Let's have a chat about the 100 day stallion test! I'm curious ... [Archive]

crestline

Jun. 24, 2004, 07:05 AM

Just my opinion....but here goes...and this is, of course, just our personal decision...different things work for different people...

We had considered going when the 100DT was to be in CA this year. We have decided to pursue the performance route instead. I recently talked to some folks that figure, all totalled, they will spend about $20K for the testing...and even one of the training directors told me that many approved stallions will not ever book more than a few breedings per year. (As we already book plenty of mares it is hard to have this be a factor)

While it is an interesting concept...many of the horses there may not ever show to Level 8 jumpers or PSG dressage (the performance requirements) yet they get approved no problem since they are nice "all-arounders". I would guess some of them can't even manage their hormones enough to make it to an open show and perform in a new environment where mares our present so I'm not sure how much weight to give these scores that are so expensive to obtain. That said, when a stallion has NO performance career...the scores are nice to look at and gives some ideas of his strengths.

When I get to the bottom line, $20K buys a heck of a lot of horseshows! We already show and win at a level higher that what the 100dt tests for. I just can't justify that much money for someone to tell me that Palladio is easy to ride and talented. I can gather that every time he babysits me over a fence http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif...and after listening to George Morris gush about him all weekend...I guess I don't really question whether or not qualified people think he's talented.

Besides....on top of all of that...there is always the little scary voice in the back of my head that says...."what if he comes back and can't be ridden and shown in his rubber bit", "what if he were to get sick and no one noticed?", "what if, what if, what if. At the end of the day I'm not sure if I could live with myself if something happened to him while he was there....and Ohio is a pretty darn long haul from Washington State! In Europe the distance just isn't an issue...no one has to haul for a week to get to a test...

I can say that I like the idea of sending them older...three is younger than I like my horses to jump. I like the slow and steady approach myself.

Just one opinion....

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 24, 2004, 07:21 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by crestline:
"what if he comes back and can't be ridden and shown in his rubber bit" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

OMGiH this was worth starting the thread alone! You can ride your stallion in a rubber bit!

I guess he just never needed anything stronger ???? Kudos to you BOTH. Whatta guy!

And THAT is a very persuasive point ... $20K buys a lot of horse shows. From my inquiries on the H/J board, apparently it would buy 20 weeks!

I also understand that performance requirements are different for every registry ... is that right?

crestline

Jun. 24, 2004, 07:25 AM

OMOM-
Heehee...yes happy mouth snaffle all the way...even hopping around the prelim/Level 5's/Mini Prix. You can imagine I'm a tad protective over who puts what in his mouth http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Like I said...hard to spend the money for someone to say "yep, he's ride-able" http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

HFSH

Jun. 24, 2004, 07:33 AM

I had a stallion OMOM and we opted to start the Performance route versus the 100dt. Moot point as he died, but, that was the plan. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

The performance route is expensive if you are paying a trainer! $20K will get you 20 months of training at $1K per month, no show expenses included!

I like the new route that the Europeans are taking, with 2 testings. 1 30-day and 1 70-day testing. Gives 2 opportunities for scores, and a break in between to let the horse rest before the bigger testing. I like that idea! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

Future Breeder

Jun. 24, 2004, 07:36 AM

.. and where can I get a Palladio baby? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I believe Liz (pintofoal) if I'm not mistaken had Sempatico in the 100 DT, but don't quote me on that. I do remember him being in some type of testing.. but Liz will have to verify that one. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

--

Edited to say, nevermind - Sempatico was in the 30 and 70 DT http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Paula

Jun. 24, 2004, 07:48 AM

FWIW I've talked to a number of owners who put their stallions through the test who were very happy with the care, training and experience. One of them was an older stallion, the others went through as three year olds. One stallion went to the test basically unstarted and passed and the owners were very pleased and he is progressing well in sport. Another was an older stallion who won the test and was already seasoned - the owner will tell you it was the best training money she ever spent on the horse and she couldn't have been happier with how he came back. The other three ranged in age from four to five when sent and the owners were also happy and felt the care and training were very good and consistant with their own training programs. The caveat here is all of these horses scored well and passed http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
I'm not saying the test is perfect but I would take the time to call up owners of stallions yourself - most are more than willing to talk candidly about their experience.

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 24, 2004, 07:56 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by crestline:
OMOM-
Heehee...yes happy mouth snaffle all the way...even hopping around the prelim/Level 5's/Mini Prix. You can imagine I'm a tad protective over who puts what in his mouth http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Like I said...hard to spend the money for someone to say "yep, he's ride-able" http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess. If I were going to do an ad for him for one of the stallion publications, I think I'd have that as a headline:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> This Stallion's so Rideable he shows in a RUBBER BIT! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

or, even better:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Free Rubber bit with every booking! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am just kidding, but congratulations. It also speaks very highly for your hands! I'm very very impressed. (BTW, please check your PTs in a minute or so. I want to ask you a question http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

HFSH -

Oh, sweetie, I'm so sorry.

I am lucky as my Partner on my guy is a trainer. But the two testings are an interesting alternative. Do you think this will catch on here?

HFSH

Jun. 24, 2004, 08:06 AM

Well, since the Federation is only doing ONE testing every 2 years, I can't see them getting it together any time soon to do 30 and 70 day tests. We as a country are not producing enough stallion candidates yet to make it feasible, I think. The testing fills every 2 years, but that's 20 stallions every 2 years.

http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 24, 2004, 08:10 AM

Something else I just learned.

They only accept 20 stallions. And I assume they have NO problem filling the stalls!

sylvan farm

Jun. 24, 2004, 08:13 AM

Well, I have sent two stallions through 100 day testing - one as an immature 3 yr old (dressage type) and one as a 4 yr old (jumper type). IMO, the decision to send depends on two factors: the mental and physical maturity of the horse, and who will be the training leader. Both horses enjoyed the experience, esp. cross-country, and finished the tesing with above average scores. If I had it to do again, I would have sent the 3 yr old as a 4 yr old - he was tall and gangly and the dressage work did not suit him at that age. He did go on to be a very successful sire in Canada. The other stallion (Agincourt) came through the tesing wonderfully, looked great, completed the testing in a happy apple bit. He was 2nd in the jumping with a score over 126. He still goes in a snaffle today after many years on the big circuits.

If Helmut Schrant is the training director, I would not hesitate to send another stallion (although our current stallion prospect is being raised in Germany and will test there if licensed). BTW, we did not spend anywhere near $20,000 for either testing, and one horse shipped back East. One suggestions for anyone sending a horse, be proactive in your approach to the testing. Go meet the Tr. Dir. and let him know your expectations, for example, you would like a phone call each week for an update on your horse's progress. Go to visit during the testing, or have a friend that lives near visit.

My personal experience is that the testing is not much different from sending a horse to a top training barn for 3 months. But, I would have my horse fit before sending him.

JMO.

Mannuscript Farm

Jun. 24, 2004, 08:16 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Oldenburg Mom:
have any of you sent your stallions there? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, Mannhattan went in 1996.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Were you pleased with the results? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Overall, yes. It's like most things, especially involving horses. Some things I was really, really pleased with and others less happy with. But the overall experience was positive.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Would you do it again? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. I'm sending our four year old stallion, Waterford this year. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[QUOTE[ If you had a stallion that maybe didn't do as well as you thought ... what did you do? Go the performance route? Geld him? [/QUOTE]

If I had a stallion that didn't pass the test, I'd probably geld him and sell him.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Would you breed to a stallion that had the top score ... would that play a part in your decision? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My only concern when looking at a stallion is whether or not he is fully licensed. How he achieved the license is secondary. So, it would depend on the stallion. Would it play a part in my decision, probably not...other than knowing that he successfully completed the test. ANY stallion that has completed the test has proven that he is an exceptional athlete. It "is" tough.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> What do you think of the evalution analysis ... I've copied it here <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

One thing you can be sure of with a stallion that has completed the 100 Day Test, is that they probably have a decent temperament. Almost 50% of the final score has something to do with work ethic, rideability, trainability, character, temperament, etc.

The cost of the testing is $8,500 for a stallion that is approved through one of the Federation registries. On top of that, you have your costs of getting the stallion there (it's going to cost me about $2,500), liability insurance for him while he's there, and any vet or shoeing costs while there.

This year's stallion director is Helmut Schrant.

While going the performance route is certainly an option, it has its inherent risk. Mannhattan completed the testing and went on to perform up to the 5' division in the jumpers, quite successfully. Unfortunately, he ended up hooking his shoe in a fence and removing a goodly portion of the hoof, pulling all kinds of tendons and such in his leg and is now no longer performance sound. If I had been going the performance route, he wouldn't have his breeding license and his offspring would not be eligible for registration, in spite of how well they are doing!

Liz sent Spectrum to the last testing here in the US, not Sempatico. Spectrum did quite well and was a fun horse to watch throughout. He just had that "can do" attitude. It "is" interesting to see the stallions who do go through the testing as you are literally looking at some top notch performance animals all in one arena.

It "is" difficult! It's meant to be. Wouldn't mean a darn thing if it wasn't! There "are" risks to it and there is also the possibility that the stallion won't score sufficiently to attain a license. But, there are risks in going the performance route, as well which are mroe substantial, in my opinion. The training directors have the horses well being in mind and do everything they can to give the stallions the best opportunity to succeed.

I agree with the others about the age issue. It would have to be an exceptionally mature stallion for me to send them as a three year old. Waterford at four still has some growing and maturing to do, but I'm comfortable sending him this year. As a three year old, he just looked like a kid http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif...gawky, gangly and just not mature enough. Waterford, btw, is ridden in a nice, easy French snaffle http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif and goes around quite softly and happily.

It's been interesting watching the progression with Waterford. He's a Mannhattan grandson, so he definitely can jump. His temperament is to die for <smile>...comes running nickering when we go out to catch him in his paddock and the dude can MOVE!! Nervous? You bet! But I wouldn't send him if I didn't think he'd do well.

Kathy St.Martin
Mannuscript Farm
Home of the Oldenburg stallions, Mannhattan and Waterford

and

Equine Reproduction Short Courses
6 days left of the Spring Enrollment Special!
http://www.equine-reproduction.com

LLDM

Jun. 24, 2004, 08:26 AM

Omom - There are two different questions in my mind. Would I send one of my own? And does having 100DT scores available on a stallion make him more interesting to me for my mares?

I don't know if I would send one of my boys or not. It depends on how things are with the test at the time. I understand that they have had, um, "issues" in the past. I also understand they are getting much better. I would not send a three year old, but mine tend to grow slow. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

With my "mare owner" hat on, I have to say that I really like having those scores available to me. They allow me some objective measure of a stallions strengths and weaknesses. If I have a mare that needs a better canter or help in the jumping dept. for example, I can pick one that scores very well in those areas. Since ridabilty and work ethic are very important in my program, those scores must be good. If I am trying for an eventer, those XC scores become very important. You see where I am going with this right?

Scores are not everything, but neither is performance. But then conformation isn't everything either is it? And bloodlines are no absolute are they? And just how does one discover "heart for the work?"

My advice - when you discover his choice of career, if he loves one thing and is good, then maybe go performane. If he is pretty good at everything, consider the test.

SCFarm

Sorry, no easy answers

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 24, 2004, 08:40 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by LLDM:
And just how does one discover "heart for the work?" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

GOLD DUST ???? PAGING GOLD DUST! Isn't this right up her alley??? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

I wish we ALL knew the answer to that one! And hey, if it was easy EVERYONE would be doing it! Difficulty makes the struggle for achievement worthwhile!

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 24, 2004, 08:50 AM

Sylvan Farm and Mannuscript Farm:

You know I have to complement you both. And this is why even though there is some contretemps from time to time I think this BB is just GREAT.

You have both written non-inflammatory answers, tried to give an accurate picture, and gave the positives as well as some of the drawbacks. This free exchange of information, without malice, is what the horse world SHOULD be like and sometimes isn't.

