but his name won't come to me now.


Hail Yeah is doing upper level movements but is not in competetion. He's well trained and a shining example for what mustangs can do but he's not competing as far as I know.

I realize I threw in Connemara - and those are Irish brees. I was thinking non-traditional WB breeds.... and and Seldom Seen and brother Final Scene were bred in the US. Threes & Sevens WAS an american horse - A QH.

My point - all nice horses but not warmbloods.

[ASBJumper]

And how often does *this* happen, I wonder?
http://firemistfarm.com/stallions.html

That, "KWPN reg stallion", as they call him, is half Saddlebred. But it's not indicated anywhere in his page. It's hidden, denied. This happens all too often.
They're proud to tout his Dressage Suitability win at Devon (which happened when he was owned by someone else), oh yes, but they don't say what name he showed under (Kalamino) or what his lineage is. It's sad. And frustrating.

[Renae]

And how often does *this* happen, I wonder?
http://firemistfarm.com/stallions.html

That, "KWPN reg stallion", as they call him, is half Saddlebred. But it's not indicated anywhere in his page. It's hidden, denied. This happens all too often.
They're proud to tout his Dressage Suitability win at Devon (which happened when he was owned by someone else), oh yes, but they don't say what name he showed under (Kalamino) or what his lineage is. It's sad. And frustrating.

I think you are wrong to take offense in how that owner (who is a lovely woman who has done wonders for that horse) chooses to advertise her horse. Firstly, the stallion he is by was imported to Holland and approved as a KWPN Tuigpaard (Dutch Harness Horse) breeding stallion. When he was in America, being shown by Lisa Rosenberger as a Park and 5-gaited horse he sired a total of 5 registered American Saddlebred foals, in Europe he sired 5 more, a total of 10 Saddlebred foals in his career at stud. In contrast he sired 230 KWPN foals in Europe, so not only was he approved for the KWPN breeding program he was used far, far more as a KWPN sire than he ever was as a Saddelbred sire. Kaareltje is not registered Half-Saddlebred, he is by an approved KWPN sire out of a KWPN mare and registered in the KWPN Tuigpaard Foalbook, so why should his owner not call him a KWPN horse?

BTW any American Saddlebred stallion can attempt the test to be approved by the KWPN for use in Tuigpaard breeding. It involves a inspection of conformation and movement in hand, inspection of movement, trainability, and show horse attitude in harness, and a veterinary exam that includes radiographs, semen evaluation and a endoscopic check of the throat for breathing problems. How many Saddlebred stallions that are currently breeding mares would pass this test? Sadly it is very, very few. Even sadder yet are the ones that would fail not on the performance or conformation requirements, but on the basic veterinary requirements.

Saddlebreds are one of my favorite breeds, but I also think breeds of horses have been created for certain reasons, and when you take a breed and breed it for an off use you may be using those bloodlines but you are no longer breeding the true breed.

But I also think the smart breeder reckognizes when an outside, non-traditional breed might have soemthing special to offer and utilizes it in their program. Heck that is what the KWPN has done in letting the Saddlebred into the Tuigpaard book in the late '90s (and Tuigpaard horses can then in turn be used in the Rijpaard book), and I think some American organizations, such as the American Saddlebred Horse Association, that originally had performance based, open book registries, are silly to have closed books now when their breed and the breed's primary event are getting smaller and there are other horses in the world that posess the type and talent to make positive contributions.

[pintopiaffe]

I actually had amazingly wonderful communications in the early 90's with the KWPN regarding my 1/2 ASB mare, they were doing a keuring tour and weren't sure about the 1/2 arab blood, but were completely willing to look at her. And they were WONDERFUL to deal with--I was SO very new into the WB stuff myself at the time, my only other experience was Tk, which is a closed book and different from most other Euro WB books.

I have no problem with the above mentioned breeder calling the horse Dutch...

and yet...

Part of why I started this thread: I have a very cool 2yo colt. His is out of my RPSI Pre-book mare. She was a Tb x *Malachit daughter, and I had a photocopy of the covering certificate, but she was never registered until I presented her RPSI. His by my RPSI approved stallion. Stallion is 15/16ths Arab, 1/16th ASB. Colt awas born the day *after* 2006 Inspections, lost the dam in Feb of '07 and I was just unable to do DNA before '07 Inspection. Lesson learned. (I do have some hair, and am going to attempt DNA, but it's old now)

Technically said colt is RPSI. I don't think I'd be exaggerating to call him Zweibruken, no? (If I could spell it. :p ) But I just don't feel like that is accurate. I will go that way with him should his performance qualify. (And should it not, he won't need stallion approveal anyway. :no: ) Maybe he is and maybe that IS what he should be called?

Of course, if I got his dam registred, post-mortem, Trakehner (which is a possibility, they tell me) then the 1/32 of ASB keeps him out of the Trak books.

I can present him AWS no problem, and did as a very awkward long yearling, scoring nicely, and asked to return at a better growth stage for stallion evaluation. But at only 1/4 Tk, is he REALLY a WB? I don't think that either. Again, *technicall* I think it's fair to call Arab x TB/Tk (with a drop of ASB) wb... but it's not what we MEAN when we say 'capital W' WB.

He's a mutt. Yet I don't think his bloodlines are worthless. Quite the opposite. I think he will be a super Sportpony/smaller Sporthorse stallion prospect. Bone and movement, refinement... all the reasons you'd want. I am hoping he'll be quite competitive against the imports, as the trend grows.

But where does he fit? Ya know? Does he have to be GRP to be credible?

Then sometimes I come back to the real, rural corner of the planet I *live* at, and not the cyber world I play in, and realize that LOCALLY and even regionally, he'll probably get just as many mares just being reg'd PtHA as anything else--because they'll be SEEING him in person, seeing his sire out and about, seeing his siblings showing etc. Other than elite WB breeders--whom I would adore to get a good mare or two, but I doubt they would even look at him--who am I making all this fuss about? Some perception of prestige? A label, even a brand, doesn't change the HORSE...

(my problem with PtHA is if the kid comes out solid, then the mareowner is out of luck, depending on HER registry(s) and I really do think that some sort of tracking/registration is important. I have these horses pedigreed back to the desert, back to Poland and Russia, would hate to waste that. )

More ramblings. It's very, very early. I HATE working day shift... :winkgrin:

[Daydream Believer]

I think you are wrong to take offense in how that owner (who is a lovely woman who has done wonders for that horse) chooses to advertise her horse. Firstly, the stallion he is by was imported to Holland and approved as a KWPN Tuigpaard (Dutch Harness Horse) breeding stallion. When he was in America, being shown by Lisa Rosenberger as a Park and 5-gaited horse he sired a total of 5 registered American Saddlebred foals, in Europe he sired 5 more, a total of 10 Saddlebred foals in his career at stud. In contrast he sired 230 KWPN foals in Europe, so not only was he approved for the KWPN breeding program he was used far, far more as a KWPN sire than he ever was as a Saddelbred sire. Kaareltje is not registered Half-Saddlebred, he is by an approved KWPN sire out of a KWPN mare and registered in the KWPN Tuigpaard Foalbook, so why should his owner not call him a KWPN horse?



I think this is what I truly dislike about the WB registries. They take other breeds, inspect them and call them their own. The "other" blood...in this case Saddlebred...is not mentioned and the value and credit of that blood is lost to the Saddlebred. It's "assimilated" into a WB registry and not mentioned as Renae explained above. Same with QH and any other breed they take but don't want anyone else to know about.

I think we need to keep our American breeds blood in American registries personally. Let us not lose sight of their contributions like the Saddlebred behind this stallion is no longer recognized. To me, that is what an American Sporthorse Assoc/Registry would be all about versus slipping one into the lower books of a European registry. Give credit where it is due and don't let someone else take that credit for themselves.

[grayarabpony]

The breeding of that horse isn't really hidden, though -- if you go to allbreed, it's there.

Are there any pictures of Moga around?

[FriesianX]

http://www.tstonramp.com/~wendy/press.html : 3 Morgans

http://www.rowestables.com/new-aboutus.html : 1 Lipp/Appy, 1 QH

http://www.horsesdaily.com/market/horsemarket/100plus/harry-callahan.html 1 Saddlebred

http://www.shineabit.com/sa03007.htm 1 Appy

http://www.jrlazyday.com/larkascending2.htm 1 QH

http://www.morgandressage.org/scholarships/2008_scholarships.html 2 Morgans (see Sally Anderson – she’s ridden at least 2 to Grand Prix)

:winkgrin: .... and that's just from, oh, 6 or 7 minutes of Internet browsing. Safe to assume, there's many more who aren't necessarily mentioned on the net, or who were around before the Internet.

And this WAS just strictly searches for horses doing "Grand Prix" - if I had included all the 4th level / Prix St Georges horses I found, the list would be much longer. Teehee.. :p :D


http://www.courtenayfraser.com/Courtenay.htm
You forgot this lovely, well bred little guy ;)

http://www.morgandressage.org/history/timeline.html
This is not an all inclusive list of Morgans competing at the FEI levels (I know of others who are not yet at GP, but doing PSG or better that aren't on the list)

[siegi b.]

I just don't get it.... on one hand everybody wants to be able to register their horses with the Euro registries, on the other you want all the recognition for what the horse really is.

American breeds already have American registries last time I checked - they have them for Q-horses, Morgans, Saddlebreds, Walkers, Trotters, etc. etc. etc..

So what you really seem to want is to breed across registries at will and then have a "reputable" registry acknowledge that you know what you're doing.

You see, sometimes you can't have your cake and eat it, too.... Sometimes you have to make a decision on what you want to be when you grow up...

Good luck!

[NoDQhere]

I think this is what I truly dislike about the WB registries. They take other breeds, inspect them and call them their own. The "other" blood...in this case Saddlebred...is not mentioned and the value and credit of that blood is lost to the Saddlebred. It's "assimilated" into a WB registry and not mentioned as Renae explained above. Same with QH and any other breed they take but don't want anyone else to know about.

The thing people are missing here is that the KWPN uses ASB and HACKNEY blood in their Dutch HARNESS Horse books, not the Riding Horse books. It's hardly a secret. ASB and Hackney make "sense" in driving horses that are purpose bred to be fancy driving horses. Not so much for riding horses. "Technically" (I think) you can use a DHH Stallion on a Riding Horse mare but I don't think there are many DWB breeders that do that. The "movement" needed in DHH horses compared to Dressage horses is very different. As Renae has already said, not just ANY ASB stallion is allowed in the DHH books. It is this inspection process that makes the WB registries "different". They have "always" used other breeds as "improvers", but those "improvers" had to possess the right credentials.


I think we need to keep our American breeds blood in American registries personally. Let us not lose sight of their contributions like the Saddlebred behind this stallion is no longer recognized. To me, that is what an American Sporthorse Assoc/Registry would be all about versus slipping one into the lower books of a European registry. Give credit where it is due and don't let someone else take that credit for themselves.

There are many American bred horses who have done very well, nobody is saying anything else. But that wasn't what the OPs question was. My opinion, and last I checked, I am entitled to that, was that, for the most part, a WB is not going to "improve" with the addition of "most" American breeds.

[pintopiaffe]

So what you really seem to want is to breed across registries at will and then have a "reputable" registry acknowledge that you know what you're doing.

Aaaahhhh... but isn't that EXACTLY what Euro WB breeders & registries do? Except for Trakehners... and perhaps Dutch? Most of the stallions I have looked at are registered with one, but have pedigree of many...

So we're only allowed to do that if they are European? We're not allowed to pick and choose the best sporthorses of American breed and blend them together, and wish for a way to register and track them? ;)

And no, I have NO FREAKING IDEA what I want to be when I grow up. *And* I really need a new job too. I am not passionate *enough* about any breed to want to breed purebreds. I love what ASB's contribute, but they're not entirely for me. I adore Trakehners, and probably, given the funds, could be convinced to go that way solely... I am increasingly fond of Iberians, and am launching into Aztecas. I *do* think my dream horse is probably a homozygous tobiano Azteca stallion at least 3/4 Iberian. And THAT is going to take me the rest of my life. :lol:

Not entirely sure I want to grow up either... sometimes it's fun to keep a child's mentality and love them ALL because they are beautiful and athletic and wonderful... not become blinded by one particular thing or another.