Kudos to you both. Well done. Bravo bravissimo. This is just great stuff. Oh, and it's great to hear about what everyone's using as bits.

(ahem)

On to specifics.

Sylvan - yup it looks like you are right in line with most of the thinking. Later rather than sooner. Actually, looking at the scoring, I can understand why the Training Director is so important. Without getting into specifics, what did you like about Mr. Schrant.

Mannuscript:

Mannhattan's accident must have broken your heart! And I suspect it must have been a freak accident. We ALL want the horses under our care, just like kids, to do well regardless.

And again, the age issue. Which makes me question why the Germans are doing this so early.

And nervous!? I imagine I would be up nights not able to sleep!

Tiki

Jun. 24, 2004, 09:30 AM

One of the things that you have to consider is that if you go the performance route, the requirement is for 3 'good' scores at the Prix St. Georges level. When you consider that the FEI Young Horse Test for 6yo's is at the higher end of 3rd level, and most people in this country think that is pushing the horse too fast, then consider that in order to be competitive and placing with 'good' scores (I think it's 65 or better - don't remember for sure and my book is at home which is why I'm saying 'good' scores) the horse will have to be about 8 years old.

Do you really want to lose all those breeding years from 3-4 until 8 or so??? I, for one, as a multiple mare owner, will NOT, absolutely NOT, breed to an unlicensed/unapproved stallion. I know there are a lot of people out there who will, especially hunter/eventer people, but basically, generally, with an unapproved stallion you will either get no breedings or extremely low stud fees.

As Kathy says, there is also always the possiblilty that the stallion will be injured and unable to complete the requirements for the performance route, and then you've got an unlicensed/unapproved/unbreedable pasture pet.

The Europeans have been doing the 100 Day Test for a looooong time. If you feel your horse is better suited to go at 4, fine. He will do best if he is already under saddle and fit. He doesn't have to be doing great work, but having to break him first (at the test) will take up a lot of time and put him at a disadvantage compared to a stallion who goes already under saddle and reasonably fit. BTW, stallions who do very well at the preliminary inspection are usually the ones who have the best chance to succeed at the 100 Day Test. Those that pass with marginal scores often don't do as well, or even don't pass the 100 Day Test, so the preliminary inspection, at which a horse with a good score is invited to attend, seem to be good predictors (usually).

Also, as noted, these horses come home with 100 Days of daily training which is a big benefit.

ltw

Jun. 24, 2004, 10:01 AM

I and my partner sent a 4 year old stallion to a 100 day test in Europe. We were not comfortable sending him at age 3. He was not mature enough.

It is important to know your bloodlines and your horse. Proper preparation and evaluation of your horse is critical. The Rubinstein and Donnerhall lines are both late maturing. They also are very dressage oriented. I would not send a 3 year old from these bloodlines.

A large majority of the testing scores are based around jumping. It is very important that your youngster have some jumping talent and be properly prepared. It is also important he be in work and well started before he goes in order to have a good outcome.

I also would recommend visiting the testing site every two weeks and staying in very close contact with the training leader.

It is also important to realize that you may not recoup your investment for a very long time. The average warmblood stallion in the US gets about 5 breedings a year. That takes alot of studfees to pay back your advertising, training, upkeep, vet bills, and 100 day test fees. The mare base is not large enough to support more stallions. So think long and hard before decide you want to stand a stallion. The horse needs to be outstanding in every way or you will set yourself up for spending alot of money with no return on your investment.

Laura Whitford

Spectrum

Jun. 24, 2004, 10:01 AM

Is there a difference in cost for the short test? Do only certain registries accept the short test for licensing?

I think if you have the all-around skills and ability to train your own stallion, the short test would be really advantageous if the cost is lower and you are able to attend with your horse.

I know the disadvantage is that you have to have a rider and groom available for the entire month if you go the short route.

Spectrum.

Tiki

Jun. 24, 2004, 10:21 AM

Laura brings up a really good point that I sort of danced around.

Unless your horse is exceptional in a number of ways, bloodlines, conformation, temperment, movement, jumping - at least to a reasonable degree, he will make an incredible gelding. We ARE at the point now where we almost have too many stallions in this country - especially when you consider that frozen semen from Europe is soooooooo easily attainable. The requirements are getting tougher - and for good reason. Any stallion approved these days has to be somewhat better than the average stallion approved from previous tests. When you read about Liz and Sempatico getting over 80 mares this year you have to realize that this is NOT typical. Your horse should score well above the minimal required to go to the test to be considered a 'good' stallion candidate, or else wait about 8 years and see if he is a very strong Prix St. Georges or Pan Am Games candidate. Then, with the performance route, you have a long wait and lots of money to get him there.

I have the numbers somewhere, but I can't remember where, but I think it's something like only 2% of registered warmblood colts born ever make it through the process to become approved stallions. Anyone else know? I'm pretty sure it's not even as high as 10%, I really think it's only about 2%.

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 24, 2004, 10:26 AM

More good points, Tiki. And BTW, loff your new line below your screen name. Way to go, babe!

Breeding years from four until eight. Just a question. Why does it matter? I would have thought if you are going to go the performance route it would get your stallion's name out there. To me that means publicity.

Of course, he has to do well! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif That would help!!!!

And that's great info re prelim inspection. I assume you are referring to the Registry inspection, right?

Look, at the end of the day it's a stretch to hope that ANY stallion is going to make it ... if you get one as a baby.

Plus, I'm not talking about MY guy. I opened this thread just to learn about the test and what the consensus is. This has nothing to do with him or what's going to happen to him. Which is why I asked questions about mares as well!

Tiki

Jun. 24, 2004, 10:37 AM

Thanks OMOM.

Yes, I'm talking about the Registry inspection, usually done at 3 years old for permission/invitation to attend the 100 Day Test, or for conformation, movement and free jumping (if the horse isn't an exceptional Open Jumper) for final approval by the performance route, or for approval for stallions approved in Europe to see if they meet the Registry's criteria for conformation, type and movement.

The reason it makes a difference for waiting from about 3-4 years old until 8 or so is the great god, MONEY. Moola, baby, the green stuff. Even IF you can only get 5 mares a year, for, say, a $1500 stud fee, that's $35-$40K of income lost in stud fees. That's one of the main reasons they do the 100 Day Test in Europe vs sport/performance. With some of the sport/performance horses, the owner never bought the horse for breeding, but rather as a competition horse. They do really, amazingly well, and (as you say - publicity, etc.) people will come up to the rider or owner and ask if the stallion stands at stud and can they breed to him. At some point in their career the owner may say, 'hmmmmmmm, now that this horse is getting ready to retire from sport, maybe I can still make a little money on him. As an example, VIP did not go to the breeding shed until very late in his life/career. He was an astounding athlete, and for a jumper, an incredible mover. He has perhaps a dozen or so foals on the ground and now he's deceased. My girlfriend just happens to have 2 of them - one a gelding and the other a colt - out of a Zeus mare. They are also incredible, but they can never be replicated.

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 24, 2004, 10:44 AM

Ahhhhhhh. That great god M-O-N-E-Y.

Not at the top of my priority list actually. (No, I don't have six heads http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif) And of course, we ALL know how there is "no money in horses. You don't do this to get rich, you do this for love." With the acknowledgement that THIS is the "way things are in the horse business" my objective has always been ... to steal the phrase from Christine QUilling who put it faaaaaar better that I ever could:<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Good Horses. Good people. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Anyway, from the statistics I've seen, regardless of advertising, standing a stud is MARGINALLY profitable ... unless he's Voltaire or someone of his stature!!!

It seems, though, that everyone that has responded concurs that three is just too darn young. I wonder how the Germans justify it?

Yes, the first big step is the registry inspection.

cyriz's mom

Jun. 24, 2004, 12:06 PM

A few comments...
One, there is a 30 day test held in conjunction with the 100 day. Basically, you send the stallion for the last 30 days of the 100 day. Some registries will accept the score, others will not. To me, it was going to end up more expensive. I think it was 6,500 PLUS stallion owner has to provide a rider for the entire 30 days and for the test. Way more expensive than the 8,500 for the 100 day by the time you figure in housing, food, etc.

My guy has to go the 100 day route, because he's a TB approved by the RPSI (and hopefully others later). I've been apprehensive about sending away my baby since he was approved last September... many of the concerns expressed here already. But I have decided that I have to have faith in him and his ability and in the training director. It helps that he's 5 and is doing 3' courses. Of course, ask me how I'm doing in a month when he actually goes or the middle of November during the final test...I figure I'll either be bald or gray by then http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

As for bits, my guy goes in a D-ring mylar snaffle.

I do appreciate the advice about keeping in touch with training director. That was my intention, but the comments here solidified that plan.

As for it filling up, I think you'd be surprised. I was told that they would take 30 stallions, but they expected it to fill a couple of months ago. I finally got the funds together the first of June and was still able to get in. I don't know/haven't heard how many stallions will be in the test.

Thanks OMOM for starting thread...I'd been meaning to start something about the test, but have been busy trying to finish up breeding season.

maple_brook

Jun. 24, 2004, 12:23 PM

Tiki...to answer your question about the percent of wb colts which become licenced/approved stallions, I think 2% is alittle high. If memory serves me correctly, there are about 8000 hannoverian colts born in Germany every year. Of those, about 80 get licensed (so 1%). Of those that get licensed, about half pass the performance test for final approval, so that is about 40 stallions or 0.5% of the original 8000.

These were the numbers quoted to me when I was in Germany last year to watch the Hannoverian stallion licensing. I'm not sure if they are different for the other wb registries.

crestline

Jun. 24, 2004, 12:34 PM

I suppose I should clarify...the $20K I mentioned wasn't something I have researched...it was what someone else figured they'd spend by the time it was all said and done. If the test is $8500 + what...maybe $3-4K shipping round trip + airfare and lodging to go check on horse?...yes...it will add up in a hurry.

We still agonize over our decision...was it right, etc. Some days I wake up and think...ahh...send him...he's all ready to go...an other days I think... no way do I want to turn him over to strangers. I suppose I will worry about making the right choice until all of his performance is completed.

I have asked many, many people about the test and got both very positive and very negative feedback...I think it's like most horse-related things...everyone has their own opinion. I am finding that the tests done in more recent years seem to have much higher satisfaction rating...that's good...I think it means that the test overall is improving....

Delyth

Jun. 24, 2004, 12:38 PM

Just a side comment - but after a young stallion is approved by a registry he is granted a provisional license for 2 years. During those 2 years his offspring would be eligible for full studbook papers. After those first 2 years he must have completed either the 100-day test or the sport reqs to obtain his permanent license.

So - I guess my point is you are not losing ALL breeding years from 3 onwards by doing the competition route, and you are also not losing breeding years by waiting and allowing your young stallion to mature a year or two before sending him to the test.

Sporthorse South

Jun. 24, 2004, 01:19 PM

A few comments:

I know several people who have sent stallions through the N.A. testings in the past. Most of them have been pleased with the overall care, results, etc., a few of them were mildly unhappy with this, that, or the other, and one or two have been extremely disappointed (one stallion was even injured pretty badly at his test - took him a LONG time to get over it). Most of these "unhappy" owners participated in the earlier tests, and my understanding is that the tests have gotten better and better the past several "go-rounds" - esp. the ones runs by Helmut Schrant.

Now - regarding the "age" factor. I agree that 3 years is pretty darned young for most horses. Some of these boys can handle it just fine, others just aren't quite ready physically or mentally (or both). In addition to the people I know that have sent horses to the N.A. testings, I know several that have sent horses to the German testings. As with the N.A. stallion owners, some of these people have been pleased, some of them have been mildly unhappy, some of them have been very disappointed. In many of these cases, the horse would have done much better had he been older and more mature, but - for various reasons - the owner opted to send the horse as a 3 y/o, and he just didn’t do as well as the older stallions in his test. Heck, at one site last year, about half the horses in the test were age 4 and up, including several 5 y/o’s and even one 7 y/o(!), and most of the older horses finished in the top third of the testing.

There are of course other issues besides age that affect the outcome. A few examples - in one case, the stallion didn't do well because he got cast in his stall and injured himself badly enough that he couldn't continue the test. Since he had already completed most of the testing, he was allowed to carry his scores forward from that point on, but he couldn't take part in the final 3 days of testing, so missed out on those scores. He passed the test with appropriate scores to keep his breeding license, but his scores were not particularly spectacular. In another case, the stallion got a pretty bad cold during the final two weeks of the testing. He was very lethargic and tired going into the final weeks, and his scores reflected it. In another case, the horse slipped in the mud at a cross-country jump and shook himself up pretty badly - he wasn't hurt enough to discontinue the testing, but the incident really rattled his self-confidence, and he had a pretty hard time in the jumping phases after that.

So why do the Europeans start testing at 3 y/o? Because they want some kind of proof that these guys are rideable before they put a slew of babies on the ground! The owners want to start breeding them at age 3 (think money), and the Verbands don't want a "hot" young stallion that blows everyone away at his inspection to sire 400-500 foals his first year at stud w/o having demonstrated that he is rideable. There is also the fact that the owners do not want a bunch of horny 3 y/o stallions standing around taking up time and space while they "mature" - they need to get these guys either paying for themselves or get them off the payroll.

Although I am a big proponent of breeding only to licensed/approved stallions, I do understand Crestline’s decision to take the performance route. It’s a long, tough, and risky road, but I can certainly sympathize with her concerns about sending her boy off to strangers for 100 days. In the end, I think each stallion owner has to do what they think is best for their own particular situation. Some will do as Crestline did and opt for the longer route, others will say “da*n the torpedoes” and take the shorter but even riskier route of sending their horse to the test. It’s all a crapshoot, just like breeding in general. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

ise@ssl

Jun. 24, 2004, 02:05 PM

We would definitely send a stallion prospect to the test - we may be doing that with some pony boys in a few years!!

With respect to what the test means to me as a breeder - I consider the many temperament related scores very carefully in my selection process. The gaits are something I look at and then look at again in video or if I have seen the horse myself. The guest rider scores are something I consider - but sometimes it depends on the riders.

The temperament scores during the testing by the team riders is more telling in my opinion than the guest rider scores. These are the people who are on these horses everyday and deal with the issues.

You also need to remember these stallions are there with many other stallions so it's a test of their focus with other "boys" around as well.

I try to get to the final testing to see them go and have picked young stallions to breed to (and been happy with my decision) based on what I saw.

The cost? Well I think you really have to be detailed with respect to comparing sending them for the 100 days for a known amount of money vs. performance which I believe has more hidden costs. Training board (if you don't have your own facility or indoor for those of us in the NE) is expensive. Some facilities won't take stallions - that's a major consideration. Showing ALWAYS costs more money that you anticipate. Entry fees are the least of it. And there is - as Kathy pointed the injury possibility.

Paxton Farms is a top facility and Helmut ...well I'd turn any horse over to him for 100 days.

Oakleigh

Jun. 24, 2004, 02:11 PM

I can look at this from a couple of different views. Since I am chairman of the breeding committee for AHHA, I see that many newly permitted stallions have an incredibly difficult task in completing the performance requirements in sport option. Every year I havea couple of stallion owners requesting an extension because their stallion did not compete at the level, OR complete the number of tests required. In this case it would have been much more expedient for them to have sent their horse to the 30 day or 100 day test. By not completing the sport requirements, they risk losing their permit to breed.

This year, the ISR/ONA is REQUIRING that stallions approved at this summer's inspections either complete ALL of the sport requirements by December of this year, or commit to sending their stallion to this year's stallion testing in Ohio. There is no option to wait 2 more years to go to the test.

That said, I'm presenting my stallion this summer for approval, knowing full well that if he is approved, he will have to go to Ohio. Being only 4, there is no way he could complete the in-sport option at the level required, by December.

I think the 30 day test option is the way I will go. It keeps the control of the wellfare of the stallion in the control of the trainer. Actually, I'm optimistically working on arrangements right now with a trainer willing to go to Ohio for the month.

Oakleigh

pintofoal

Jun. 24, 2004, 02:46 PM

Well, I have a lot of in put on the testings and sports route, but unfortunately don't have a lot of time at this moment to type it all, so will give a brief overview of my thoughts on it and hopefully have more time later to add.

I have sent three stallions through the testing 2 here in the USA; Hall of Fame and Spectrum and Sempatico in Germany did the 30 day and 70 day tests. Art Deco was approved via sport results.

Personally I think being able to do the sports venue is the best way to go BUT and it is a BIG BUT it is SOOOO hard to do for the many reasons mentioned already and one that hasn't been mentioned and that is having someone capable of getting your stallion to those levels. I've had a heck of a time keeping a consistant trainer here ever since Jim Koford left. So many of my horses/stallions will never see the success that Art Deco has in the show ring--but not because they are lacking the talent, they are lacking the consistency of a single trainer bring them up the ranks. So that is another BIG consideration when considering the show route to approval--are YOU cable of getting your horse there? Or do you have someone that is? You can have the most talented horse in the world but if you don't have the talent to show it and train it then it doesn't matter.

After I sent Hall of Fame through the testing at November Hill many, many years ago I SWORE I would NEVER send another stallion, he passed but it was a horrible and I was very unhappy about many things. I had watched the testings for many years and felt they had improved leaps and bounds when it came time to send Spectrum I decided I would do it. I was still very nervous about it, but felt I didn't have much choice with the trainer situation I was in. I was much happier with this testing, the care through out was excellent and I really think Spectrum liked his riders and the work there. I felt he did well and his training did not regress and I felt they took excellent care of him. I was NOT happy with the guest judges scores though and that is 50% of your testing.
So would I send another horse to the 100 in the USA?--yes, if I had too but I certainly wouldn't go into it with high expectations of how well the horse would do--because I thought both Hall of Fame and Spectrum would do much better then they did.

Sempaticos testings seemed very stress free to me (probably because I wasn't there http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )--they where also a lot less expensive and I was happy with how he did both score wise and training wise.

So my short post has become a book and I have hardly scratched the serface http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

saxony

Jun. 24, 2004, 03:09 PM

I will be sending a stallion to the 100 day test this year - to put it mildly, I'm terrified. I opted not to go the perfomance route for several reasons: first and foremost is, the chance for injury rendering a stallion unable to complete the performance requirements are so great and that is more risk than I an willing to accept. Secondly, a licensed stallion only has two years to either complete the test or get the scores necessary for full approval so unless you have a stallion ALREADY competing at Grand Prix level it would be impossible to do it in the required time frame. In addition, once a stallion's provisional license expires I'm pretty sure you have to start the whole process over again anyway. Thirdly, I'm not independently wealthy, so to justify owning a stallion (that I can't even ride, lol) I need for him to at least help pay his way http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I have had my stallion in training since March, however, to get him conditioned for the rigors of this test. I am hoping that with a good fitness level and his good temperament he should be okay.

So, as someone who didn't even know what a 100 day test was 3 years ago, I am jumping in with both eyes closed and hoping and praying for a positive outcome. So ask this question in four months and I let you know how I feel about the test then http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

cyriz's mom

Jun. 24, 2004, 03:53 PM

Well, after reading these posts, I am actually feeling better about sending Cyriz (Sea Accounts). I'm sure that he won't be the most talented stallion there, but I am very confident about his temperament, attitude and rideability.

I'm thinking that we should start a support group for those of us sending our boys off to Helmut!! What do ya think?

I certainly hope that they have an EMS crew on standby at the final testing...not for the riders, but for us owners http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I'm sure we'll all be talking about this much more in the next few months, but I want to take this opportunity to wish everyone a successful test with happy outcomes and healthy boys at the end of November! Cheers

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 24, 2004, 06:16 PM

This is going to be great thread to pick up in November. I am DYING to hear about the adventures of those who are preparing their boys.

It sure ain't gonna be boring!!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Anyway, some fascinating comments here. And yes, it sounds as if the performance route would be very very difficult, given the time frame of only two years.

I'd love to have some specifics on what you folks thought was the best part of the test. What was the worst?

Oh, and did it make a difference in your bookings!?!?!

enavant

Jun. 24, 2004, 06:51 PM

I sent my stallion, Scimitar to the 2000 stallion testing at Rancho Murietta. It was the controversial one when two of Glennwood Farms stallions didn't make the score to be licensed Hanoverian and their were a bunch of unhappy stallion owners. I felt the testing was very fair and professional. Scimitar was only three and came through the testing just fine; very happy, fit and sound.
You have to keep in mind the herculian tast that is the 100 days testing. I wouldn't wish the training and care of twenty young and sometimes barely broke stallions on my enemies!
As another poster already commented on...I would always trust my stallions with Helmut; he is a superb horseman (not the trainer at Scimitar's testing but, Rudy Leone did a good job also)
I think the individual maturity dictates at what age the stallion should go through the testing. I do think their needs to be a cut off age at which the stallion has to be licensed through performance and no longer be eligible for the 100 days testing.
I would, and maybe still will send another stallion through the testing. It is a risk, as all things in life worth doing are.
Just my two cents worth

Ashemont

Jun. 24, 2004, 07:32 PM

NO!!! I will not send a stallion to the 100 Day Test ever again. Our lovely Pikör ended up with a bowed tendon... and yet never took a lame step! When he was initially injured he was supposed to have certain treatment and special handling - it never happened. We ended up getting him fully licensed via performance and he produced some awesome babies.

The two home-bred stallions we currently have, Welt Marke (GOV registered)and Pikör's only stallion son, AB Phoenix (RPSI) are both going the performance route. They are both currently approved RPSI. The RPSI allows for a stallion to continue to be licensed as long as he meets certain show criteria each year. So as long as he is progressing properly there are no 'lost' years without a license.

We found that the total cost of the test was more than double the charge for the test. There were so many extras tacked on it was ridiculous. And I've NEVER paid so much for such poor shoeing.

Another thing that you have all failed to consider is that the test is scored on a bell curve and some horses HAVE to fail. If your horse goes during a year when there are lessor quality horses, then that's good. But if it's a year when there are several superstars... well, you just might not make it. I prefer the much more objective show arena where horses are judged to a standard and not against each other.

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 25, 2004, 03:42 AM

Pat -

I just looked at your site and I'm so sorry you lost Pikör.

I did hear about the shoeing issue. And the extras ... can you enlighten me? What was tacked on?

I find it fascinating you've gone the performance route. I know that the Selle Francais ONLY go this route ...

Oh, and the bell curve thing. Eeeek. If that is still accurate, it makes it a real cr@p shoot, as opposed to something objective, i.e., like dressage tests are scored.

Having said THAT ... depending upon who shows up at a show, you're kind of in the same boat, aren't you? Actually, it depends upon whether you're showing h/j or dressage. Dressage, yes, it's a fixed scoring system. h/j ... well, it kind depends upon who shows up that day.

Sporthorse South

Jun. 25, 2004, 04:10 AM

Pat, I'm glad you mentioned the bell curve placings. I forgot to include that in my list of things that can affect the outcome. It is a huge factor on where a particular stallion ends up in the placings.

Another thing to consider regarding the German tests. I have heard more than one U.S.-based stallion owner say that they felt there was a bit of a prejudice against their horse because it was owned by an American. Although the testing sites are supposed to be independent, they are well aware of which stallions are owned by big-name stallion stations, and there is a bit of subtle pressure for them to "be nice" to these stallions. Those stallions often get the best riders and the best grooms, and they are looked after with a little more concern than stallions owned by "outsiders."