[FriesianX]

Siegi, no one disputes you have great breeding results! But - aren't the Euro Warmbloods simply crosses of different breeds? Why shouldn't U.S. breeders desire to infuse some of their own sport horse lines in the same way? And create something like the Euro regional registries - a place to track successful pedigrees using different sport horse blood lines? A registry(ies) that helps track what is (and isn't working), and that promotes our U.S. bred horses, the same way the Euro registries track their bloodlines and bring dollars back into the European countries for further promotions of their horses?

The point of this thread is NOT that we want to register our horses with a Euro registry, but that we want to see the creation of a similar performance registry system in the U.S. and are feeling out what the parameters might be. The Euro WB registries are NOT breed registries, they are performance registries. You mention US registries that are breed specific, there is a huge difference.

In reality, it is not an easy process, and it takes a while to build "reputable", no one denies it. But if we don't start talking about it now, we will continue to be nothing more than a colony, subservient to the European countries and their registries, stuck with their rules, their leadership, and sending our money to their countries to further support their rules and leadership, with no real say of our own. That may be OK with many of you - and we don't deny you that right, but for many of us, there is, with a bit of a fight, and a lot of hard work and brain power, maybe a better way.

[NoDQhere]

The breeding of that horse isn't really hidden, though -- if you go to allbreed, it's there.

Are there any pictures of Moga around?

Somewhere around here I actually have a video of Larry Mahan, of Pro Rodeo fame, riding Moga while Jaye teaches him Dressage. It is a great video but is on VHS so I have no idea how I would get it onto my computer???

I saw Moga and Jaye at the US Olympic Festival (?) in Colorado Springs (?). It was years ago. My Mom and I love Appys so were really looking forward to seeing Moga. Honestly, he wasn't much to look at until he moved, then he gave us goosebumps! He was really something. I don't think Moga made it to the Olympics but he was competitive.

The Mustang was JB Andrew. He came out of the Nevada herd that has a lot of Percheron blood and that is what he looked like, a nice draft cross. He made it to I-1 but I think he was injured and was then retired.

[grayarabpony]

The thing people are missing here is that the KWPN uses ASB and HACKNEY blood in their Dutch HARNESS Horse books, not the Riding Horse books. It's hardly a secret. ASB and Hackney make "sense" in driving horses that are purpose bred to be fancy driving horses. Not so much for riding horses. "Technically" (I think) you can use a DHH Stallion on a Riding Horse mare but I don't think there are many DWB breeders that do that. The "movement" needed in DHH horses compared to Dressage horses is very different. As Renae has already said, not just ANY ASB stallion is allowed in the DHH books. It is this inspection process that makes the WB registries "different". They have "always" used other breeds as "improvers", but those "improvers" had to possess the right credentials.



Is it? The team that won in the 2002 WEG were highly trained in dressage, according to the commentary, and one I believe was a son of Ulft who I was very surprised not to see in the dressage ring.

[Daydream Believer]

I knew Moga and Jaye in California back in 1984 right before the LA games. Jaye was working with Hilda when I was here working student. Moga was a very cool horse. If I remember correctly, she was having some difficulty with his changes but I know he was at least short listed for the team. I can't recall if she rode in LA or not with him. I joined the Army right before then so I wasn't there at the Games.

Siegi...you are right...to a point. We want a registry that will celebrate the "American" in the sport horse bloodlines...not shun it or hide it like it is now by the Euro registries who take the blood begrudgingly and put it in lower books. I personally don't think American horses "need" WB blood to do well. I think purpose breeding what we have already is enough but people will crossbreed and that is fine. It is that blending that will probably be the ultimate result of an American Sporthorse Registry.

I had a 3/4 Irish TB 1/4 Morgan cross gelding some years ago (1990's) that placed very respectably on the line at Raleigh in the Sport Horse Breeding Show stallion/gelding class (4th) and beat out a couple of full WB stallion prospects at that. I think one of Liz's pinto stallions won that class that year and he truly was lovely as I recall. My point is that Lieslot Fore, the German judge, placed an American blooded non WB gelding over WB stallions based on his own merit on that day...which is how it should have been done. Boomer (Thunder Bay) went on to be a 3rd level dressage horse and training level eventer before I sold him to an Ammie rider. Not sure what happened to him after that.

Unlike many of you here, I do think that the American horses can offer something to the WB's...in fact they already have...that is as useful as what the TB and Arab blood brings to the table. Truly though with the attitudes that are prevalent, I don't want to see it done and see the credit to the American horses bloodlines given elsewhere. THAT is why I think we need a reputable American Registry for Sporthorses...not an American WB registry...we have two of those already and they are OK but not the same as what some of us invision. I don't think the WB needs to be recreated but rather something uniquely American created instead.

[grayarabpony]

Somewhere around here I actually have a video of Larry Mahan, of Pro Rodeo fame, riding Moga while Jaye teaches him Dressage. It is a great video but is on VHS so I have no idea how I would get it onto my computer???



Yeah, that would be a lot of trouble. I've thought about converting some of my VHS tapes to digital (recording with my digital recorder from a TV picture, which probably would not make for very good images) but have never thought it was worth the hassle.

[tri]

See, I think this is where some of the disagreements come into play:

The U.S. breeders who are into euro breeding say a qh or a saddlebred, etc is NOT a warmblood.

Then the KWPN uses saddlebreds & hackneys and THEY call it a warmblood.

Then it is pointed out that those saddlebreds/hackneys/etc are for a different book - in this case the DRIVING horses.

But, qhs are approved with the American wb registry ALSO for a different reason - hunters.

But the U.S. euro breeders say it is different. It isn't.

I am for a strong American studbook that produces top quality european type warmbloods. Along with the registry should be sporthorse books that are separate. Much like how the Oldna/ISR is set up. Except that the warmblood books shouldn't be called Oldenburg.

I still don't know why that wouldn't be a great solution, satisfying what everyone here says they want.

[grayarabpony]

I saw Moga and Jaye at the US Olympic Festival (?) in Colorado Springs (?). It was years ago. My Mom and I love Appys so were really looking forward to seeing Moga. Honestly, he wasn't much to look at until he moved, then he gave us goosebumps! He was really something. I don't think Moga made it to the Olympics but he was competitive.



This is what some of us have been trying to get at -- that the horses which produced a horse like Moga would be good additions to a sportshorse breeding program.

[twofatponies]

I may be wrong about some of this, but I was recalling studying my own Morgan mare's pedigree - going way back. And then following some of those ancestral horses around to see what other horse's lines they were in.

What struck me was that back in the early 1900s (through the 30s or 40s maybe?) the "breeds" such as Morgan, Saddlebred, Standardbred had very mixed heritage. That "breed" was defined much more by performance than solely by lineage. My "Morgan", if you go back far enough, has Morgan, Saddlebred, Standardbred, TB, and "Farmer Joe's Gray Nag" in her pedigree.

So you could have a horse who was a mix of "Morgan" and TB, and if it met the speed standards of trotting, it could be registered Standardbred. If it was part Saddlbred, part TB, part Morgan, but an amazing saddle horse, it got called a "Saddlebred". If it had those same three "breeds" in it but really made a nice Morgan-y harness horse, it got labeled "Morgan.

So that in some ways the system was performance based. Then those studbooks got closed, and the focus shifted to purity of lineage and breed standard, rather than solely performance.

Am I off base? I'm not saying it was just like the modern Warmblood system, but it was closer, perhaps, than today's system.

?? Any thoughts?

[NoDQhere]

Is it? The team that won in the 2002 WEG were highly trained in dressage, according to the commentary, and one I believe was a son of Ulft who I was very surprised not to see in the dressage ring.

For the record, I think CDE horses are quite a bit different than what DHH are being bred for. What I said was "The "movement" needed in DHH horses compared to Dressage horses is very different." We all know that many different breeds do well in CDEs, but that isn't what I was talking about.

I think the difference in movement is easy to see.......

http://www.trakehners-international.com/nms_2004.html

http://www.dutchharnesshorses.nl/index2.php

[grayarabpony]

The team that won at the 2002 WEG did not move with such exaggerated knee action. Get the video and check it out.

[NoDQhere]

This is what some of us have been trying to get at -- that the horses which produced a horse like Moga would be good additions to a sportshorse breeding program.

While I would like to agree with you because I love Appaloosa horses I can't. Because my experience has taught me that when dealing with "unknowns" in a breeding program you will produce more offspring of "less than you are aiming for" than offspring that are what your goal is.

[FriesianX]

Non-traditional breeding example - Galoubet, one of my favorites ;) Out of a French Trotter mare - created one of the best show jumpers and best jumper sires in the world! And he had some nice dressage offspring as well.

NoDQ - I can think of a few Olympic medal winners that had dramatic hock and knee action. Some like that action, others don't, but you can't deny they were top contendors...

In reality, a top sport horse is a horse with decent athletic ability, a great mind, and a great rider. And with many of the American bred and non-traditional bred horses, they end up in the hands of adult ammies - which means they may not realize their full potential in the FEI sport horse world. But many of us recognize they are meeting their full potential in that they are making their riders very happy. In the U.S. and Canada, we have a greater adult ammie market than they do in Europe - and those adult ammies are what PAY FOR our sports - they support the shows, they support the trainers, they support the organizations (USDF/USEF, etc). So, I think a US sport horse registry or organization would be more cognizant of that population of equestrians.

[grayarabpony]

While I would like to agree with you because I love Appaloosa horses I can't. Because my experience has taught me that when dealing with "unknowns" in a breeding program you will produce more offspring of "less than you are aiming for" than offspring that are what your goal is.

Would your unknowns have produced horses as good as Moga?

The thing is to start with the mares who can do the job. Can she go advanced in eventing or jump a grand prix course? If she can't I wouldn't really expect her foals to be able to either.

Warmblood breeders don't always get what they are breeding for either. Nor do racetrack breeders. No one does. As long as you breed athletic horses they are going to be good for something. Placing one of the offspring that doesn't fit your program is a problem for every breeder.

[siegi b.]

FriesianX - Yes, you can find Holsteiners in Dutch pedigrees, Trakehner in Hanoverian, etc. etc. In my opinion, the difference is that when the Euro breeders use other registries they still know what those bloodlines will provide, so it's not a complete crap shoot. Besides, it's really breeding type to type....

I am all for the American Registry for American sporthorses, but be prepared to have tough breed standards, tracking of bloodlines and pedigree requirements in order to keep the F1 products from being total failures. I think I can speak for quite a few folks when I say that it's the 1/4 Arab-1/4 Saddlebred-1/4 paint and 1/4 Percheron or whatever mixes that scare me. Even if that particular horse is "nice", how can you make any half-way intelligent breeding decisions with it?

I know that you have to start somewhere, but it's not only that, it's also requiring a certain discipline when making breeding decisions and then enforcing that through inspections. That's where I think the problem will be.... Breeders of American Sporthorses want to do what they think is right, not what a registry prescribes.

Just my opinion....

[FriesianX]

FriesianX - Yes, you can find Holsteiners in Dutch pedigrees, Trakehner in Hanoverian, etc. etc. In my opinion, the difference is that when the Euro breeders use other registries they still know what those bloodlines will provide, so it's not a complete crap shoot. Besides, it's really breeding type to type....

I am all for the American Registry for American sporthorses, but be prepared to have tough breed standards, tracking of bloodlines and pedigree requirements in order to keep the F1 products from being total failures. I think I can speak for quite a few folks when I say that it's the 1/4 Arab-1/4 Saddlebred-1/4 paint and 1/4 Percheron or whatever mixes that scare me. Even if that particular horse is "nice", how can you make any half-way intelligent breeding decisions with it?

I know that you have to start somewhere, but it's not only that, it's also requiring a certain discipline when making breeding decisions and then enforcing that through inspections. That's where I think the problem will be.... Breeders of American Sporthorses want to do what they think is right, not what a registry prescribes.

Just my opinion....

I agree with you quite a bit - it takes careful breeding and type to type breeding of many generations to create something consistent. Basically, your F-1 crosses and your F-4 (and later) crosses are where you start to see SOME consistency, and in between, you better know what you are doing :winkgrin: BUT - having said that, take a look at these photos: Consistent? High Quality? You want Sunridge, or Festa, or Springfield (my personal fav of the group). What about Ruthard? Or Grundstein4?

http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/index.php?h=donerhall&g=9&query_type=photos&search_bar=photos&inbred=Standard&x2=n&username=&password=&x=0&y=0

Go to the Reports tab and pick the Pictures report. These are all photos of ancestors of Donerhall... Most WBs have similar ancestors. Type to type?

I don't think MOST people here are talking about breeding a Saddlebred/Draft/Friesian/Tbred, or a Paso/Draft/Tbred/Arab - I think we are talking about some careful cross breeding to include some U.S. (and other non-traditional European) breeds. And I think most are proceeding with some research and specific goals. At least most participating here on COTH.

[canticle]

Name 10 horses of American breeding (Stock horse, morgan, etc..) that have been successful in Grand Prix Dressage. There is no way, IMO, that American bred horses can influence WB's in any way, except negative. They are not better jumpers, their temperments are not better, their movement is most definately not better, their conformation is not better (all of those being as a whole, I'm not saying there arn't exceptions).
While I do agree that American breeds would be negatively influenced by WB blood, your other assertions are ridiculous. The very reason I chose Morgans was because of their superior conformation, movement, and temperament. WB people need to remember that their horses are not better, just different. In addition, Olympic competition has proven to be a questionable standard to build a breeding program around. I would not boast about it.

I am primarily concerned with preserving the traditional Morgan type, and there is no way that a WB could contribute to that. Not to mention that it is a closed registry! I encourage potential sport Morgan breeders to stick to the breed standard. Your horses will be better in the long run.

[pintopiaffe]

I think I can speak for quite a few folks when I say that it's the 1/4 Arab-1/4 Saddlebred-1/4 paint and 1/4 Percheron or whatever mixes that scare me. Even if that particular horse is "nice", how can you make any half-way intelligent breeding decisions with it?How is that different than an Old x Holstein x Trak x TB? If I am breeding TYPE TO TYPE, and very studious with pedigrees, how is it any different? I was *going* to say "excepting the percheron" but we all know some of the best field hunters are 1/4 or 1/8 Draft. Perch in particular have strains which are lighter & more suited to riding than pulling. You don't get 1/8 without starting with 1/2 somewhere, then going to 1/4.

I'm one of those scary ones, I admit it. You can say it. ;) I had a really nice mare who was 1/4 Arab, 1/4 ASB X (high % TB) APHA. She was usually mistaken for WB. Everyone wanted to know if she was Art Deco or Hall of Fame back then. :lol: I *line* bred her back to Arab (approved WB arab) and got extremely consistent, good results.

I've bred her dam, the 1/2 Arab mare to APHA 3x and got exceptional foals all three times. I did not breed to a halter horse nor to a WP type--actually, only the first was even hunter type (and he *was* very TB'dy in type). I bred to very uphill, baroque moving, excellent hock action, good neckset stallions. The foals were exactly what I was aiming for: added substance, back end 'sit', and fabulous work ethics. Got elegance, movement and refinement from damside. Bred the mare to my own stallion 4x and to a Dutch X Friesian the last time. To me the Dutch X Friesian makes perfect sense with the ASB. That particular stallion is really huge, and throws huge, and I would not repeat the breeding for *myself.* But I would consider Cadence in Color in a heartbeat because he has a smidge of APHA and I know how nicely this mare nicks with APHA. Her foals who have been inspected have won Gold, Silver & Bronze.

As you know, you don't cross and cross and cross. You outcross, then come back. BUT--Hybrid vigour doesn't occur without the HYBRID.

I'm 100% for inspections. I think there is enormous merit, that is why I have presented mine RPSI & AWS. I guess that's my whole point. If we WANT the critique, the process, where do we find it? Obviously NOT with the WB verbands, because they really, really DON'T want us there.

I think in ANY registry there will be people who heed the Inspector's advice, and those who don't. You can't really think that is unique to the US, or that somehow someone will react differently because it's an ASBx vs. a WBx... that doesn't really follow logic. I can't see why you'd spend the time & money for Inspections if you *didn't* want the opinion of the organization/inspector... because you don't HAVE to here. It's completely voluntary. Only people who ARE striving for excellence even care about this... the rest just breed whatever they want ANYWAY and are fodder for nasty internet blogs....

Is it for everyone? No.

[Fairview Horse Center]

If the arab, saddlebred, paint, and percheron were all chosen by breeders that had a good eye, and choose horses with similar traits, they it may not be as unpredictable as you would think.

Some lines of Saddlebred horses looked and moved VERY much like the Warmbloods of today. They were not the high headed english show horses we see in photos.

Back in the mid to late 70's, the President of VADA went around to Hunter shows doing dressage exhibitions during the lunch break on her Saddlebred mare named Dress Boots. This was back in the day when we wore t-shirts that said, "Dressage, ask me what it is." Her movement was EXACTLY like the Dutch stallion Taxateur's movement. She looked like a TB with a bit more substance. She schooled her at the barn I was working at, and her gaits ARE what got me interested in dressage. Her gaits were a LOT closer to the modern warmblood than the Warmbloods we were seeing then.

We have all seen arabs that are very suitable in type to the warmbloods. Paints can also be chosen for their phenotype. And I personally fell in love with a Oldenburg that I saw at an event in the early 80's. I just knew he was an Oldenburg, because of his gaits and look. Blew me away when I found out he was a Percheron, and not half either. Compare that to Hanoverian stallion that were incredibly successful as recently as the mid 90s like Diwan who had such heavy bone and big feet, they still talk about him at Morven EMC.

Just like with European Warmbloods today, you can find extreme examples of all types of conformation and heaviness, the same is true of American breeds. There are breeders that have been breeding their QHs, Saddlebreds, Arabs, and drafts for a long time, and THOSE breeders have developed horses that more closely resemble Warmbloods than their own "show horse" breed photos.

Why would we think that someone intending to use for example a Saddlebred to breed for dressage would choose the show horse type, and not the type that resembles Warmbloods?

Yes, there are backyard breeders that breed to the local yahoo, but there are also people that study and know what they are doing, when CHOOSING specific horses to cross.

[Equine Reproduction]

How is that different than an Old x Holstein x Trak x TB? If I am breeding TYPE TO TYPE, and very studious with pedigrees, how is it any different? I was *going* to say "excepting the percheron" but we all know some of the best field hunters are 1/4 or 1/8 Draft. Perch in particular have strains which are lighter & more suited to riding than pulling. You don't get 1/8 without starting with 1/2 somewhere, then going to 1/4.

I think you have to go back to basic genetics to understand why it is different breeding Old x Holstein x Trak x TB than breeding Saddlebred x Arab x Draft x Paint. With the warmblood/TB crosses, there is a "type" of horse that has been bred again and again and again. In other words, while you may see a slight variation in type, you won't see a horse that looks like a draft (thick heavy legs, larger stature, etc.) or a horse that looks like an Arab (light spindly legs, smaller stature, etc.). So, genetically speaking, while you may get the occasional throwback, you are more likely to get something fairly consistent with the cross. With the other crosses, while you may have the perfect result of such a cross, the gene "type" has not been set, so while it may be a perfect example, the genes may very well still be there to "crop out" at an unexpected time. It is generally acknowledged that it takes four generations before a "type" is set. In other words, it takes that many generations of breeding that Arab x Draft x Saddlebred x paint to another Arab x Draft x Saddlebred x Paint and then their resulting offspring and then their resulting offspring, etc., until you KNOW what you're going to consistently produce!

An oversimplification but hopefully a bit easier to understand, think of eye color. Two blue eyed parents are going to produce a blue eyed child. It's a given. If not, someone had better check to see which rooster got to the hen. Let's say I've decided I want brown eyed children. So, me being blue eyed, I go out and find a brown eyed mate. If that brown eyed mate is homozygous, ALL my children will be brown eyed, but they now carry the blue eyed trait. So, if we cross those children with another brown eyed mate and we dont know if that mate is homozygous, you could very well have "crop outs" that will be blue eyed. Is this making sense? It's those unexpected recessive traits that throw the ringer into the genetic mix and consequently WHY you don't want to breed to something that doesn't have a historical type of pedigree. You may win the lottery and produce that perfect horse that consistently throws itself, but you are much more likely to end up with something that just isn't what you expect.

So while your breeding program may make perfect sense to you and may work for you, there are those of us who just can't afford the risk if it doesn't. I'm big on doing things outside the box, but I also recognize the risks involved of attempting to try something different.

I appreciate the fact that there are non-traditional breeds out there that are doing well in the Olympic disciplines. But, they are notable BECAUSE they are doing something outside of what they were bred for. And yeah, let's face it, most of us will never compete at the upper levels, but it's nice to think that we have a horse that might be able to take us there if we had the ability to ride it <lol>.

And with regards to Galoubet and the French Trotter, the French Trotter isn't quite like our American version, the Standardbred. The French Trotter tends to be much more like a heavier TB and is known for phenomenal endurance.

As ever, just my humble opinion :D

Kathy St.Martin
Equine Reproduction Short Courses
http://www.equine-reproduction.com

[pintopiaffe]

Darlyn, well said. You explained it better than me.

So, genetically speaking, while you may get the occasional throwback, you are more likely to get something fairly consistent with the cross. With the other crosses, while you may have the perfect result of such a cross, the gene "type" has not been set, so while it may be a perfect example, the genes may very well still be there to "crop out" at an unexpected time. It is generally acknowledged that it takes four generations before a "type" is set. In other words, it takes that many generations of breeding that Arab x Draft x Saddlebred x paint to another Arab x Draft x Saddlebred x Paint and then their resulting offspring and then their resulting offspring, etc., until you KNOW what you're going to consistently produce!While I understand what you are saying technically, we're not talking about breeding a 13.2h halter Arab to a WP Paint... we're talking TYPE to TYPE.

And many of the US breeds have similar ancestry (Iberian, Arab, TB, probably some 'trotter'... etc.)

I certainly don't advocate splicing an apple to an orange.

I'll agree to disagree, ;) because if you are crossing type-to-type, coupled with extensive pedigree research (i.e. the one your using isn't the freak cropout, but rather the rule for the strain or family) I just won't agree that it is not *exactly* what is done within European breeding. But for some reason people want to get up in arms about it if it's non-traditional breeds.

[pinecone]

I don't think MOST people here are talking about breeding a Saddlebred/Draft/Friesian/Tbred, or a Paso/Draft/Tbred/Arab

:confused: I'm curious what makes you want to use these breeds as a bad example? Draft is probably the most commonly accepted of the alternative crosses, and TB and Arab have already been established as acceptable even in Warmblood pedigrees. Paso is the only breed out of your list that really jumps out at me, and maybe Friesian a little bit. It's ironic to see hypocrisy and "my breed is better than your breed" even within a thread encouraging people to be open minded about using alternative breeds. I would personally consider every breed you listed, with the exception of the Paso, as a superior choice over a Morgan for breeding a sport horse:winkgrin:. But Morgan is what you've said you use for cross breeding, so is this another case of "my breed is better than your breed"?

I'm not singling out this poster except that this is a great example. There is "my breed is better than your breed" not just between Warmblood breeders vs American breeds, but even between one breed and another of the American breeds:yes:. Goodness, if even the breeders of American breeds want to take shots at each others breeds, what hope is there of a giant group of American breeds AND Warmbloods intermingling and cooperating?

If a Morgan cross breeder can poke fun at drafts, Arabs, TBs, Saddlebreds, and Friesians in one fell swoop, what do you think a European Warmblood breeder thinks reading this thread.:D

They might be thinking you're all nuts, and "my breed is better than your breed!":lol:

Equine Repro, I agree with the pointsyou made. There's a lot more risk involved with using some of these breeds to reinvent the wheel, rather than sticking with the proven. I've also got to wonder, what happens to the results of these breeding programs, when they lose the gamble and the foal is not what they were hoping for.