I also want to reiterate something Laura said. These tests weight jumping ability pretty heavily. A young dressage-bred stallion without a lot of inherent jumping skill, or one whose jump training has been "screwed up" by overfacing him at a young age, will very likely have a very difficult time in the jumping phases. Also - in the German tests at least - there is little appreciation for a "hunter" type jumper. They want to see the horses gallop very enthusiastically to their fences and jump very boldly, with lots of power off the ground and scope. A quieter, less scopey horse with a "flatter" jump isn't going to impress them too much, no matter how stylish he is.

Also, many people seem to place a lot of weight on the "rideability" scores of these stallions. I used to also - and still pay a heck of a lot of attention to it, but I learned something very interesting last year from a German friend, who pointed out that the test riders want horses that are very forward and quick to the leg, soft in the mouth, and elastic in the back. This person has prepped quite a few stallions for the testings, and commented that very quiet, mellow horses can get scored down on rideability if they aren't quite "hot" enough for the test riders. Horses that are going through teething changes also sometimes get dinged on rideability if their mouths get sore and they either pull on the bit or back off from it too much, and horses who get sore in the back during the testing will also sometimes get lower scores for rideability because they stay tight and tense under the rider. That conversation was a real eye-opener, and I no longer automatically discount young stallions just because they don't get 9s and 10s for rideability.

I truly believe that the testings can be an important tool for assessing a young stallion, but after talking to quite a few stallion owners and trainers who have sent horses through the testings, I really take a horse's scores and placings with a grain of salt. Of course, I am always impressed with a stallion who scores way at the top, with many 9s and 10s (heck, who isn't impressed by these guys?)- but I will also take a good look at stallions in the middle of the pack now that I know about all the extenuating circumstances that can affect a stallion's scores and placing.

KimPeterson

Jun. 25, 2004, 04:14 AM

Hi,
Unico may/probably will attend the testing in 2006 at 5yrs old. We broke him this year and Lisa at Los Alamos says he is very rideable, I am bringing him home soon and we will start working him here. Showing him in fall this year and next year at 4yrs dressage and low jumpers. I did not feel it would be fair to send him at 3yr although I did think about it. He is trail riding once a week quietly, and going w/t/c super sweet and happy so far with riding. He is up in Freehold NJ right now at their farm with more than a few other stallions all next to each other and all super pleasant and I am very happy with our decisions so far.

ise@ssl

Jun. 25, 2004, 04:56 AM

Well in reality the bell curve in the testing isn't any worse than performance competition in the show world. When you consider the performance requirements - they are demanding. Also depending on where you are in the US - attaining these scores may mean quite a bit of travel and stabling stallions at shows is often not under optimum conditions. It also requires that if the stallion is traveling to compete - he may or may not be able to be collected - so servicing mares during that time can be limited. We've worked with stallin owners when the stallions are competing/breeding and sometimes it's not bad - sometimes it's terrible - depending on the services they can arrange on the road. It's also sometimes hard on the stallions.

While rideability by the guest riders can be debated with respect to what they are looking for in the the stallions. The scores during the test for character, temperament, ability to work and willingness to work are pretty straight forward.

I feel strongly people have to look at the quality of the riding, management and facilities that are now in place and not at some tests decades ago that were way below standard - IMO. And let's be realistic folks - we all own horses - we all know what they can do to themselves both in the field/barn and in competition. They do have injuries and it's rather improbable to believe that this can only happen at a 100 Day test. Is it demanding - YES. It's supposed to be.

I also feel the placings in the testings shouldn't be the sole selection criteria used to evaluate a stallion. As we can see historically - many of the top boys at tests have gone off the radar screen. The test scores are one part of the analysis but having the scoring available to mare owners as part of their selection process is invaluable.

suzette

Jun. 25, 2004, 05:28 AM

Ok, just to emphasize a point.
Almost everyone has stated something along the lines that they do not place much value in the scores that are issued in these tests: they are bell curved so dependent on the competition, they are dependent on the amount of training/conditioning at the beginning, they are age dependent, they are rider/trainer dependent, a lot of the top scorers never amount to anything while a lot of "also rans" end up wonderful, yada yada yada.

Ok, so if we don't place any faith in these numbers - WHY DO IT AT ALL? Maybe it should be changed to a Pass/Fail - based on an objective scale rather than a bell curve. I think a lot more people would be supportive (myself included) of a test of this nature. Has anybody made this suggestion to the associations?

The old tests were originally set up a hundred years ago as the ONLY test that a stallion (who was meant to produce military horses rather than AA Show horses!) could have, and after completion, he went out to stud and never saw a saddle again in his life!

Who cared if he was hurt or if his mind was messed up?

Obviously, the tests no longer are applicable to the breeding of AA Show Horses, because we all admit that they don't mean anything!

So, why do we keep doing it????? Because we love to give our money to other people and pay them to tell us that our horse is good!

Dumb Americans..... When will we learn?
http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 25, 2004, 05:33 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by suzette:
The old tests were originally set up a hundred years ago as the ONLY test that a stallion (who was meant to produce military horses rather than AA Show horses!) could have, and after completion, he went out to stud and never saw a saddle again in his life!

Who cared if he was hurt or if his mind was messed up?

Obviously, the tests no longer are applicable to the breeding of AA Show Horses, because we all admit that they don't mean anything!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How interesting! I didn't know this.

Is this true? Is this where these tests came from?

Suzette, where did you get this information? I didn't know the Stallion Test (the German ones, right?) were over a hundred years old. I thought it was a recent invention.

Just goes to show what I know. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

ise@ssl

Jun. 25, 2004, 06:29 AM

If you go to the ISR/OLDNA website www.isroldenburg.org (http://www.isroldenburg.org) and click Stallions - then click 100 Day test - there's a very good history of the 100 Day test.

I didn't get a the same impression the most of the people posting here felt the test results weren't important.

Tiki

Jun. 25, 2004, 07:32 AM

Excuse me Suzette, but you are definitely not speaking for me when you say that not much value is placed on the scores from the 100 Day Test! I value the scores very highly.

I am breeding for temperment first, rideability second, gaits 3rd and conformation 4th. If a stallion scores well in all these areas, especially the first 3 - which are readily available from the testing - I am very interested.

I still look to see if he will be a good match for my mares, because scores are only one part of the picture, but they are a very important part. It can be almost impossible to ascertain information on temperment, rideability and trainability from a performance approved stallion.

If, for example, Michael Poulin is riding a horse at Prix St. Georges and making it look extremely easy, that is absolutely NO indication that that horse would be easy for me to ride. Michael is an incredible rider who has a long history of working with and rehabilitating difficult horses. He has the skill to make almost anything look easy.

When you have a training director, test riders and guest riders all evaluating the horse for temperment, rideability and trainability, that tells you a lot.

Yes, some stallions may have problems of sore backs and tenseness, or other issues mentioned and not get really high scores at the test. That's when I want to see some other information - either the stallion in person, or a good video showing him handled and ridden.

As another example - I went a few years ago to Liz Hall's farm to look at her stallions. This was the first time I met Liz. I had an appointment and went with a friend to see her stallions. There was a horse on cross ties when we went into the barn and Liz was in the indoor ring. She called out that she was in the middle of something and would be right with us. We went up to the horse on crossties and started talking to him and patting him. He was the sweetest thing on earth. Liz came out laughing and said, "Oh, by the way, that's Art Deco". Of course I immediately signed a contract.

Jeanne

Jun. 25, 2004, 07:47 AM

Geez, Tiki! Lighten up!
I am in total agreement with Suzette. That's what a lot of the people in this discussion (and MANY other discussions on this board) have been saying!
The "numbers" and rankings do NOT necessarily reflect the qualities of the stallions for the various reasons that she has listed.
These numbers are NOT a good indicator of what stallions will be great performers or great producers. They are extremely subjective, and the result of too many variables.

I think Suzette's idea of changing this to a pass/fail against a STANDARDIZED test to be a FABULOUS idea!

Tiki - get your undies out of a bundle and think about this idea! Chill girlfreind!

Tiki

Jun. 25, 2004, 08:05 AM

If you can convince Europe first to go this way then I'll gladly think about it.

And, BTW, most of the people on here did NOT say the 100 DT was worthless.

ltw

Jun. 25, 2004, 08:10 AM

Chris Hutchings brings up very good points about stallions teething and backs getting sore. I know of one stallion in Germany that went through the whole 100 day test with a broken jaw. No one knew or cared. They thought he had mouth/bit problems and scored him way down into the 90 point range. His rideability scores were in the toilet. He ended up failing the test. The broken jaw was discovered after the test and it was an old injury that occurred at the test or before.

I do think the 100 day test is very important but unless you know who is doing the test riding, who the training leader is and who the other stallions are in the group you won't be able to discern some of the subtle details of the scoring and placement.

Finally, yes the 100 day test has been in Europe for a very long time. It is a recent process in the USA. The same goes for the tests for States Premium mares. They now go through a performance test that includes dressage and jumping. They use to just pull a cart or logs to prove their value or strength in order to get their title.

Ashemont

Jun. 25, 2004, 08:14 AM

A pass/fail test against a standard... that sounds much more reasonable. But I doubt the test will change unless the Germans initiate it.

Another point you need to consider is the Training Director. He has such a large input that he can almost guarantee a horse pass or fail the test. And how do I know this? Because the Training Director himself told me so! He bragged about the power he had. I don't think it's fair that any one person can control the scores - too much chance of politics (as has been noted this is what happens in Germany). And the quality of the riders... we do NOT have Bereiters here. I've heard the quality of riders has improved but there will still be some who are better than others. If you're lucky and get the best rider then your horse stands a better chance. If you end up with the poorest rider... well, you can figure it out.

Extras tacked on? Oh, $35 for daily hydrotherapy - they hosed the horses legs off; $$$ for blanket repair - several times because they kept leaving my horse's blankets where his neighbor could chew on them; $25 daily thrush treatment - they poured a little Thrush-X in his feet (yet my horse had never had thrush in his life and neither had many of the other stallions). The list goes on and on and it added up fast!

I'll stick to the performance thank you. Especially since my association allows my stallions to stay licensed as they go up through the levels.

Mannuscript Farm

Jun. 25, 2004, 08:22 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by suzette:
Ok, just to emphasize a point.
Almost everyone has stated something along the lines that they do not place much value in the scores that are issued in these tests: they are bell curved so dependent on the competition, they are dependent on the amount of training/conditioning at the beginning, they are age dependent, they are rider/trainer dependent, a lot of the top scorers never amount to anything while a lot of "also rans" end up wonderful, yada yada yada. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

All that "is" to true to a certain extent. But, you must take a look at the bigger picture. Why don't some of those horses go on to be something? The horse is only 50% of the combination in competition. A good horse can take a poor rider only so far and a good rider can take a poor horse only so far. But a good horse and a good rider can certainly make a phenomenal team. All of us with stallions know just how difficult it can be to find a good rider...Liz makes that observation re: Jim Kofford. With regards to conditioning and training, I don't find that the training necessarily makes the difference, but the stallion "does" need to be fit...otherwise much of the initial work is spent just getting them in shape to do the basic work and there is a higher risk for injuries on an unfit horse. And youth "is" a concern. I wouldn't have sent Waterford as a three year old. No way, no how. He'll take a 5 point hit for not going as a three year old, but his maturity will more than make up for it. Anyone that has ridden youngsters knows the difference a year can make!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Ok, so if we don't place any faith in these numbers - WHY DO IT AT ALL? Maybe it should be changed to a Pass/Fail - <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Personally, I would prefer to see it changed to a pass/fail scoring system. Why do it at all? Because you KNOW that ANY of the stallions that have successfully completed the testing are going to be superior athletes. Yes, there are going to be different aspects that will have an impact on the final scoring. But you're dealing with horses...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> based on an _objective_ scale rather than a bell curve. I think a lot more people would be supportive (myself included) of a test of this nature. Has anybody made this suggestion to the associations? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The bell curve serves a VERY important purpose which people don't always like to accept. It means as our horses get better, we will continue to "move" that bell curve. If it is stagnent and horses are scored and selected strictly on a flat scale, as we get better and better horses, those that aren't an "improvement" will still be approved. And, the bell curve isn't just a comparison for one year, they use several year's past testings to determine the "bell".