[FriesianX]

:confused: I'm curious what makes you want to use these breeds as a bad example? Draft is probably the most commonly accepted of the alternative crosses, and TB and Arab have already been established as acceptable even in Warmblood pedigrees. Paso is the only breed out of your list that really jumps out at me, and maybe Friesian a little bit. It's ironic to see hypocrisy and "my breed is better than your breed" even within a thread encouraging people to be open minded about using alternative breeds. I would personally consider every breed you listed, with the exception of the Paso, as a superior choice over a Morgan for breeding a sport horse:winkgrin:. But Morgan is what you've said you use for cross breeding, so is this another case of "my breed is better than your breed"?

I'm not singling out this poster except that this is a great example. There is "my breed is better than your breed" not just between Warmblood breeders vs American breeds, but even between one breed and another of the American breeds:yes:. Goodness, if even the breeders of American breeds want to take shots at each others breeds, what hope is there of a giant group of American breeds AND Warmbloods intermingling and cooperating?

If a Morgan cross breeder can poke fun at drafts, Arabs, TBs, Saddlebreds, and Friesians in one fell swoop, what do you think a European Warmblood breeder thinks reading this thread.:D

They might be thinking you're all nuts, and "my breed is better than your breed!":lol:

Equine Repro, I agree with the pointsyou made. There's a lot more risk involved with using some of these breeds to reinvent the wheel, rather than sticking with the proven. I've also got to wonder, what happens to the results of these breeding programs, when they lose the gamble and the foal is not what they were hoping for.

Pinecone, I made up some crosses, to point out most of us aren't doing a 4 way very diverse cross mare to a totally different 5 way cross stallion, and even those who are using some multi-crossing are doing it carefully - and in fact, I threw a bunch of different breeds in there to illustrate that point.

As for my breeding program, actually I focus on Warmblood to Friesian. I have a single Morgan mare in my broodie herd because, if you want to look type to type, the Morgan and Friesian are very type to type, in fact, most Morgan historians feel that the original Morgan(s) (multiple if you move down from Figure to the three most common ancesteral sires) trace back to Pennsylvania Dutch Friesian bloodlines. Not sure why you have such a distaste for Morgans.

Funny, you manage to pop up and focus negatively on my own breeding program and my posts pretty often. Why is that? Who are you, and what is your motivation? Why do you have to come in and turn this into a personal thing again? If you READ my posts, you'll see I'm pretty supportive of any educated breeding, and have spoken quite positively of Saddlebreds, Paints, and other American breeds. If you visit my website - which I'm fairly sure you HAVE done, you'll realize your criticisms are not founded in fact. So leave your personal agenda at home.

[Fairview Horse Center]

PP. that quote was not mine ;) You may want to reread MY post. :D

[pinecone]

Overreact much? Re read my post, particularly where I said it was not singling you out. What you wrote made for a great example. Apology accepted ;)

[Daydream Believer]

There are many American bred horses who have done very well, nobody is saying anything else. But that wasn't what the OPs question was. My opinion, and last I checked, I am entitled to that, was that, for the most part, a WB is not going to "improve" with the addition of "most" American breeds.

I don't mean to pick on you but I got on your website out of curiousity and you have a Paint mare that you are breeding to your WB stallions and you've got one of her offspring shown as being top quality...and he is cute...that's not the point... but I'm confused. You have been one of the most vocal against introducing American breeds into WB breeding programs on this thread. Is that is a do as I say not do as I do sort of thing? Has he been inspected and registered? You don't' state it that I saw.

Please don't take me wrong...no criticisms of your stock but I'm just baffled that you come across so against doing this sort of crossbreeding on this thread but in real life you are doing the opposite...and you are producing very nice horses at that.

[NoDQhere]

NoDQ - I can think of a few Olympic medal winners that had dramatic hock and knee action. Some like that action, others don't, but you can't deny they were top contendors...

It isn't about the knees and hocks :eek:! It's about the pulled up, locked neck, the dropped and rigid back and the fact that the hocks "articulate" behind the horse that is "good" in a fine harness horse, not good in a Dressage horse. That is the difference in movement that I was trying to point out.

[Equine Reproduction]

If a Morgan cross breeder can poke fun at drafts, Arabs, TBs, Saddlebreds, and Friesians in one fell swoop, what do you think a European Warmblood breeder thinks reading this thread.:D

They might be thinking you're all nuts, and "my breed is better than your breed!":lol:

As someone that gets to deal with probably more different breeds than the average breeder, I don't look at the thread as poking at the other breeds. Quite the contrary! I see that we breed specifically for a particular type that will do well in a specific arena. Melyni, I think it was, pointed out if you want to do endurance, you look at Arabs! If you want to cut cows, you look at Quarter Horses. If you want to do the Park Horse thing, you look at the breeds that excel at that. I don't look at it that "my breed is better than your breed". I look at it that my "breed" (warmbloods) is better for the particular discipline that I've chosen than say a Quarter Horse. That's NOT to say that there aren't Quarter Horses out there doing it, it's simply saying that as a whole, the breed is not known nor is it bred for the Olympic disciplines. Make sense? If I were planning on barrel racing and doing at least mediocre well at it, the LAST breed I'd look at would probably be a warmblood ;).

And, I think all horse people are a little bit nuts :D

Kathy St.Martin
Equine Reproduction Short Courses
http://www.equine-reproduction.com

[grayarabpony]

It isn't about the knees and hocks :eek:! It's about the pulled up, locked neck, the dropped and rigid back and the fact that the hocks "articulate" behind the horse that is "good" in a fine harness horse, not good in a Dressage horse. That is the difference in movement that I was trying to point out.

It would be interesting to hear Renae and goodhors' take on this. Are there different kinds of Dutch Harness Horse? I'm just about positive they are used for CDE as well as carriage driving, and CDE horses cannot have a rigid back with the hocks out behind them.

What do you guys think of these two? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQkccQyWgs0 They already look like they are yoked together. :lol:

[NoDQhere]

I don't mean to pick on you but I got on your website out of curiousity and you have a Paint mare that you are breeding to your WB stallions and you've got one of her offspring shown as being top quality...and he is cute...that's not the point... but I'm confused. You have been one of the most vocal against introducing American breeds into WB breeding programs on this thread. Is that is a do as I say not do as I do sort of thing? Has he been inspected and registered? You don't' state it that I saw.

Please don't take me wrong...no criticisms of your stock but I'm just baffled that you come across so against doing this sort of crossbreeding on this thread but in real life you are doing the opposite...and you are producing very nice horses at that.

Thank You DDB, I think ;). The horse in question is a gelding, and no he is not represented as a WB. He will be registered Pinto because his new owners want him eligible for All Breeds Awards. He is a very nice horse but I don't think I refer to him as "top quality" in the description. His mother is a nice mare with a good show record who is in our program because she is the right "type". But I don't delude myself that she is going to produce a GP horse or produce breeding stock. She does however produce nice riding horses with very good dispositions. Mark's new owners are 12 and 10 years old and they can both ride him around a course and do flying changes.

We actually have two Pinto mares with "holes" in their pedigrees. They are both producing very nice riding horses. The other mare is 1/2 Trakehner, so her daughters "should" be good enough to be breeding stock, but they are in Book II and we sell them that way. Her first daughter that we sold is a Childrens Hunter.

Our largest market is for under saddle horses to the Ammy market. But the Ammys we sell to still want a horse that "could" go quite a ways in terms of competition if they want it to. We have not found that upper level potential makes a horse unridable by an Ammy. Maybe we have just been lucky???

I guess that what I am trying to say is that IMO you have to be far more careful when you are producing breeding stock.

[FriesianX]

Overreact much? Re read my post, particularly where I said it was not singling you out. What you wrote made for a great example. Apology accepted ;)

I re-read it - and you did single my post out, you drastically took my quote out of context, and you then proceeded to make inaccurate comments about my specific breeding program, and said I was putting down other breeders and claiming Morgans make a better cross. And, in past threads, you actually recommended someone look at other horses instead of mine - overreacting? I think not. Perhaps you need to go back and read this entire thread and realize how out-of-context your comments are.

[grayarabpony]

I'm not singling out this poster except that this is a great example.

Yes, you are singling out this poster and no, that is not a great example.

Draft/ TB crosses are actually somewhat risky since that is not type to type.

[Daydream Believer]

Thank You DDB, I think ;).

We actually have two Pinto mares with "holes" in their pedigrees. They are both producing very nice riding horses. The other mare is 1/2 Trakehner, so her daughters "should" be good enough to be breeding stock, but they are in Book II and we sell them that way. Her first daughter that we sold is a Childrens Hunter.

I was certainly not being critical of your horses..merely trying to understand where you were coming from. :) Now if you got a very nice filly from this cross, you would not be tempted to breed an F2 cross? Wouldn't you want those horses to be recognized on their own merit and not thought of as inferior due to "holes" in their pedigrees? Seriously? I thought that gelding was a nice as some of the full WB's in your list. He was seriously nice.

Now that pinto WB filly was very droolworthy I have to admit! :D

I think what some of us are proposing...if it would work...would be a place where nice WB crosses with American breeds (purebreds etc..that meet a standard) are welcomed at face value as individuals and not penalized for their bloodlines. :)


Our largest market is for under saddle horses to the Ammy market. But the Ammys we sell to still want a horse that "could" go quite a ways in terms of competition if they want it to. We have not found that upper level potential makes a horse unridable by an Ammy. Maybe we have just been lucky???

Well deep down I will admit that I am breeding for FEI quality gaits also. :D I have one homebred that does have that level of quality...at least according to an R dressage judge who I had to drag out of my pasture :winkgrin:....and a number that are very nice movers that are nothing I'd be embarrassed to ride down the center line on despite their untraditional colors (which I am truly in love with). I'd love to see my babies end up in upper levels also but I try to be realistic...they are small and will likely appeal to older amateur ladies...but they are ammie friendly also in temperaments...so I'm trying to do both also...just with a different breed. I don't think the two qualities are mutually exclusive but I do think it's hard to pull off and unrealistic to breed two uber movers that are very sensitive type horses and expect the offspring to be automatically quiet enough for a typical ammie rider if it is not quite the quality the pros want.

[pintopiaffe]

Darlyn, sorry--what I'd typed to you got cut off when I added the quote. Fixed it. :p

[FriesianX]

I'm one of those scary ones, I admit it. You can say it. ;) I had a really nice mare who was 1/4 Arab, 1/4 ASB X (high % TB) APHA. She was usually mistaken for WB. Everyone wanted to know if she was Art Deco or Hall of Fame back then. :lol: I *line* bred her back to Arab (approved WB arab) and got extremely consistent, good results.

I've bred her dam, the 1/2 Arab mare to APHA 3x and got exceptional foals all three times. I did not breed to a halter horse nor to a WP type--actually, only the first was even hunter type (and he *was* very TB'dy in type). I bred to very uphill, baroque moving, excellent hock action, good neckset stallions. The foals were exactly what I was aiming for: added substance, back end 'sit', and fabulous work ethics.


And that is the perfect example of crosses that work! Educated breeders who understand what does and doesnt' work! And of course, when you look at ArabXASB, it has a history of working well. Actually, Arabs seem to cross well with a lot of different breeds. And most people who are using Paints in their sport horse programs are using Paints with a high % of Tbred. Heck, not everyone realizes, some APHA horses are 100% Tbred! They aren't all Western Pleasure type horses. I know someone who gold medaled on a Paint - which means she was able to score above 60% at Grand Prix. Another friend has an APHA who has a ton of Dutch WB in him. He LOOKS like a WB, but he's registered APHA - with Art Deco lines :lol:

Scary is just randomly breeding different mixed up breeds and hoping something works out. I don't think people here are doing that.

[Renae]

I think this is what I truly dislike about the WB registries. They take other breeds, inspect them and call them their own. The "other" blood...in this case Saddlebred...is not mentioned and the value and credit of that blood is lost to the Saddlebred. It's "assimilated" into a WB registry and not mentioned as Renae explained above. Same with QH and any other breed they take but don't want anyone else to know about.