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> The old tests were originally set up a hundred years ago as the ONLY test that a stallion (who was meant to produce military horses rather than AA Show horses!) could have, and after completion, he went out to stud and never saw a saddle again in his life! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<sigh>...And the testings have changed accordingly. 50 years ago the tests included pulling as part of the regimen. Obviously, the tests are geared for the Olympic disciplines now.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Obviously, the tests no longer are applicable to the breeding of AA Show Horses, because we all admit that they don't mean anything! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, that's NOT what is being said here. What "is" being said is that the final scores are not necessarily a total reflection on the horse's ability. However, I will say that ANY stallion that has successfully completed the 100 Day Test is probably a good chap with a kind temperament and absolutely, beyond any doubt, a superior athlete.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> So, why do we keep doing it????? Because we love to give our money to other people and pay them to tell us that our horse is good! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, not at all. Because it separates the wheat from the chafe. Because many horse owners are barn blind. Because the final outcome is a reflection that the stallion who has successfully completed the test is going to be something that is worthy for consideration in the breeding shed. Because it gives an objective opinion from several (not just one) individuals who have LOTS of experience dealing with stallions. Because it is 100 Days of excellent training under consistent supervision. Because it is an opportunity to improve on our domestic breeding program. Because it is a system that obviously works.

Having had the experience of sending a stallion through the testing, I have a better understanding of what exactly the scores mean. A stallion that is sore will not necessarily have as good a score in his gaits that he could have. If the scores are excellent, then you are probably seeing a true and accurate reflection of his ability in that area. However, if the stallion receives a lower score, I don't automatically discount that as being necessarily an accurate reflection of his ability in that area. For example, Mannhattan scored 8's on his trot during his stallion inspection. He's repeatedly scored 8's on his trot at dressage shows. During the testing, he received one score of 5 on his trot. It was an accurate representation on those final three days of his testing. But, not necessarily an accurate representation of what he is/was capable of. He "was" sore and consequently, his trot showed it. He did, however, win the jumping portion with scores of 9's on his jumping http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif And, anyone that has seen a few of his offspring - his sons Morocco and Maverick, come to mind - knows that he throws an incredible trot!

Many have "touted" the competition route as being objective. Unless you're competing strictly in the jumpers, unfortunately that isn't the case. Dressage is EXTREMELY subjective.

I can't speak for the German testings, but I have the utmost respect for Rudy Leone and Helmut Schrant. Even in light of some of the bad mouthing and ugliness that was rampant, Rudy was always professional and objective and didn't allow his opinion of some of the people out there to color his opinion of the horses he was working with. Yes, Glenwood Farms had two stallions that didn't score adequately to receive their Hanoverian licenses a few years back. Again, I think that speaks well of the inpartiality of those doing the judging.

The hunter market is very much a North American phenomenon. If you look at any description of a particular "breed" of warmbloods (Hanoverian, Oldenburg, etc.) it will state something about it being a horse bred to excel in the Olympic disciplines. Consequently, horses that do well in the hunter arena, while there is definitely a place for them and a market for them and no doubt that they are athletes, it's not what the European warmblood market/breeders are breeding for. I think it speaks volumes that are domestic registries are making efforts to recognize those stallions that do excel in the hunter arena! But, change takes time and trying to figure out a way to include those stallions in the performance aspect of things is all part of the change.

As someone that manages a large number of stallions of a variety of breeds, I really appreciate the fact that the warmblood industry has the requirements they do. Any fully licensed stallion that has been approved for breeding due to the 100 Day Performance test or through performance, breeders are going to KNOW that the stallion is a quality animal! Not perfect necessarily http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif but at least all four legs are going to be facing the right direction and he's going to be a respectable athlete, and he's going to have a decent temperament. All very valid, ESPECIALLY for the AA market...

Kathy St.Martin
Mannuscript Farm
Home of the Oldenburg stallions, Mannhattan and Waterford
http://www.mannuscriptfarm.com

and

Equine Reproduction Short Courses
5 days left of our Spring Enrollment Special!
http://www.equine-reproduction.com

crestline

Jun. 25, 2004, 08:27 AM

I agree that the bell curve thing is a bit scary...and would love to see a simple scored test evaluation with pass and fail...I like that idea myself.

About the test rider scores/training director scores...yes they are useful in many cases...but I can't believe this is the only way to show a stallion is ridable. And what about when the horses that get these great scores are never seen at a show...I think competitive show horses are most people's goal (yet obviously some breed for nice amateur "fun" horses)? Just my personaly preference but I like to see stallions out showing.
Are there cases their ridability was only at the controlled test environment but they couldn't truly perform in the open show world? I think a good show horse has to be ridable and trainable to some degree...otherwise they just wouldnt compete.

As an amateur that shows my stallion for fun I have a hard time justifying incredible expense of the 100dt to have a bunch of people tell me he's sweet and easy...I can go to a horseshow and have countless people come up and tell me that. I've seen other stallion videos with juniors/amateurs on stallions at horseshows and I think it shows alot. A horseshow is tons more chaos than a 100dt with new environment, mares present, etc so I think there is alot that can be learned from the show stallions.

I think there is a point when you have to realize there are so many routes to take with a performance horse...We agonize, do we show dressage, hunters or jumpers? The horse is great at all three...but hard to decide where is best to show...similar to deciding is the 100dt right for me or will I have more fun and more personal comfort doing the performance route.....I don't think there is necessarily a right answer...just what works for each owner. I always have to make peace with the fact that there might be a future breeder that doesn't want to use Palladio because he doesn't have test scores. I decided I can live with that....people have to make their own decisions about what stallions work for them.

Terrie

Jun. 25, 2004, 08:41 AM

Great topic Oldenburg Mom! I didn't know that much about it before now.

But, I have been lucky enough to have worked under the instruction of Helmut. In one word - phenomenal. Wish I could work with him again. Just a great overall horseman (riding, training, handling, care, etc.). I used to love going early for my lessons to watch him ride some of the green horses or Frohwind.

GW Ranch

Jun. 25, 2004, 09:11 AM

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif MAJOR FLAME suit one…

Well I have been watching this thread closely and I am only ½ way thru, but I have to add a little here. I have done both the test in Germany and here in the USA and I would NEVER again send a horse here in the USA to a test. Of what I have witnessed at the USA test makes your skin crawl. One stallion was killed due to the test (I think it was 1996) [I know since I transported the stallion to US Davis for the owner]. He had a fractured leg and they tried to do surgery on and then 2 weeks later they had to humanely destroy him. I am still shaking my head on it…. The CC course was SOOOOO bad that they had to take fences out of the middle of the course due to the footing after some stallion already jumped it. The footing was so bad that stallion where slipping and sliding around. That was the year that Sacramento flooded and we had El Nino….. Well that was not all… I requested that my stallion should be drilled and tapped (just in case of bad weather) and when I received my farrier bill, I noticed I was not charged for it (this is like 3 weeks before the end). I called the farrier and he told me that he would speak with the Tr. Director and he would get back to me. Couple of days later I finally picked up the phone and called the Tr. Director myself and I was told that I was NOT allowed to have my horse drilled and tapped and that if it gets bad all horses would be drilled and tapped. Well the sky opened and it started raining about 1 week before the end… and it did not stop… it rained and rained… even had to move the basic gaits section indoors because of the weather…. So here comes the cc… it is raining AGAIN.. NONE of the horses where drilled and tapped and even a short test rider was putting crocks into the shoe, was told to remove them… The thought of cancelling the CC did NOT even occur.. and they did not care if a horse would injure themselves or not…

The horse that I took to the hospital was sick in the stall that morning.. colicy.. and not acting right.. NOBODY was there except for other stallion owners .. it was 9AM in the morning and that is when it was going to start.. NOBODY no grooms.. no riders.. no Tr. Director…. Only stallion owners wondering what was happening Finally at 10am they showed up.. I mentioned to the tr. Director that that horse was sick.. and he sent the vet to check him out.. respiration fast, sweety.. and just not acting right.. the vet gave the go ahead … Vet called it indigestion.. In hind site, I think the horse was in pain (already having a possible fracture of the hind leg). So the test continued… well when that poor stallion finally finished the cc portion (2 ½ miles and rolling hills slipping and sliding), I was helping out by hand walking the stallion so that they could check the recovery time. Well this horse did not recover and the respiration was still fast very sweety … They asked my to remove the bandages and walk him some more.. well when the bandage was remove, the leg shattered and the horse was unable to move… they had to bring the trailer to him to load him up from the cc course…

On the other hand, I had a stallion go through the test 2 years ago in Germany where something similar happened. The area got flooded (we are talking towns here.. Major flooding) and they where going to cancel the cc portion of the test… They where not going to risk any of the stallions…. The footing was incredible in Germany so after the rains finally stopped (1 week before the end) they where able to hold the cc… But they where thinking about not doing it because of the weather and footing.. Safety was first to them..

I know people will say.. well that was only one test.. and only one horse.. but I can tell you story and story and even have documented by talking to ALL stallion owners of the 2000 test of there comments.. People like Glenwood Farms, Hill Top Farms, Plum Creek, etc… The majority told me that they would not do it again or buy an approved stallion already… or do the test in Germany..

Just my 2 cents worth PLEASE

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 25, 2004, 09:31 AM

Hey Guys.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and to share it. Heike, I don't know you but there should be no reason for you to have to climb into your flame suit. You are telling your opinion—as is Tiki—and this is what encourages learning.

This is supposed to be educational. Let's not make personal comments or let this thread deteriorate, or I'll just cut my losses and have a moderator lock it.

We've got a good conversation going here. Let's respect EVERYONE's opinion, whether negative or positive, and deal with the issues. Many people ARE reading this thread, and I'm sure many of them own youngsters and are considering the test. You've managed to raise some great points, both positive and negative. That's what a good conversation is all about. The pros and the cons.

So. Let's keep it professional. Ok?

Ashemont

Jun. 25, 2004, 09:35 AM

No need to put a flame suit on Heike... many stallions have been seriously injured, or died as a result of the 100 Day Test. A friend of mine sent her stallion several years after we had done the test and he came home with a fracture... but they never pulled him from the test!

And if you depend on the test to weed out undesireable traits... well, I know of several stallions who have done well at the test but I would NEVER consider breeding to them. I don't like club feet nor parrot mouths. And then there are a couple of stallions who passed the test but somehow were never licensed.

It can be an indicator of a stallion's potential but that is all I'd use it for. A stallion who is licensed through performance OTOH has PROVEN himself IMO.

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 25, 2004, 09:40 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ashemont:
I don't like club feet nor parrot mouths. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thought these were serious, heritable faults.

But perhaps performance at the test is all the designers had in mind.

It looks like there is no % score for conformation,... which is where these issues would fall. Right?

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 25, 2004, 09:46 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Mannuscript Farm:
Why don't some of those horses go on to be something? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ahhhh. What a good point!

As LoriK suggested about the breed shows, what have the "winners" done, performance-wise?

What have those that have done well gone on to do, performance-wise?

Sporthorse South

Jun. 25, 2004, 10:06 AM

I don't think a "pass/fail" system will work because different registries have different minimum score requirements. If the stallions aren't scored, how will the registries decide if the stallion should keep his breeding license or not? I also don't feel that "pass/fail" powers should be given to the testing sites because there are already enough problems with them trying to stay somewhat autonomous and free from outside (or inside) influences. Giving them pass/fail powers could open up a whole 'nuther can of worms.

Despite the "issues" with the bell curve system, it can still be a helpful tool because you can bet that the horses that finish at the top are extraordinarily gifted animals that were adequately prepped and conditioned for the test. You just have to realize that those horses also had extraordinary luck at the testing in that they got a very good rider, an attentive and caring groom, and they didn't get hurt or sore or sick, or hit an awkward growth spurt during the testing. Just don't forget when looking at the scores and placings that there may very well have been other "extraordinary" horses there also, who just weren't as lucky.