I think we need to keep our American breeds blood in American registries personally. Let us not lose sight of their contributions like the Saddlebred behind this stallion is no longer recognized. To me, that is what an American Sporthorse Assoc/Registry would be all about versus slipping one into the lower books of a European registry. Give credit where it is due and don't let someone else take that credit for themselves.

The mare Sweetheart On Parade was a Saddlebred X Standardbred cross. At the time she was bred the Saddlebred registry was an open book registry. Sweetheart On Parade was accepted for registration and won the 1931 and 1932 Five Gaited Saddle Horse World's Grand Championships titles and she has gone down in history as beeing a Saddelbred. Should we be giving credit to the Standradbred side of her pedigree and calling Sweetheart On Parade a Half-Standardbred instead of a Saddlebred?

[Renae]

Some lines of Saddlebred horses looked and moved VERY much like the Warmbloods of today. They were not the high headed english show horses we see in photos.


The goal of all Saddlebred breeders has historically been to produce high headed show horses. That is the breed standard. Saddlebreds have been bred to be high headed show horses since before the American Civil War, the sport of showing show horses in three gaited, five gaited, and fine harness classes is older than any of the modern olympic equestrian sports. Saying that there are 2 different types of Saddlebreds is incorrect, those that have acceled in the sport horse disciplines are typically very, very well bred form a show horse perspective and didn't quite live up to their pedigree as a show horse breeder would want.

A prime example is Harry Callahan, one of the most succesful straight Saddlebred dressage horses, he is by Supreme Heir, sire of many, many, many world's champions, and out of a mare by The New York Times who was also dam to CH Atlantache, a World's Champion Five Gaited horse, Crystal Harmony, a Saddlebred Yearling Futurity winner and dam of CH Lightnin Lil, and March Madness, who was a star 3 year old Three-gaited horse.

I'm all for using a horse for what it is best at, I think that leads to the happiest life for the horse. But I think breeders should purpose breed for specific sports, no "breed" can do everything as well as a "breed" the is specifically bred for one or a few things only.

[NoDQhere]

I was certainly not being critical of your horses..merely trying to understand where you were coming from. :) Now if you got a very nice filly from this cross, you would not be tempted to breed an F2 cross? Wouldn't you want those horses to be recognized on their own merit and not thought of as inferior due to "holes" in their pedigrees? Seriously? I thought that gelding was a nice as some of the full WB's in your list. He was seriously nice.

Now that pinto WB filly was very droolworthy I have to admit! :D

Thank you, again. I didn't "feel" that you were being critical, just wanting clarification :yes:. That is what this board is for, or should be IMO :).

I can't say absolutly not, (in regards to the dam of the gelding) as far as an F2 cross. But probably not. Because even though the dam is not "stock horse" shaped, there are old time bull dog QHs in her pedigree. So far the mare has only produced "geldings" so we haven't had to make that decision yet :lol:.

The other mare is sired by an Approved TK stallion and out of a Pinto mare that was mostly APHA and maybe a teeny bit of ASB, but we don't know for certain. The filly on the web site is very good quality, tall, pretty and has a nice disposition. I "feel" she is good enough to become a broodmare, but would like to see her shown first. It will be up to her owner to decide if she is breed worthy.

We honestly don't have a problem with Book II. After many years of doing this I understand why the WB registries are as strict as they are. If these horses go on and do well, we feel they will get as much recognition as it is possible to get with USEF :no:

I think what some of us are proposing...if it would work...would be a place where nice WB crosses with American breeds (purebreds etc..that meet a standard) are welcomed at face value as individuals and not penalized for their bloodlines. :)

I agree with you 100% here, IF a performance standard is met.



Well deep down I will admit that I am breeding for FEI quality gaits also. :D I have one homebred that does have that level of quality...at least according to an R dressage judge who I had to drag out of my pasture :winkgrin:....and a number that are very nice movers that are nothing I'd be embarrassed to ride down the center line on despite their untraditional colors (which I am truly in love with). I'd love to see my babies end up in upper levels also but I try to be realistic...they are small and will likely appeal to older amateur ladies...but they are ammie friendly also in temperaments...so I'm trying to do both also...just with a different breed. I don't think the two qualities are mutually exclusive but I do think it's hard to pull off and unrealistic to breed two uber movers that are very sensitive type horses and expect the offspring to be automatically quiet enough for a typical ammie rider if it is not quite the quality the pros want.

Aiming high, IMO is a good thing ;).

[pintopiaffe]

The last few posts have put a thought in my mind... must one ALWAYS be breeding for F2 or F4???

I mean, we're a group of BREEDERS, so we think in terms of breeding animals.

Many, if not most, really, riders do NOT. They want a horse to RIDE.

Don't take this the wrong way... I'm not saying to cross willy-nilly because you're striving for performance not breeding...

Hell, I don't know how to express what I'm thinking. But many have talked about the 'freak' non-traditional... so whose to say you shouldn't try to *recreate* the freak, rather than REPRODUCE it?

Does that make any sense at all? I don't think I'm able to articulate the way I'm thinking about it... :uhoh:

[quietann]

What struck me was that back in the early 1900s (through the 30s or 40s maybe?) the "breeds" such as Morgan, Saddlebred, Standardbred had very mixed heritage. That "breed" was defined much more by performance than solely by lineage. My "Morgan", if you go back far enough, has Morgan, Saddlebred, Standardbred, TB, and "Farmer Joe's Gray Nag" in her pedigree.

So you could have a horse who was a mix of "Morgan" and TB, and if it met the speed standards of trotting, it could be registered Standardbred. If it was part Saddlbred, part TB, part Morgan, but an amazing saddle horse, it got called a "Saddlebred". If it had those same three "breeds" in it but really made a nice Morgan-y harness horse, it got labeled "Morgan.


And furthermore, there are Morgans who appear in QH pedigrees. A lot of ranch horse breeders in the early 1900s used Morgan stallions to build up their lines. The US Remount posted Morgan stallions throughout the Midwest to bring a high quality line in.

[twofatponies]

And furthermore, there are Morgans who appear in QH pedigrees. A lot of ranch horse breeders in the early 1900s used Morgan stallions to build up their lines. The US Remount posted Morgan stallions throughout the Midwest to bring a high quality line in.

And going back to the comment about Sweetheart on Parade (SaddlebredxStandardbred) a few posts ago, I think was addressing my meandering point, which was, I suppose, when and WHY does a breed association close the books? There must have been some political or monetary or strategic reason to decide that it wasn't enough for a horse to be, say, an excellent saddle horse or excellent ranch horse, it also was beneficial to be able to say that it was "pure".

But registries that value solely purity without also demanding some kind of testing/approval process...well, isn't that sort of like saying "my trainer is a good trainer because his parents were good trainers" vs. "my trainer is a good trainer because he has a diploma from Riding School XYZ"?? Both are likely to provide some indication that the trainer is at least somewhat skilled, though neither guarantee it completely.

Does anyone know why the various American breed registries that had open books ended up closing their books?

[Dawn J-L]

The last few posts have put a thought in my mind... must one ALWAYS be breeding for F2 or F4???

I mean, we're a group of BREEDERS, so we think in terms of breeding animals.

Many, if not most, really, riders do NOT. They want a horse to RIDE.


This perhaps encapsulates the difference between the goals of the European based WB registries and the F1 cross-bred sport horse. The Euro WB registries ARE highly focused on the future generations of breeding stock that are strictly purpose bred for producing performance ability in the sport disciplines. I believe that while cross-bred sport horses can be capable of performance achievement, that they do not offer the kind of genotypic predictability that is required of the Euro WB style breeding system.

A registry that approved Friesians, Saddlebreds, Morgans, WB's, PRE's, Arabians, QH's, draft crosses, etc. for sport breeding with each other simply could not result in a coherent type of horse down the generations. While producing F1 cross-breds with sport ability is a fine goal for an individual breeder, a breeding registry needs to have a longer term vision that is looking at how the current generation is going to lead to improvement in subsequent generations.

Note: The question of whether Morgans, Arabians, QH's, Saddlebreds, Colonial Spanish, etc. can be purpose-bred within their breed to produce excellent sport horses is an entirely separate question from creating a registry where diverse types of sport horses would be approved for breeding. ;-)

[grayarabpony]

I don't think you understand what some are us talking about when using various breeds to create sportshorses. Those horses won't fit their breed standards at all in some cases. It's about breeding types, just as they do in Europe.

[Fairview Horse Center]

I don't think you understand what some are us talking about when using various breeds to create sportshorses. Those horses won't fit their breed standards at all in some cases. It's about breeding types, just as they do in Europe.

Yes, just like the TBs we use for sporthorse breeding are not the downhill ones whose gaits are quick to the ground.

[EqTrainer]

Exactly.. it's all about type. That is why I always say that nice horses, no matter what breed, have more in common than not.

[pintopiaffe]

Thanks Dawn.

I am always looking at the next generation, or the next three or four or five. Very rarely am I looking at this foal for just it's own merit.

I've already got ideas for grandbabies of yet unborn foals of my rising 2yo. :lol:

But I had to ask the question.

As to purpose-breeding, I've been singing THAT song for a long, long, long time. I honestly am pretty darn breed blind--BUT, am adamant about purpose breeding. When you go from a 'good athletic horse' to a 'good athletic dressage horse,' life is SO much easier you never want to go back. We've actually had *that* discussion a few times on the dressage board. Now, I don't agree that purpose-bred must equal purebred or Warmblood... but I am in complete agreement that the long winding road is much smoother and straighter with a horse bred to do the job.

I *do* think that when many people see "QH" or "APHA" or "Arab" or "ASB" they have a picture in their head that probably does not at all match the animals those of us in sport are using. The Paints I've used are as much 'stock' horses as the upper level Lusitano schoolmasters I ride. The Lusos sure can 'work cattle' :lol: ;) But I think people tend to have this idea that a Paint is a tank on teacups who can't move.

[grayarabpony]

Yes, just like the TBs we use for sporthorse breeding are not the downhill ones whose gaits are quick to the ground.

Is that actually the breed standard? It sounds to me like you more describing sprinters.

Now that's a sporthorse I would love to see more widely developed, rather than always crossing with warmbloods. I've seen a lot of stellar sportshorses straight off the track. It's true that a lot of top TB sportshorses do not fit the breed standard of being winners on the track. lol.

I think it's interesting how there are top sportshorses, including GP jumpers, sometimes just directly off top racing horses. Some changes in the angles? Or no? There's a top French breeder who says that Guidam de Revel looked just like Northern Dancer (but with better feet). http://www.horsemagazine.com/BREEDINGBARN/GREAT_STALLIONS/quidamderevel/quidamderevel.html What do you think?

[Dawn J-L]

I don't think you understand what some are us talking about when using various breeds to create sportshorses. Those horses won't fit their breed standards at all in some cases. It's about breeding types, just as they do in Europe.

I breed sport type purebred Arabians so I *DO* understand. ;-) I think there are some marvelous sport type non-WB's out there in a number of breeds. I also have experience with both Euro based WB breeding programs and with quality F1 cross-bred sport horses (including F1 crosses of some of the breeds mentioned).

It's the great diversity in sub-types that are being proposed as being under one breeding umbrella that is concerning to me. No matter how wonderful the individual horses from these various breeds are in terms of sport horse performance phenotype, a breeding pool as diverse as the one being proposed is NOT going to have consistency of the desired qualities in subsequent generations due to the number of generations required to "fix" type when breeding from such divergent genetic types.

[tri]

As someone that gets to deal with probably more different breeds than the average breeder, I don't look at the thread as poking at the other breeds. Quite the contrary! I see that we breed specifically for a particular type that will do well in a specific arena. Melyni, I think it was, pointed out if you want to do endurance, you look at Arabs! If you want to cut cows, you look at Quarter Horses. If you want to do the Park Horse thing, you look at the breeds that excel at that. I don't look at it that "my breed is better than your breed". I look at it that my "breed" (warmbloods) is better for the particular discipline that I've chosen than say a Quarter Horse. That's NOT to say that there aren't Quarter Horses out there doing it, it's simply saying that as a whole, the breed is not known nor is it bred for the Olympic disciplines. Make sense? If I were planning on barrel racing and doing at least mediocre well at it, the LAST breed I'd look at would probably be a warmblood

But that is the problem. When I was growing up doing hunters, the QH/TB cross was THE HORSE TO HAVE for this disipline. Everyone wanted one to do the hunters with and trainers specifically sought them out and people purposely bred them specifically for the hunters.

Today, still, a QH stallion is in the top ten of hunter sires.

There is a WHOLE studbook for the QH/TB cross - the appendix one.

And, people aren't breeding QH/TBs to work cows with - at least not on the east coast.

[Fairview Horse Center]

It sounds to me like you more describing sprinters.

Unfortunately, sprinters are most of what is being bred today. The classic distance runners are becoming harder to find.

[pintopiaffe]

It's the great diversity in sub-types that are being proposed as being under one breeding umbrella that is concerning to me. No matter how wonderful the individual horses from these various breeds are in terms of sport horse performance phenotype, a breeding pool as diverse as the one being proposed is NOT going to have consistency of the desired qualities in subsequent generations due to the number of generations required to "fix" type when breeding from such divergent genetic types.I guess I'm a little lost... I'm not saying everyone should crossbreed. Nor am I saying that the American Sporthorse should be a MIX, or should be a mutt.

I'm asking where the 1/4 or 1/8 APHA fits in, for example... if that other 7/8 is anything but TB.

And I'm not looking to call it a breed... (that's actually always been my issue--they are NOT American "warmbloods." They are sporthorses. ) the only 'umbrella' I'm looking for is some sort of inspection/approveal and tracking process.

The difference between "registry" and "breed", and why there are many arguments that the verbands are not BREEDS, but rather registries...

???

[Dawn J-L]

Thanks Dawn.

I am always looking at the next generation, or the next three or four or five. Very rarely am I looking at this foal for just it's own merit.

I've already got ideas for grandbabies of yet unborn foals of my rising 2yo. :lol:

But I had to ask the question.

As to purpose-breeding, I've been singing THAT song for a long, long, long time. I honestly am pretty darn breed blind--BUT, am adamant about purpose breeding. When you go from a 'good athletic horse' to a 'good athletic dressage horse,' life is SO much easier you never want to go back. We've actually had *that* discussion a few times on the dressage board. Now, I don't agree that purpose-bred must equal purebred or Warmblood... but I am in complete agreement that the long winding road is much smoother and straighter with a horse bred to do the job.

I *do* think that when many people see "QH" or "APHA" or "Arab" or "ASB" they have a picture in their head that probably does not at all match the animals those of us in sport are using. The Paints I've used are as much 'stock' horses as the upper level Lusitano schoolmasters I ride. The Lusos sure can 'work cattle' :lol: ;) But I think people tend to have this idea that a Paint is a tank on teacups who can't move.

I am rather breed blind myself and appreciate a good horse of whatever the background.

Let me clarify my position a bit here. I think that crossing the right AQHA (or Paint) with the right Lusitano can produce excellent horses. Just as crossing the right Morgan to the right Friesian could also produce an excellent horse. The problem comes in when the sport type QHxLusitano is crossed to the sport type MorganxFriesian-- there is just too much opportunity for the wrong combination of traits to crop up. You could get lucky or you could get very unlucky. This is NOT a reflection on the quality of the foundation horses (the F0's) but simply a matter of genetics. Even breeding closer type to type can result in offspring with less than desirable characteristics-- a gene pool as wide as the one being proposed for this uber-open sport breeding registry is simply too diverse to result in consistent quality. This is NOT to say that individual cross-breeding efforts should necessarily be discouraged--just that the best results over many generations come with the right balance of type to type with sufficient --but not too much-- genetic diversity.

[grayarabpony]

I breed sport type purebred Arabians so I *DO* understand. ;-) I think there are some marvelous sport type non-WB's out there in a number of breeds. I also have experience with both Euro based WB breeding programs and with quality F1 cross-bred sport horses (including F1 crosses of some of the breeds mentioned).

It's the great diversity in sub-types that are being proposed as being under one breeding umbrella that is concerning to me. No matter how wonderful the individual horses from these various breeds are in terms of sport horse performance phenotype, a breeding pool as diverse as the one being proposed is NOT going to have consistency of the desired qualities in subsequent generations due to the number of generations required to "fix" type when breeding from such divergent genetic types.

Honestly, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. You're exaggerating the concern of fixing type, which I don't understand since we're talking about crossing type to type. Some people may breed sports ponies, others sports horses. In some cases people may want to cross the two together to add toughness or scope, and register according to how the foal turns out. In most cases that horse would be gelded or used as a broodmare if she's good enough. People are so concerned with these issues of type, although we're not talking about crossing a cutting QH with a warmblood, but some will linebreed up close without batting an eyelash. We're careful they say. You don't know what you have until it comes out, unless you're an alien with the magical power of reading DNA. I can understand linebreeding in generations 3-5, which is the true definition of linebreeding, but any closer than that freaks me out and is asking for trouble.

Warmbloods have been created by the recent addition of Arabian and TB blood, among others. The most inbred ones are the Holsteiners, because their registry doesn't outcross as much. In fact they are going to have to find another outcross soon or that registry is going to get into trouble. Most other warmbloods aren't that inbred at all, at least not the top ranked ones.

It's interesting, someone recently put up a link showing that the Arabians used most in warmblooding breeding is actually the Shagya, which is not typically of most Arabians but a taller, rangier horse.

[Waterwitch]

But many have talked about the 'freak' non-traditional... so whose to say you shouldn't try to *recreate* the freak, rather than REPRODUCE it?


The Irish Sport Horse is (was?) a good example of F1 cross breeding that is done primarily to produce horses for sport (rather than future breeding stock). Heterosis enhances many characteristics that are critical for sport and overall hardiness, but strict selection must be applied to the result if this product is used for breeding. Of course this is how the warmblood studbooks started - by applying strict selection/culling to F1 crosses and moving forward from there.

Which is why the idea that an American studbook could never produce a coherent product for sport is illogical. ANY group of horses can be selectively bred for ANY breeding goal given enough generations. The argument is not "can it be done" - it can of course. The arguments are "how many years will it take" and "who will sacrifice short term gain to do it".

[Dawn J-L]

I guess I'm a little lost... I'm not saying everyone should crossbreed. Nor am I saying that the American Sporthorse should be a MIX, or should be a mutt. (snip)

And I'm not looking to call it a breed... (that's actually always been my issue--they are NOT American "warmbloods." They are sporthorses. ) the only 'umbrella' I'm looking for is some sort of inspection/approveal and tracking process.

Well, the WB registries ARE breeding registries so a discussion based on following the WB model seems to imply breeding. Several other posters seem to be advocating for a breeding registry.

What we need here is a US based performance tracking system. As for "breed" designations for cross-bred sport horses in such a system, most cross-bred sport horses that are registered with a registry can be designated according to their registration. If the cross-bred is one with no parent registry then how is "grade" much different than "american sport registry" in terms of identifying the underlying breeding? If a cross-bred horse is successful in competition then a registry approval seems redundant.

[NoDQhere]

Is that actually the breed standard? It sounds to me like you more describing sprinters.

Now that's a sporthorse I would love to see more widely developed, rather than always crossing with warmbloods. I've seen a lot of stellar sportshorses straight off the track. It's true that a lot of top TB sportshorses do not fit the breed standard of being winners on the track. lol.

I think it's interesting how there are top sportshorses, including GP jumpers, sometimes just directly off top racing horses. Some changes in the angles? Or no? There's a top French breeder who says that Guidam de Revel looked just like Northern Dancer (but with better feet). http://www.horsemagazine.com/BREEDINGBARN/GREAT_STALLIONS/quidamderevel/quidamderevel.html What do you think?

Here is a picture of Northern Dancer: http://www.equiery.com/archives/NorthernDancer.pdf
Honestly, don't think they look a lot alike, but the picture of GdR is a pic of a fit horse and the pic of ND is a fat, older stallion. I see more differences than similarities, but that is just MO.

[jdeboer01]

And going back to the comment about Sweetheart on Parade (SaddlebredxStandardbred) a few posts ago, I think was addressing my meandering point, which was, I suppose, when and WHY does a breed association close the books? There must have been some political or monetary or strategic reason to decide that it wasn't enough for a horse to be, say, an excellent saddle horse or excellent ranch horse, it also was beneficial to be able to say that it was "pure".

But registries that value solely purity without also demanding some kind of testing/approval process...well, isn't that sort of like saying "my trainer is a good trainer because his parents were good trainers" vs. "my trainer is a good trainer because he has a diploma from Riding School XYZ"?? Both are likely to provide some indication that the trainer is at least somewhat skilled, though neither guarantee it completely.

Does anyone know why the various American breed registries that had open books ended up closing their books?

As far as closing books go, my guess is that it was partly (if not mostly) about politics. In many cases, the people who own breeding farms are also quite involved with the registry they paper their horses with, and have quite a bit of money put into the registries as well. If a book is closed, it forces breeders to choose stallions from "inside" the registry. More precisely, the stallions owned by the people running, or contributing good amounts of money to, the registry! It guarantees them more bookings. It also has the effect of increasing the value of the stallions, as they would then be declared "pure". This may also play a part in breed registries that have no approval process. As if to say "who cares the offspring can't do crap! It's by the famous stallion 'So -n -So' so it's worth big bucks!" This again adds value (albeit via "the Emperor's New Clothes" theory) to the stallion owned by the individual running the registry. Just a theory!!

[ASBJumper]

The Irish Sport Horse is (was?) a good example of F1 cross breeding that is done primarily to produce horses for sport (rather than future breeding stock). Heterosis enhances many characteristics that are critical for sport and overall hardiness, but strict selection must be applied to the result if this product is used for breeding. Of course this is how the warmblood studbooks started - by applying strict selection/culling to F1 crosses and moving forward from there.

Which is why the idea that an American studbook could never produce a coherent product for sport is illogical. ANY group of horses can be selectively bred for ANY breeding goal given enough generations. The argument is not "can it be done" - it can of course. The arguments are "how many years will it take" and "who will sacrifice short term gain to do it".


YES!!!! BINGO!!

[tri]

Agreed. And it also flies in the face of all those people - here and in europe - breeding "sport ponies" which are also crossing some of these different types. And, also, the U.S's very successful hunter pony industry which are quite often welsh ponies crossed with arab, tb, warmbloods, shetlands, PINTOS (THIS IS A VERY POPULAR ONE), APPYS (also very popular), quarterhorses, and more.

[grayarabpony]

Here is a picture of Northern Dancer: http://www.equiery.com/archives/NorthernDancer.pdf
Honestly, don't think they look a lot alike, but the picture of GdR is a pic of a fit horse and the pic of ND is a fat, older stallion. I see more differences than similarities, but that is just MO.

Aside from the body condition issues. :rolleyes:

[NoDQhere]

Aside from the body condition issues. :rolleyes:

GdR is a more rectangular horse and ND is very square. GdR is longer legged. His front legs are longer as well, (in relation to his hind legs). His topline is better for a riding horse, (good saddle position). His shoulder is better, his humerus is longer making for a better jumper. I like GdRs hind end angles better as well. Now, we all know that GdR is an excellent "sport horse" and ND was an excellent race horse. I doubt ND could (have) outjumped GdR, and I'm doubtful that GdR could (have) outrun ND. Both NICE, QUALITY horses but different.

Of course their colors and markings are remarkably alike :rolleyes:

[grayarabpony]

Yes, I'm sure you know much better than QdR's owner. :lol:

I don't know if I think Northern Dancer looks like QdR either, but without seeing both horses when they are fit, it's hard to tell.

Patty I honestly don't know WHERE you get your elitist attitude from (and you definitely have one, having read your posts here and on the Dressage Forum), do yourself a favor and lose it. :)

[Dawn J-L]

Which is why the idea that an American studbook could never produce a coherent product for sport is illogical. ANY group of horses can be selectively bred for ANY breeding goal given enough generations. The argument is not "can it be done" - it can of course. The arguments are "how many years will it take" and "who will sacrifice short term gain to do it".