Really, I think Kathy said it best:

"... ANY stallion that has successfully completed the 100 Day Test is probably a good chap with a kind temperament and absolutely, beyond any doubt, a superior athlete."

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 25, 2004, 10:39 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Sporthorse South:
Really, I think Kathy said it best:

"... ANY stallion that has successfully completed the 100 Day Test is probably a good chap with a kind temperament and absolutely, beyond any doubt, a superior athlete." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh, I missed that one. That's a great comment!

Mannuscript Farm

Jun. 25, 2004, 11:36 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Oldenburg Mom:
I thought these were serious, heritable faults.

But perhaps performance at the test is all the designers had in mind.

It looks like there is no % score for conformation,... which is where these issues would fall. Right? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, stallions are presented to the breed registry that they will hopefully be licensed with prior to the testing. At those presentations/inspections, the stallions are scored on their conformation, gaits and most are free jumped. The breed registry will then determine whether or not they'll give them a conditional license off of that and then if they will give them the "nod" to go on and fulfill the performance requirements.

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

Egioja

Jun. 25, 2004, 12:36 PM

I've been following this thread closely as I have a stallion prospect that I plan to put through the test at some point (he's just a yearling now). For me the thought of sending my Kis out to someone else for 100 days, well-it's terrifying-and some of these story's really aren't helping (though I do want to hear them).
I didn't know that the 30DT was an option here in the states-but it sounds like a good idea to me (especially if you provides your own rider and groom).
I got off track, but I basically wanted to say thanks for starting this thread-I've learned a lot!

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 25, 2004, 12:52 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Egioja:
I got off track, but I basically wanted to say thanks for starting this thread-I've learned a lot! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's why I started it. I've learned a heck of a lot too.

Thanks to all you experienced folks that voiced your opinion.

ise@ssl

Jun. 25, 2004, 01:59 PM

Well the riders at the 100 Day testing ARE BERIETERS - most of them ARE FROM GERMANY So the comment that they are not is not factual.

To say that many horses were injured or died is a statement that I find to be inflamatory and I think we need more data to believe that statement. And when that data is presented let's have the same data from the tests in Germany and Holland where many more horses are tested. Also all the tests in Europe are not exactly the same with respect to locations, conditions, riders, etc. We hear this all the time that some are "better" than others and/or have more prestige.

Let's now let this digress into something that IS A PERSONAL ISSUE BY ONE PERSON AGAINST A SPECIFIC TRAINING DIRECTOR.

I'd heard it all and WENT to Paxton Farm's first testing and WENT to Rancho Murieta's last testing. I could not go two years ago. I'm planning to go again in November. I WENT to the barns and looked every single stallion over several times - these horses were all in very good condition and this was at the end of the testing. I did take into account the guest riders and their style of riding when I considered the scores for those rides. I also took time to meet and watch the test riders. To say they were not of the best quality for the last three tests is very unfair to those young riders. They can work at my barn and start my young horses any day of the week! They really do become attached to these horses after riding them for that long a period of time. And in many instances having to work through some pretty serious issues that the horses had and came with.

To say that the scoring is on a bell curve is not completely accurate. It's a very complicating weighted scoring system that takes into account previous tests. Too difficult to explain and requires a computer program to calculate. Also the final test scores are by THREE judges - two of which are judges who have decades of experience in Germany. The judges score what they see on a 1-10 scoring system. The passing score varies from registry to registry slightly.

It's not a horse show and it's a system to test stallions - one option compared to competition. Mare owners have the information to take from it the factors that are important to their breeding program. As Tiki said - it's a piece of the equation.

I feel this is a good thread for a breeding discussion so I'm hoping we don't get into a scorched earth discussion on this. As people know the last days of the testing are open to the public. Go and see the horses and make up your own mind.

Ashemont

Jun. 25, 2004, 02:26 PM

Are you saying ALL of the riders are Bereiters? And you surely cannot dispute that the scoring system is set up so that a certain percentage of horses MUST fail. That is why there must be at least 16 stallions in a test. Otherwise the computer program does not work.

No matter what the judges at the final testing and guest riders do, the Training Director carries so much weight that he CAN tip the scales. And horses have been injured and died. It's been documented before. I've actually had two breeders call me and ask if there was anything they could do. I was sad that there wasn't.

I'll admit that the test is getting better. I think partially it had to because more people heard about it and are going to watch. But it's still not at a point where I would subject my beloved stallions to it. Maybe if I could pick the rider, Training Director, etc. But that's just it: you have NO control! IMO that is just not responsible horse ownership. And saying you can withdraw your stallion at any time doesn't cut it because most of us could not afford to take such a loss.

I also wonder why it's costing so much. I can send my horse to 8-time Olympian Mike Plumb for $1000/month. I doubt that the 100 Day Test trainers are of his caliber so it just doesn't seem very cost-effective to me.

Equine Connection

Jun. 25, 2004, 02:49 PM

I think the decision to "test or not to test," is a very individual one -- a decision that should be made based upon a stallion owner's individual situation, beliefs, etc. (both economically and otherwise). It's a personal choice and there are pro's and con's to both.

IMO, while the 100-day or 70-day tests are very good "indicators" of a stallion's athletecism, versatility, rideability, trainability, etc., etc., I don't believe passing the tests necessarily guarantees or equates to a top quality breeding stallion. IMO, it is one tool by which to evaluate. I've seen quite a number of tested stallions who later do not become successful breeding stallions and vice versa. IMO, the true test of a stallion's success in the breeding arena is TIME. As both a stallion and mare owner, I do not select a stallion based on his testing scores. I look at his lineage, conformation, TEMPERAMENT, performance (if he's more established) and most importantly, if I feel he and my mare are a suitable "match." Can I improve upon the mother and father? Are the chances good to produce a top quality offspring with a particular combination, as quality is our top priority? Inspection scores do not sway my opinion one way or the other. Even after thorough research and objective questioning, the breeding game is still a bit of a crap shoot, so there are no guarantees -- whether a stallion is tested or not. Yes, the testing can be a good indicator, but I believe there are many other equally important factors to consider. But, that's just my personal philosophy. I think, however, it is a very positive step that a 30-day testing alternative is available, and hopefully it will be accepted more widely. This could be a very viable alternative to the 70 and 100-day versions. If one has a stallion who already has a breeding and performance track record, the 30-day test could possibly be another "feather in his cap" -- or he can continue to prove himself via his children, their performance and his own performance. Luckily, we have the privilege of "choice."

There are many stories of success and tragedy from stallion testing, and I don't believe it's a topic to be taken lightly. What is good or right for one is not necessarily good or right for another. IMO, there is definitely more than one road to Rome, so to speak, in assessing the quality and success of a breeding and/or performance stallion. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ise@ssl

Jun. 25, 2004, 03:19 PM

Pat = I think you should have gone to the last three testings and I'm quite confident your opinion would be different.

Now let's look at the Training Director and what they can or cannot do and let's really consider the double edged sword this person has to work with. Certainly we can see that they do score the horses through the testing based on what they see, experience (they ride every horse) and feedback from the riders. So those scores for the testing portion stay with that stallion. But too - those scores stay with that Training Director on into the future. So while that stallion may go on to a competitive career - those scores are always there ...attached to both the stallion and the Training Director. Their reputation is on the line to a great extent. They clearly cannot see into the future. So to give a lousy horse great scores or a great horse lousy scores is a dangerous gamble. It's not a job most trainers will take on and here in the US - we ONE test every TWO years so it's pretty hard to hide from the scores! Europe has many tests and many more stallions going through the testing with many Training Directors. The forest is a little thicker there!!

Alpha Mare

Jun. 25, 2004, 08:06 PM

From the mare owner's perspective the top stallion at the 100-day test (#1) is certainly worth a hard look and the next few highest-scoring stallions are also, so I disagree with the statement that scores do not matter. However, I also agree that there are so many factors that just finishing the test is a plus for the stallion even if scores were disappointing. I would still look at the individual components of the scores (for all) to see the strengths and weaknesses as they relate to the mare. And take this as one part of the overall evaluation of a stallion, not the only thing.

Having attended a 100-day (2000) it was a great experience to see the different stallions and compare them at one time, which is what I really like about the test. It was very interesting to see the different riders on each horse and to see how each stallion handled the different disciplines. I have a much better picture of their character and talents in my mind after seeing them that way. I think it gives a stallion a leg up in the breeding seasons early in his career - once his foals hit the ground they will start to be a big reference for him.

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 27, 2004, 04:29 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by ise@ssl:
Too difficult to explain and requires a computer program to calculate. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I would be very interested in knowing more about this as I work with statistics all day ... and I'm a computer professional.

I'm not being confrontational here. I just think that this is one of those crucial issues. Perhaps you don't understand it yourself, but someone SHOULD be able to explain it.

I also believe statistics was a required course for those who went to college.

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 27, 2004, 04:32 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ashemont:

I also wonder why it's costing so much. I can send my horse to 8-time Olympian Mike Plumb for $1000/month. I doubt that the 100 Day Test trainers are of his caliber so it just doesn't seem very cost-effective to me. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A very interesting question. Again, I'm NOT being confrontational here nor trying to start an argument. Really I'm not. But I think this is a valid question.

Mannuscript Farm

Jun. 27, 2004, 05:00 PM

Because we don't have the number of horses going through the 100 Day Test here as they do in Germany, our final scores are calibrated using past tests as part of the scoring. I can't explain it either and I'm sure there is someone out there that can, I just can't tell you who it is http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif After having just spent the last week with a statistician discussing the results of a research project involving sperm counters, I'm even MORE confused about stats than I was before http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif So, I'll leave that to someone with a better understanding and a passion for it.

With regards to the cost, it's $8,500 for three months. That includes board at a top notch facility. And, the cost isn't "just" for training...it also includes the cost of bringing in expert riders for the final testing and judges, as well. There are three judges for the basic gaits, etc., two of which are usually from Germany and have judged testings over there. There are also three expert riders who judge the stallions gaits and rideability and another two that judge the horses over jumps. The expert riders in the past have been people like Christine Traurig, Todd Minikus, Richard Spooner, John French to name a few. So, the training is just a part of the overall cost...

In any event, it is a personal choice deciding which option is the better route to go and there will always be those who choose another option.

Kathy ST.Martin
Mannuscript Farm
Home of the Oldenburg stallions, Mannhattan and Waterford
http://www.mannuscriptfarm.com

and

Equine Reproduction Short Courses
3 days left of our Spring Enrollment Special!
http://www.equine-reproduction.com

sylvan farm

Jun. 27, 2004, 05:09 PM

The 100 day test is jointly operated by The American Hanoverian Society and the ISR/ONA. Information about costs can be obtained from the AHS. The computer program that generates the statistics/results on the stallions has been in use for a long time (it is the same one that is used in Germany) and involves a rolling average. Contact Ekkehard Brysch directly for an explanation of how it works - he is usually happy to explain it.

IMO, how you approach the 100 day test has to do with whether you think inspecting and approving breeding stock is important to the advancement of your breeding goal. I personally think it is important so support the concept. I think that the scores are an important tool, that provides information for mare owners. Is testing perfect- no. Is it political- to some extent, yes. Is there risk involved for the horse- just as much as all training involves. Is it expensive- yes, everything to do with horses is expensive, but testing is not unreasonably so.

If individuals don't think inspecting and approving breeding stock is necessary for their breeding program, that's fine. If someone believes the testing is too political, or too risky, or too expensive, fine. They can choose a different route to their goal.

Good luck to everyone.

Laurie@CBF

Jun. 27, 2004, 05:36 PM

I agree with equine connection. Whether to send a horse or not depends on your breeding "philosophy". If you are a breeder at heart and plan on raising/standing a number of stallions - then you send them to the testing. If this horse is your once in a lifetime performance partner - think long and hard before sending him.