Exactly!!!


*My* point in cautioning about the difficulties in establishing consistency of offspring over breeding generations with foundation stock (and continued use of outcrosses to a wide variety of breed genotypes) of seemingly suitable individuals from draft crosses to Baroque breeds, to QH's to any other breed that than can manifest sport characteristics is that it is important not to overlook the challenges that a massive project of selective breeding for sport horses from such a wide gene pool (and a large number of folks with divergent goals) requires. :-)

If it seems incomprehensible that even with careful selection that initial generations would result in significant numbers of culls compared to breeding projects that start with less variance in physical size, substance, style of movement, etc. then everything I've observed and learned of breeding and cross-breeding must be wrong!!! ;-)

[Fairview Horse Center]

Those 2 stallions are nothing alike.

QdR has a longer neck, nicely defined throat, better shoulder angle, and better saddle position. He has a longer back, but I prefer ND loin connection. ND has a lot of underneck. ND has less slope to his croup, and shorter from top of the rump to tail. QdR has a longer gaskin, and more open stifle. I like the way ND cannons come out of his knee better, and it appears he has more bone, but legs are super hard to tell from photos, as they distort so easily from angle. You definitely have a longer, rangier stallion compared to a more compact one. They are both bay though, and their blazes look remarkably similar.

[grayarabpony]

Yeah, I'm sure Quidam de Revel's owner is so dumb, he thought they looked alike based on their coloring.

Have you seen Northern Dancer in person, when he was young and fit?

[NoDQhere]

Yes, I'm sure you know much better than QdR's owner. :lol:

I don't know if I think Northern Dancer looks like QdR either, but without seeing both horses when they are fit, it's hard to tell.

Patty I honestly don't know WHERE you get your elitist attitude from (and you definitely have one, having read your posts here and on the Dressage Forum), do yourself a favor and lose it. :)

First off, Greyarabpony, you've made it pretty clear that you've got your knickers in a twist towards me and a couple of other posters. Funny, but it seems to be those of us who do have some experience AND the NERVE to disagree with you. The horror. You just want to fight and insult people. And you remain anonymous, isn't that interesting??? What is it about you that is so special that we should all fall down at your feet??

Disagreeing with an anonymous poster hardly makes anyone elitist. Perhaps if you spent some time developing your eye, you'd be less inclined to argue.

[grayarabpony]

As I've said, I've seen many of your posts on the dressage forum.:dead:

I don't care if you disagree with me or not. I just wish this forum was actually to discuss breeding and not for breeders to pimp their horses.

You're not anomymous because you're here to advertise. :lol: You'd probably be better off being anomyous.

BTW, You don't have any more experience with horses than I do. But I do commend your X-ray vision. It's extraordinary!

[Mel0309]

Here are some photos of Northern Dancer in racing form. None are a confo shot though.

Carry on...

http://docsunspeckledrock.blogspot.com/2008/01/northern-dancer-1964-kentucky-derby.html

http://www.forterieracing.com/history/history2/history2.htm

middle of the page:
http://www.albatrozbloodstock.net/general.asp?WhichTable=tblMain&Item=32

[NoDQhere]

As I've said, I've seen many of your posts on the dressage forum.:dead:

I don't care if you disagree with me or not. I just wish this forum was actually to discuss breeding and not for breeders to pimp their horses.

You're not anomymous because you're here to advertise. :lol: You'd probably be better off being anomyous.

This forum is for discussing breeding and you should open up your mind enough to realize that you could learn from other people's experience. You can go on Fairview's, FriesianX's, Pintopiaafe's, or our web site and actually see what people are doing. In other words, we aren't afraid to put ourselves out there for scrutiny. You too are welcome to post the link to your website so maybe we could see where you are coming from.

BTW, You don't have any more experience with horses than I do. But I do commend your X-ray vision. It's extraordinary!

Its hardly x-ray vision :lol::lol::lol:. Can't you "see" a horse's conformation without an autopsy??? I know many folks who can. Like many of the breeders on this forum for instance.

[FriesianX]

Let me clarify my position a bit here. I think that crossing the right AQHA (or Paint) with the right Lusitano can produce excellent horses. Just as crossing the right Morgan to the right Friesian could also produce an excellent horse. The problem comes in when the sport type QHxLusitano is crossed to the sport type MorganxFriesian-- there is just too much opportunity for the wrong combination of traits to crop up. You could get lucky or you could get very unlucky. This is NOT a reflection on the quality of the foundation horses (the F0's) but simply a matter of genetics. Even breeding closer type to type can result in offspring with less than desirable characteristics-- a gene pool as wide as the one being proposed for this uber-open sport breeding registry is simply too diverse to result in consistent quality. This is NOT to say that individual cross-breeding efforts should necessarily be discouraged--just that the best results over many generations come with the right balance of type to type with sufficient --but not too much-- genetic diversity.

I agree quite a bit with you - the key will be understanding that, if you want to go to an F-2, F-3, F-4 cross, you need to do it carefully. Breeding type to type and understanding WHAT you are breeding and what your goals are. An example - I've breed a few F-2 Friesian crosses now, as have a few friends of mine. But they aren't breeding a Friesian/Arab cross to a Friesian/ draft cross. In my specific case, I'm breeding Freisian/WB to Friesian/WB - very type to type. Another person I know breeds Friesian/Appy to Friesian/Appy (for a very Knabstrupper type horse). In all honesty, my goal is NOT to create a Friesian cross BREED, most of my horses are 1st generation crosses, or a cross back to a pure WB. But I do like the idea of having a registry that recognizes the many different sport horses being bred, and recognizes that non-traditional WB lines may actually make for a successful sport horse.

As I mentioned before, I don't think you will see a lot of breeders taking a diverse cross and breeding to a totally different diverse cross (I'm not going to make up any multi breed crosses to keep a certain other poster off my back), I think most will stick very type to type. But a unified registry or performance data base might allow us to see WHAT types work well together, what bloodlines within those types work well, etc.

Right now, we have a lot of breeders experimenting without a great network of information. Some of those experiments are working, others, maybe not. Wouldn't it be nice if we could ALL see the performance results of different crosses? And have an organization that promotes for U.S. breeders and looks for the standards we desire? Maybe understands the difference between a Hunter, Jumper, and Dressage horse?

Even within the WB world, you see some genetic diversity - for example, Arabians are VERY different than many WB lines, yet with careful breeding and re-breeding, some WB lines have refined their look quite a bit (the Trakehner comes to mind). If you look at older pictures of WBs, they look much (MUCH) different than today's WBs - from careful outbreeding, then F-2 and F-3 and F-4 generational breeding with some pretty diverse lines - Tbred, Arab, and old style WB mixed in (and maybe a little Saddlebred and French Trotter stirred in for extra zip).

And such a registry could have different books for different types - for example, a jumping book, a dressage book, a hunter book, a driving book? Not sure if that would get too complicated, but I'd love to see performance results tracked by discipline!

OK, I'm rambling a bit - all we need is a core group of volunteers and a wealthy benefactor to get the ball rolling :lol:

[grayarabpony]

A wealthy benefactor :) ...... <insert dreamy harp music here>

:lol:

[grayarabpony]

middle of the page:
http://www.albatrozbloodstock.net/general.asp?WhichTable=tblMain&Item=32

Interesting link! There are some beautiful pictures and some that are, well... :uhoh:

:lol:


OK well perhaps everyone can agree that ND and QrD were both pretty. ND got SO heavily muscled when he got older that he looks quite different then he did when he was a young racer.

[NoDQhere]

It does seem as though everyone agrees that we DO need a better tracking system. A way to keep track of and recognize horses in this country regardless of "what" they are.

I don't know what can be done, other than "lifetime" register all your foals with USEF and then hope they keep their name, AND that USEF gets a bit better at keeping track.:sadsmile:

[RiddleMeThis]

The argument is not "can it be done" - it can of course. The arguments are "how many years will it take" and "who will sacrifice short term gain to do it".
And THIS is why they dont have a place in the top books of the Euro registries and why they take at least 4 generations to get there.

Not saying they dont have a place in a different registry or a new registry or that they dont have a place in the sport horse world, just that that is why they dont have the place their breeders would like them to in the Euro registries.

[pintopiaffe]

Guys, (ladies!) I think we managed a really civil and informational discussion for ten pages +. Please, please, ignore personal digs (I know it's hard!!) and let's not make it personal. I noticed a lot of new posters around page 8 or 9. I suspect they came and looked to see what the trainwreck was. And it *wasn't* a trainwreck, it was (IMO!) a discussion that was quite eyeopening.

Right now, we have a lot of breeders experimenting without a great network of information. Some of those experiments are working, others, maybe not. Wouldn't it be nice if we could ALL see the performance results of different crosses? And have an organization that promotes for U.S. breeders and looks for the standards we desire?<clap,clap,clap> You know, back when I started this, it was because I *had* to. I wanted a more dressage advantage than I could find in pure APHA's. But I still wanted my spots. (cake and eat it too ;) ) I wanted more loft & suspension. More uphill. But I still wanted the APHA mind and work ethic, and god foribid, the tobi gene. I couldn't come NEAR to affording what Liz Hall had, and you know what? She was IT at the time. There simply was not another venue for pinto dressage and sporthorses. Oh sure--the rare APHA or PtHA made it into the USDF magazine... but I counted TWO the year I bred my first Pinto Sporthorse. I actually BOOKED to State of the Art when he was still called State of the Heart (dating myself here!) but couldn't find a vet to do the AI with me. So I set about to create my own.

Reinventing the wheel? Yup. Becuase I HAD to. I drooled over Liz's horses, but could simply come nowhere near affording them.

And now I continue, because it's WORKED. And I've always said, crossbreeding is as much art as science, and it pleases me aesthetically. Guess what--I've used Sempatico, and plan to again! <gasp> :lol: BUT, I put him to my Trak mare because of his high% of Trak in his pedigree (and the foal came out just a bit too heavy and... less sensitive... than I desire) and I wanted to put him to my NSH mare because he is the PERFECT type to match her type. AND, I am hoping that her 'spark', her sensitivity, come through along with his very strong stamp of trainability.

Anyway, the reason I relate this, is because at the time, I didn't have any options (that I could afford) but what I did, and continued... WORKED... I've got the 4th generation going now. The challenge of crossbreeding was and remains a fabulous challenge. You know what, it's FUN. It's FUN to beat the Feiner Stern colt out of the Gr. Ch. Mature horse mare, with the MorganX son of my stallion. It' s INCREDIBLY rewarding.

I don't get out as much as I want or *should*, due to costs of showing. Especially the past 2 or 3 years. Fuel costs, feed costs... I hang out at home and plan the next three or four generations--my retirement, I hope. Do I think I'm reinventing the wheel still? Not so much. I think I've figured out a way to come up with a comprable wheel, that costs me about 2/3 less. ;)

[grayarabpony]

This forum is for discussing breeding and you should open up your mind enough to realize that you could learn from other people's experience.

I guess you haven't read many of my posts? :confused:

As far as seeing a horse's conformation, at least one expert (can't remember who, but I did read this) will tell you that you need to palpate through muscle to tell where the joints are, and that muscling can be deceiving. Plus, sometimes conformation shots will only tell you what the horse is like when he's standing still. :lol:

I will admit that I am not good at reading conformation shots, especially photos. I rely more on assessing a horse when it's moving.

[NoDQhere]

I guess you haven't read many of my posts? :confused:

Yes, I have and it is clear to me that you just want to be agreed with.

As far as seeing a horse's conformation, at least one expert (can't remember who, but I did read this) will tell you that you need to palpate through muscle to tell where the joints are, and that muscling can be deceiving. Plus, sometimes conformation shots will only tell you what the horse is like when he's standing still. :lol:

With enough palpating one does learn to assess conformation with just one's eyes. When is the last time you saw a judge palpating an in hand horse???:lol: Of course one needs to see the horse move, but conformation and movement are "related". Form to function and all that.

I will admit that I am not good at reading conformation shots, especially photos. I rely more on assessing a horse when it's moving.

Sorry, but breeders need to be very good at accessing both.

[grayarabpony]

Well -- shrug -- I guess your reading comprehension could use a little help.

And how often does success on the line correlate with performance success? :rolleyes: :lol: Besides, conformation is only one factor in a horse's movement -- there's the muscling and wiring and all that. Which is why no one can determine what a horse can do from a conformation shot.

Another thing breeders need to be able to do is to post to links of good video of their horses, and to lose the sucky shots of their stallion showing a lack of engagement. :)

[siegi b.]

grayarabpony - why are you such an unhappy person? That just comes through in every one of your posts.... things couldn't possibly be that bad!

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but once you've seen enough horses and understand the form to function concept, it is indeed not that hard to correlate the two. And I have bred quite a few keuring/breed show winners that went on to really spectacular careers under saddle.

[grayarabpony]

Actually siegi I am not at all unhappy. I don't know where you get that from. :lol: Just because I don't agree with some of breeders about some things doesn't make me an unhappy person. Perhaps it just makes me right about those things. :cool:

What have your babies accomplished? Are any ranked internationally?

[Renae]

What have your babies accomplished? Are any ranked internationally?

Siegi was the KWPN-NA Breeder of the Year for 2007. With a small band of broodmares she has produced some fantastic horses. Check out her website http://www.stalleuropa.com/, and really if you are paying attention to breeding sport horses in NA, particularly dressage horses, you should not have to ask who Siegi is.

[canticle]

Siegi was the KWPN-NA Breeder of the Year for 2007. With a small band of broodmares she has produced some fantastic horses. Check out her website http://www.stalleuropa.com/, and really if you are paying attention to breeding sport horses in NA, particularly dressage horses, you should not have to ask who Siegi is.
There's no reason why a non-WB or even a non-KWPN person should know who Siegi is. I'll take your word that she is a wonderful breeder, but as a Morgan person, why should I care? It's very presumptuous to expect people to keep up with a breed they are not interested in.

[Renae]

There's no reason why a non-WB or even a non-KWPN person should know who Siegi is. I'll take your word that she is a wonderful breeder, but as a Morgan person, why should I care? It's very presumptuous to expect people to keep up with a breed they are not interested in.

It's not just the breed, the whole sport, one of Siegi's won the 4YO young horse championship last year for dressage horses, if you are interested in breeding and rasing quality dressage horses surely you pay attention to things like the National Young Horse Program?

If you only pay attention to other Morgan sport horse breeders, not the open circuti on the national and international level, then you are kind of demonstarting why some of the closed book American breeds have trouble at times when they leave the breed shows and hit the open circuit.

[NoDQhere]

Well -- shrug -- I guess your reading comprehension could use a little help.

And how often does success on the line correlate with performance success? :rolleyes: :lol: Besides, conformation is only one factor in a horse's movement -- there's the muscling and wiring and all that. Which is why no one can determine what a horse can do from a conformation shot.

Another thing breeders need to be able to do is to post to links of good video of their horses, and to lose the sucky shots of their stallion showing a lack of engagement. :)

So, come on then, show us your stuff. You too, Canticle. We are all here to learn.

[canticle]

It's not just the breed, the whole sport, one of Siegi's won the 4YO young horse championship last year for dressage horses, if you are interested in breeding and rasing quality dressage horses surely you pay attention to things like the National Young Horse Program?

If you only pay attention to other Morgan sport horse breeders, not the open circuti on the national and international level, then you are kind of demonstarting why some of the closed book American breeds have trouble at times when they leave the breed shows and hit the open circuit.
No it's not the whole sport. It's just your little corner of it. Congratulations to Seigi, but I honestly don't care about about the young WB horse shows. I also wouldn't expect her to follow the Morgan shows. No one would expect her to know who the WC stallion was in 1996, 1999 and 2002. In fact, her eyes are probably glazing over right now!

Yet some people are so arrogant and into themselves that they actually expect other people to follow the minutiae of breeds they aren't even interested in! Ok, I hope you put your money where your mouth is and can rattle off trivia about Icelandic Horses and Shires. Who are the big breeders? Who are the up and coming sires?

I pray that Morgan breeders remain dedicated to the Morgan breed first and foremost. That is the best way to preserve the classic Morgan type. There is nothing to be gained by immersing oneself in KWPNs or Gotlands or Akhal Tekes.

[Renae]

Canticle the USDF Young Horse program is for all breeds, it is an open program.

And actually I have shown Icelandic Horses and can rattle off quite a bit about them if you like.

[RiddleMeThis]

I also wouldn't expect her to follow the Morgan shows.
Do YOU, a morgan breeder from what I gather, follow morgan shows?

[grayarabpony]

Siegi was the KWPN-NA Breeder of the Year for 2007. With a small band of broodmares she has produced some fantastic horses. Check out her website http://www.stalleuropa.com/, and really if you are paying attention to breeding sport horses in NA, particularly dressage horses, you should not have to ask who Siegi is.

I know who Siegi is. I asked what her horses have done. Pretty simple question, right? It would appear from her website that one of the horses she bred is now doing 4th level, correct?

Now I'm sure someone will try to twist that question into something sinister but they should not, because it isn't. I'm sure seigi's horses are beautiful.

Patty I'm glad you're here to learn. That's a commendable attitude.

[Renae]

What have your babies accomplished? Are any ranked internationally?

Oh, so you were just saying this because you thought it was a cute/nasty smart ass comment? What have horses you have bred done?

[NoDQhere]

I know who Siegi is. I asked what her horses have done. Pretty simple question, right? It would appear from her website that one of the horses she bred is now doing 4th level, correct?

Now I'm sure someone will try to twist that question into something sinister but they should not, because it isn't. I'm sure seigi's horses are beautiful.

Patty I'm glad you're here to learn. That's a commendable attitude.

Siegi's horses have done much more than that, but you aren't really interested at all, are you?

A little hint for you. You'd darn well be learning if you hope to get anything accomplished in the sport horse world. Unless of course you are one of those people who was born knowing everything. In which case, lucky you!

Oh, we are still waiting for a list of your accomplishments..............

And this was quite a good thread. Darn trolls :no:.

[canticle]

It looks really bad when people start trotting out the line: "Do you have ANY idea who so-and-so is?!" Are you guys really that desperate? You don't see me boasting about my Kohler toilet.

[Renae]

It looks really bad when people start trotting out the line: "Do you have ANY idea who so-and-so is?!" Are you guys really that desperate? You don't see me boasting about my Kohler toilet.

Thats your closest connection to a Kohler-bred Morgan, your toilet?

[canticle]

Thats your closest connection to a Kohler-bred Morgan, your toilet?
Oops, I just checked. They're American Standard!

[pintopiaffe]

yikes.

:(

Sorry guys... it was constructive there for awhile. Thanks for that.

[grayarabpony]

Oh, so you were just saying this because you thought it was a cute/nasty smart ass comment? What have horses you have bred done?

Classy Renae. If a horse has gone on to have a spectacular career why not "believe" the horse has gone on to have international success?

I have a beautiful TB/ Hanoverian. Not for sale, never will be for sale, so you can forget about seeing video. :)

Yours is an ironic statement considering all of the "cute/ nasty smart ass" comments I've seen siegi make, which no amount of smiley faces can make up for. Her attitude could not be justified even if she's produced Olympic level horses, which she has not yet anyway. If even she had, her attitude is unappealing.

Actually Patty, I'd like to see a list of your accomplishments.....:)

Guess what Patty, it's you who can't stand to have anyone disagree with her view. If anyone disagrees with some of the breeders on this forum, such as yourself, they turn very nasty. Are people beating down your door to breed to your stallions? Do you think they'll read your posts and want to do business with you? I don't think so.... :no:

I'm going to do myself a favor and put a few people on ignore. You're deluding yourselves if you think what you post here is educational.

[tri]

So, back to the ot, since breeders such as Siegi don't mind being in a registry that accepts saddlebred blood and hackney blood and doesn't mind being in a registry that has a hunter book with horses in it that otherwise wouldn't be accepted, would breeders like siegi mind being in an american registry that has a couple of "sporthorse" books along with books with strict traditional wb bloodlines?

[NoDQhere]

] I have a beautiful TB/ Hanoverian. Not for sale, never will be for sale, so you can forget about seeing video. :)

Why is this no surprise?

]Yours is an ironic statement considering all of the "cute/ nasty smart ass" comments I've seen siegi make, which no amount of smiley faces can make up for. Her attitude could not be justified even if she's produced Olympic level horses, which she has not yet anyway. If even she had, her attitude is unappealing

Siegi has worked hard for her success AND she has done very well. Yes, that will cause jealousy. An expert once told me that jealousy is the most sincere form of flattery.

Actually Patty, I'd like to see a list of your accomplishments.....:)

"My" accomplishments have been made possible by a whole team of people. There is information on the web site if you were actually interested. My personal best was riding a horse I (my family) bred to the Area 9 Intermediate Horse Of The Year. There is a picture of him on the home page of our web site. And guess what???? He was an APPALOOSA. Shortly after that I suffered career ending physical problems and was forced to give up competitive riding. Now my duties are more "on the ground" although I still ride often enough to know what a good horse is :yes:.

Guess what Patty, it's you who can't stand to have anyone disagree with her view. If anyone disagrees with some of the breeders on this forum, such as yourself, they turn very nasty. Are people beating down your door to breed to your stallions? Do you think they'll read your posts and want to do business with you? I don't think so.... :no:

Actually, all the breeders, myself included, are quite good at exchanging ideas and views. What most of us find annoying is when an anonymous poster jumps down our throats, calls us names and insults our programs.

As to the rest of your insults, GAP, we are doing just fine. And we must be doing something right as we managed to produce the colt that is tied for the highest score in the RPSI this year. He is the second generation in our program as we bred his dam as well. And no, he is not for sale.

A couple of us asked you to show us "something", in other words to put your money where your mouth is. If we are expected to "bow to your superiority" we want to see something tangible. Is that too much to ask?

[Kyzteke]

Wing Tempo is a great horse, but his record for competitive trail miles was just broken by the 37 year old 1/2 Arab "Elmer Bandit":
http://www.thehorse.com/ViewArticle.aspx?ID=12972 (Elmer's new mileage record)

http://www.thehorse.com/ViewArticle.aspx?ID=12880&source=rss (a recent update on Wing Tempo)

Has anyone made the point that Elmer Bandit's OTHER half is Appendix QH....so he is kicking some PB Arab butt.

[Kyzteke]

http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/victory+gallop2

I have seen a few QHs that equal or surpass many of the warmbloods I've seen, both in jump and movement.

This stallion is less than 25% QH. Note his sire is WB, his dam listed as QH, but if you look she is actually Appendix -- HER sire was a full TB. Then take a llook --- one generation back is Three Bars -- a JC TB.

This stallion actually has very little QH blood, so he doesn't really support your theroy.

And sorry if this has been said already..I really haven't read all the pages.

[grayarabpony]

This stallion is less than 25% QH. Note his sire is WB, his dam listed as QH, but if you look she is actually Appendix -- HER sire was a full TB. Then take a llook --- one generation back is Three Bars -- a JC TB.

This stallion actually has very little QH blood, so he doesn't really support your theroy.

And sorry if this has been said already..I really haven't read all the pages.

Yes, I know that her dam was Appendix QH. Anyone can see that. Also, anyone who knows anything about QHs knows that Three Bars is considered of the modern QH foundation sires.

An Appendix QH can make a very nice American warmblood type sportshorse depending on the parents.

My "theory" has nothing to do with that stallion. It has to do with QHs I've actually known. Including a 14.1 mare who would make most German Riding Ponies cry.

Those sporthorse type QHs and horses of other breeds are out there. No, they may not fit their breed standard -- at all -- but they sure are fun, if not spectacular to watch and to ride.

[Dawn J-L]

Has anyone made the point that Elmer Bandit's OTHER half is Appendix QH....so he is kicking some PB Arab butt.

Elmer is an awesome horse and a credit to his lineage. :-)