As a mare owner I feel that ALL the stallions are going to have tough moments during the testing. Some are going to be unlucky - and not score as well due to a certain "bump" in their road. That is when spending some time talking to the SO about how things went will give you a better picture of whether to still consider a stallion that did not perform as well. It is important to me that the stallions are "ranked". Pass/Fail would not interest me as a mare owner.

The testing is very important in my stallion selection criteria. I have bred to performance approved stallions three times and 100 day tested stallions eleven times. The three offspring by sport approved stallions are all fabulous athletes but are more "fussy" about getting a good ride. Once I started adding the criteria of 100 day test performance into my breeding decision - I began breeding more rideable horses. This has translated into these young horses reaching a higher level of competition than the first three by sport approved stallions.

In hindsight I do feel that the sport approved stallions had the best opportunity for success with a very special rider. I will still consider a sport approved stallion - but will try to look at offspring out of a variety of mares before making a decision.

If I had a "stallion" candidate - it would depend on the individual of whether to send them or not. The most important factor for me would be the welfare of the horse (who cares about mare owners looking for "tough as nails stallions" http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif).

When going through this process for the first time I think it is very hard to have a good perspective as what is the best route to go (and the timing).

Organizations like AHHA - who make you choose performance vs 100 day before starting out on either path - make it even more difficult!

I wish everyone who is participating this year good luck http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

Ashemont

Jun. 27, 2004, 07:15 PM

Even bringing in outside riders and judges I still think the costs have risen more than necessary. Where can one get a complete accounting? I would really like to see just where all the money goes. Can someone tell me?

And if the test is so valid, then why do so many stallions disappear off the radar screen after the test? Why don't the top stallions always produce the top foals?

FWIW I don't like sending my stallions to ANYONE where I no longer have them under my control - not singling out the 100 DT here http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

AGH

Jun. 27, 2004, 08:27 PM

to Ashemont: it appears that the answers or resources to answer your questions have all been provided above.

Tiki

Jun. 28, 2004, 02:44 AM

Laurie, this is a VERY interesting comment - and one with which I FULLY agree!
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>The testing is very important in my stallion selection criteria. I have bred to performance approved stallions three times and 100 day tested stallions eleven times. The three offspring by sport approved stallions are all fabulous athletes but are more "fussy" about getting a good ride. Once I started adding the criteria of 100 day test performance into my breeding decision - I began breeding more rideable horses. This has translated into these young horses reaching a higher level of competition than the first three by sport approved stallions.

In hindsight I do feel that the sport approved stallions had the best opportunity for success with a very special rider. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>We just don't have the number of riders in this country who can ride a fussy horse - or one who is fussy about how it is ridden. Most of our riders are Adult Amateurs. As has already been discussed almost to death, the few top riders that we have go to Europe to look for horses for competition at the highest levels. Hopefully that will change when we get some of our youngsters up to FEI level, esp. Grand Prix. Right now, we just don't have enough home breds (US that is) that are at that level, never mind competitive with European trained horses. I still think we're breeding good ones, we still don't have trainers of the quality you find in Europe - at the upper levels.

Laurie@CBF

Jun. 28, 2004, 03:06 AM

To Kathy - I am pretty sure that there was a rule change that because the stallion testing is only every other year - that three AND four year olds get the five bonus points (or don't get the five point penalty).

Definately makes it more advantageous to send a four year old.

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 28, 2004, 04:16 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by sylvan farm:
The computer program that generates the statistics/results on the stallions has been in use for a long time (it is the same one that is used in Germany) and involves a rolling average. Contact Ekkehard Brysch directly for an explanation of how it works - he is usually happy to explain it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I will contact him, and I'll be happy to explain it in simplified terms, if I can, after speaking with him. Rolling averages are not difficult to understand at all—and are frequently used ... any of you hold Mutual Funds? Financial institutions use them constantly.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> The testing is very important in my stallion selection criteria. I have bred to performance approved stallions three times and 100 day tested stallions eleven times. The three offspring by sport approved stallions are all fabulous athletes but are more "fussy" about getting a good ride. Once I started adding the criteria of 100 day test performance into my breeding decision - I began breeding more rideable horses. This has translated into these young horses reaching a higher level of competition than the first three by sport approved stallions.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Laurie, this is just fascinating—especially since it means that we (US) is breeding horses for professionals, not just the AA.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>And if the test is so valid, then why do so many stallions disappear off the radar screen after the test? Why don't the top stallions always produce the top foals?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pat, I would like to know the answer to this too—why they disappear. I would think, like any other tracking in this country, that not much is known. BUT, the second half of the question, about the foals, ... well, we all know that breeding is not a defined science. The stallion DOES only make up 1/2 the genetic material.

Once again, this is a good discussion. And Pat, you have been one of the critics. I think that's great. If everyone just agreed nothing would ever be examined nor tested—nor would anything improve. Well done.

can't re-

Jun. 28, 2004, 04:20 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Oldenburg Mom:

What have those that have done well gone on to do, performance-wise? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Since you ask http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Rio Grande WON his performance test at Novemeber Hill with 135 points. He went on to qualify for the Olympics and has sired some top hunters and jumpers.

ise@ssl

Jun. 28, 2004, 04:28 AM

With respect to the cost of the testing - let's be sensible here when we analyze these numbers. People have NO IDEA how hard it is to find a facility that can handle 20 +/- stallions for 100 days - or facilities that actually WILL. Please remember - the facility has to have stabling (for stallions folks - not geldings), indoor and outdoor arenas with quality footing, cross country course and jumps! It has to be located somewhere that's near major transportation hubs/roads to be able to GET the stallions to the site.

Facilities that have the ability to handle the testing are usually facilities that also have full schedule of shows, clinics, etc. To take their facility off line means lost revenue. Also you CANNOt have a facility that is also going to used by other riders - especially those with mares!!!

Housing/meals/stipend for the riders has to be paid - as well as the salary of the Training Director. The TD also has to be someone not only capable of the job but someone who can LEAVE THEIR OWN FACILITY for 100 Days.

Stipend/transportation/hotel for the guest riders and fees/transportation/hotel/meals for the judges.

Now let's not do a side by side comparison to sending ONE STALLION to a trainer - probably at their facility. That trainer continues their own business - this is just another horse in training. Accomodating ONE STALLION in a training facility is usually something that can be managed. No one comes in to guest ride or judge the horse during that time under normal circumstances. So it's just apples and oranges to compare these two scenarios.

If anyone thinks someone is making money off these test - they are delusional. In fact many farms that handled previous tests stopped doing them because they LOST MONEY. I ...as a mare owner ...do not want to see the test subsidized by the registries - I feel it's a cost to the stallion owners - and I KNOW the present testing is done right to the dollar to make sure it breaks even.

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 28, 2004, 05:07 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by can't re-:
Rio Grande WON his performance test at Novemeber Hill with 135 points. He went on to qualify for the Olympics and has sired some top hunters and jumpers. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WOW! Now that's what I call "going on to do well!"

Whew! Can't re- Is this your boy!?!?!?! EVEN MORE reason to bust ALL the buttons on your shirt.

Well done!

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 28, 2004, 05:09 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by ise@ssl:
People have NO IDEA how hard it is to find a facility that can handle 20 +/- stallions for 100 days - or facilities that actually WILL. Please remember - the facility has to have stabling (for stallions folks - not geldings), indoor and outdoor arenas with quality footing, cross country course and jumps! It has to be located somewhere that's near major transportation hubs/roads to be able to GET the stallions to the site.

etc. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ISE,

You make some excellent points that I had not considered. Well done, again, that's what this thread is about. Education.

BTW, during the 100 day test they have NO shows? That IS quite a hit!

can't re-

Jun. 28, 2004, 05:16 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Oldenburg Mom:

WOW! Now that's what I call "going on to do well!"

Whew! Can't re- Is this your boy!?!?!?! EVEN MORE reason to bust ALL the buttons on your shirt.

Well done! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Boy do I wish he were mine! Rio Grande is owned by Augustin Walch in Canada.

Rio Grande (http://www.charlotfarm.com/rio%20grande.htm)

I have three of his get that I bred and my "super" mare is in foal to RG for the second time. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

ise@ssl

Jun. 28, 2004, 05:27 AM

I also feel when you look at the stallions that receive their approvals through the 100 Day testing you must also look at the foals they produce - not just the performance of the stallions. You also have to look at whether the stallions retired from performance due to injury.

As many people have pointed out - criteria for stallion selection probably varies from mare owner to mare owner depending on the mares they own, the discipline(s) they breed for and to a significant extent their own personal preferences. The last being a significant factor. Type, color, temperament, etc. of one stallion might not appeal to me - but might be just what another mare owner is looking for. We also consider different stallions for different mares - as our mare band is made up of several different breeds, types, etc.

And long term as in all breeding - many stallions do get more business because the service the stallion owners offer is just better. And also some stallions are just very pre-potent and ship better or freeze better or whatever.

Ashemont

Jun. 28, 2004, 07:18 AM

Rio Grande did the 100 Day Test with Pikör. We went up a number of times to observe and he certainly was outstanding. BUT...we also found out that he was older and had had considerably more training than any of the other stallions at the test. This at a time when WE were told NOT to have our horse trained but just to have him conditioned. (And BTW Pikör was one of only three horses whose initial evaluation for fitness was EXCELLENT http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Originally the test was for UNBROKEN 3 year old stallions and thus the initial playing field was level. It has now evolved into something entirely different and it seems the better trained horse has a leg up.

I don't know where this thread about stallions who go the performance route are 'fussy' started but, at least with my stallions, that is hardly the case. We breed for the AA market. The foals we sell go almost exclusively to this market. Our babies are being broken, trained and shown by AA with great success and our buyers are usually amazed at how EASY they are. A lot of this comes from the stallions... who are both puppy-dogs http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif No, we did NOT choose the performance route because our stallions are difficult and I think that's a poor general statement to make.

sylvan farm

Jun. 28, 2004, 07:49 AM

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Oldenburg Mom:

What have those that have done well gone on to do, performance-wise?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our stallion Agincourt has had a successful jumping career including Grand Circuit Champion at Indio, winner at Spruce Meadows, top placings in GP with Hap Hansen. After retiring from jumping at 14, he started at 4th level dressage with scores at 65%. His offspring are winning in hunters and dressage.

I think there are several of reasons you don't hear about some of the stallions that go through the 100 day test. For example: some breeders believe (as do many Europeans) that the combination of bloodlines & test scores are all that is needed for a successful breeding career; some horses become injured during training or competition; and remember, it is horrendously expensive to send a horse on the big circuits, whether hunter, jumper or dressage, and many people just cannot make that financial committment.

crestline

Jun. 28, 2004, 08:24 AM

I realize after reading this that I should clarify one of my previous comments....I would support a straight scoring system that pass/failed the stallion...but not without graded scores...it is the "some stallions have to fail" part that I'm not sure I find fair...what if on a super year all stallions deserve to pass because they are all markedly better than the existing ones approved by the registry?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Also you CANNOt have a facility that is also going to used by other riders - especially those with mares!!! " <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This I find interesting....shouldn't tested stallions be able to be ridden around mares? It seems that the testing environment in some ways is not really a true test of the horse as it doesn't really test the stallion's abilty to behave and perform in the real world.

The comment about the performance approved stallions producing fussy foals I just can't agree with. While I don't doubt that this was what the poster had found in her foals, a sample of three foals by a perfomance based stallion is not a fair assessment of the whole lot...perhaps the stallion(s) chosen in this case were just hotter type or not the best match with the mare. In the past we've had foals by 100DT stallions be a little batty....and peformance stallion ones be pussycats...and vice versa...you know breeding...you just never are sure what you'll get.

I agree with Judy/Sylvan that testing and evaluation of breeding stock is extremely important....and support the inspection process. That said, I do wonder about the 100DT requirements vs the performanance requirements. Yes, there will be some superior athletes seen at the 100DT....but the requirements that the horses are tested at is much, much lower than the performance route. I know that it was originally designed for young horses...but now older ones are going. In my own personal case (which is mostly what I have to draw from) I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that our horse would do great if we sent him....but it honestly is probably not the best thing for many reasons for him to go...and it should be about what is best for him. That said, the money side of it is a big deal...if money were not a factor I think it would be a little easier to consider.

I think the 100DT clearly favors a good minded, all arounder type of horse...which is great. But the registries sort of have us stallion owners over a barrel. I don't understand how they can consider Level 8 jumpers (height 4'9", spreads to 5'3") a good substitution for the testing. I think it is pretty safe to say that many of the 100DT approved stallions never get to that level of showing.

I would actually like to see a sport route where a stallion could prove itself in the show ring by doing both dressage and jumpers, at slightly lower level and a younger age than the performance tests require now. What about showing Level 5/6/7 jumpers combined with 3/4th Level dressage depending on the age of the horse...wouldn't that show that a horse is competitive beyound the 100DT level and still evaluate gaits in dressage and jumping ability?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> If you are a breeder at heart and plan on raising/standing a number of stallions - then you send them to the testing. If this horse is your once in a lifetime performance partner - think long and hard before sending him.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I love this quote as I think it gets to the heart of the problem....as someone with my "once in a lifetime" horse it is a VERY hard decision to make!

GW Ranch

Jun. 28, 2004, 09:31 AM

Personally having a bell-curve on the stallion is a total waste of effort. It tells the mare owner nothing. I will give you a good example....

In one of the tests in Germany one stallion won the test with 6 perfect 10.0, and the other scores like 9.66, 9.33, etc. I think the lowest score was like a 8.5. Routinier was in the same test and scored 2 perfect 10.0 and five 9.0... That is the HIGHEST individual scores of ANY stallion standing in the USA and Canada including FS... Because the average of the stallions in each individual category was very high.. for example willingness to work average of 36 stallions was 9.33 Rudy’s score is multiplied by the percentage of weight that that score carries and then it gets a little fuzzy.. don’t know if they put a bell-curve on each score but for Rudy he got a 10.0 …..average was 9.33 total +0.67 (subtract the two) weight 5% then I get +1.15 in the next column which then is added or subtracted from 100... (100 is average) so it looks like that each score has a bell-curve on it because simple multiplication does not work... As I was saying.. Anyways... with Routinier having the highest individual scores in the USA and the average of the test was SOOO high.. (Lord Sinclair won the test) he only ended up with 113.43.. Funny thing is that registries like the AHS and Dutch require a 120 point score which to me mean nothing... Every test is different and you can not compare one stallion to another if they are in different test.. The only thing the test is good for is so that not ALL stallions get approved and some fail...

GW Ranch

Jun. 28, 2004, 09:33 AM

The cost in Germany was 1000 Euros for the 30 day test and 3500 Euros for the 70 day test

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 28, 2004, 10:01 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by GW Ranch:
The cost in Germany was 1000 Euros for the 30 day test and 3500 Euros for the 70 day test <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's 4,500 euros, which at the current ROE is $5,479.20

[Median price = 1.21730 / 1.21760 (bid/ask)
Minimum price = 1.21650 / 1.21690
Maximum price = 1.21930 / 1.21980]

ise@ssl

Jun. 28, 2004, 10:09 AM

Well Crestline - really think about your comment in response to mine about mares. Now is it fair to send stallion to a training program that's supposed to have them working at a level that really tests them physically and mentally and then have a barn full of cycling mares nearby screaming their heads off?

Good God! That makes no sense to me at all and certaily doesn't measure the temperament of the stallion just measure their libido and creates a great deal of distraction.

We've had mares come to our inspections and seen them go into raging heats because a 2 yo colt was there to be inspected. Now is that measuring something in the mare? That she can't focus? that she shouldn't be used for breeding? NO - and at times it unfortunately keeps them from showing their best movement because they aren't relaxed.

It's a stallion testing and the facility and program has to focus on keeping the stallions focused, working and in good health. STressing them out with mares yelling at them -isn't something I want to see to prove some of them won't respond.

crestline

Jun. 28, 2004, 10:05 PM

ISE...I do see what you are saying...but my point is only that we do want to see our stallions function in the real world....and sometimes at that show where there is a mare one stall down in heat or whatever...

I just think that performance stallions have this "obstacle" if you will, to overcome as well (functioning in the face of cycling mares, juniors crashing into them on ponies etc) and that should not be dismissed when thinking about the temperament or work eithic of a stallion that has gone the performance route.

For example...at Palladio's first rated show as a very green horse, a kid rode a pony mare literally UNDER Palladio's neck. My trainer went to move him but was boxed in close to where the courses were posted....stallion was "at work" so did not acknowledge anything had happened. In my mind that shows great work eithic since he's good to go in the breeding shed....that was my only point about the closed environment of the test.

Cheers,

ise@ssl

Jun. 29, 2004, 03:59 AM

But the difference was your stallion probably wasn't in a barn with 19 other YOUNG stallions at the show. And a one or two day show may or may not distract a stallion. For 100 Days to constantly have mares nearby that probably will cycle because of the stallions being there is a very different venue.

At a show your horse may be required to perform in one discipline - at the testing they have a very full menu in front of them all the time.

Also on the comparable cost of testing in Europe - why waste your time on the comparison. They have many more sites...many more bereiters....and very short distances to haul the horses. So their cost effectiveness is something we just can't match. I really don't see a change coming in the future for many more testings in the US - we just don't have that many stallions - but the CHOICE is there.

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 29, 2004, 04:08 AM

Crestline ...

I agree with you.

At Lexington last year, the breed show, I think it was either the mature horse championship or the show championship...there was one stallion I know of ... as he won ... and there was at least one mare ... I know because she was in heat, BIG TIME.

What a credit to the stallion owner (Bob Orton??? One of his clients???) as when the mare "did her thing"—in the middle of the ring no less—the stallion did not pay attention. He continued paying attention to his handler (Bob)—oh, and he was only 1/4 of the ring behind her! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

I was so impressed...

IMVVVVHO, if you are going to own a stallion I believe this was an excellent example of what to strive for and what needs to be accomplished, especially if he is to be shown/taken out into public.

Having mares around SHOULD make no difference.

Equine Reproduction

Jun. 29, 2004, 04:44 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by crestline:
I just think that performance stallions have this "obstacle" if you will, to overcome as well (functioning in the face of cycling mares, juniors crashing into them on ponies etc) and that should not be dismissed when thinking about the temperament or work eithic of a stallion that has gone the performance route. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<grin>...Well, during the stadium jumping at his 100 Day Test when Richard Spooner was riding Mannhattan, one of the other stallions crashed into Mannhattan. Richard was impressed with Mannhattan as all the boy did was "puff up" to take the impact. Richard and Mannhattan were standing at the end of the arena watching the other stallion do his jumping before his (Mannhattan's) turn was up. The stallion basically came off the jump and evidently thought now was THE opportunity to show who was who... So, I don't think you can dismiss the fact that you're dealing with a bunch of stallions all in the same arena. While it may not be a bunch of mares or amatuers riding around, the fact that they are all working well together and NOT fighting, speaks volume about the work ethic...

Kathy St.Martin
Mannuscript Farm
Home of the Oldenburg stallions, Mannhattan and Wateford
http://www.mannuscriptfarm.com

ise@ssl

Jun. 29, 2004, 05:30 AM

So Oldenburg Mom - you are saying stallions and mares should be in the same barn all the time? In the case you mention the stallion WAS in hand and most responsible stallion owners DO train their boys to pay attention to the person handling them and not what's happening around them.

But PLEASE - there is a difference in having them living in proximity 24 hours a day for 100 Days. Can we at least agree on that.

Good heavens - we have a 2 yo Welsh colt and by golly he yells at the mares in the other barns and they do respond. We do NOT stable him near them, not do we turn them out in adjacent fields. He leads in hand beautifully and pays attention to whomever is handling him BUT when he's in the stall and also when he's turned out - when the mares call - he will drop and call back.

Kathy is also pointing out that these are young stallions who are working WITH each other every day. The "matcho" factor is I'm sure something that has to be dealt with. The stallions are all stabled together and YES some have to be moved as they might not like their neighbor or the stallion across the aisle. It varies.

But even in the training barns I know that have stallions in house - they don't stable them near mares. They want them focused on their work. For breeding most have procedures they will follow like fuzzy halters or bells or taking them out a different barn door.

Also for turn out - it's really not advised to use the same fields for turn out for stallions and then mares. And if you do have stallions where mares are stabled - the fencing for the stallions really must be higher. So with respect to finding facilities for the 100 Day testing - there are a lot more requirements and specifications that exist.

suzette

Jun. 29, 2004, 05:59 AM

I don't understand this thing about stallions not being in the same barn with mares and having them be required to behave. Nonsense.

I have 3 stallions in my barn, along with 5 mares and 5 geldings. The stalls are open grated, and have attached runs which butt next to each other (no lanes in between). The stallions each have a gelding next to them, and mares are only one stall down from them.

These stallions work every day, they breed during breeding season, they get turned out in the very same pastures as the geldings and mares (alone, of course).

The are expected to act as gentlemen, and they DO.

However, what makes these stallions unusual, I guess, is that they aren't the 100DT stallions, they are the Performance Test variety. They are expected to perform in public everyday, among whatever the showgrounds can throw at them. They are not hothouse flowers or treated like criminals.

Performance proven stallions have -by definition- proven that they can do the job that we are breeding for. And thier offspring are there as proof - winning at the highest levels in the show rings under the most serious of competition challenges.

Karousel Farms, Home of FEI Approved Trakehner Stallions Meistersinger*Ps* and Kreshendo*Ps* (and the PINTO Trakehner Stallion Prospect Mystic Ice!)

saxony

Jun. 29, 2004, 07:21 AM

It seems as though alot of you look at the 100 day test as something you do if you don't want to go to the performance route. To me, the 100 day test is a startingpoint not an "instead of". I intend on sending my stallion for the purpose of getting him fully approved and then pursuing a performance career. Is it unusual for a stallion to do both?? Personally I feel that doing both the 100 day test and getting a performance record are vitally important to proving a stallions true potential as a breeding stallion. As several people have pointed out the circumstances are completely different between the test and the showring and to have a stallion perform well in both is a true test of his character. As I said before - I am a complete novice to all of this, so my opinion may be way off, but I am looking forward to getting my boy out there in the performance arena once the test is over.

Sonesta

Jun. 29, 2004, 07:25 AM

While I do NOT advocate holding the 100 day testing with mares around (because I think these young stallions should not be that distracted from their work - they are YOUNG, after all), I must point out that I used to show Arabians and in those barns the stallions (many of them) are housed right next door to mares in open mess or bar topped stalls and are expected to (and do) behave themselves. They are accustomed to being polite until and if they are taken to the breeding shed, at which time they are allowed to prance and scream their heads off just before breeding. But in the barn and arenas and at shows they are complete gentlemen (usually - I know everyone has seen exceptions where the stallion is screaming in the show ring and rearing up and acting the fool, but this is NOT the norm in an Arabian show, and if Arabian stallions can behave around mares, so can warmbloods. It's all in the training and handling.)

ise@ssl

Jun. 29, 2004, 07:56 AM

Well I don't think the stallions are hothouse flowers either.

BUT - BIG BIG BIG BUT - these stallions are usually owned by all different owners. Not just by the person who owns one farm with a mix of stallions and mares.

Now - take off your own hat and put on the hat of the people who put the testing together - they have about 20 stallions heading their way - ALL with different levels of training - some have even started un-backed. They HAVE NOT handled or been around these stallions before.

Now with those stallions come owners who have made in many cases A HUGE INVESTMENT OF MONEY, TIME & EMOTION and have to LEAVE their stallions there for 100 Days.

Now for some of you who feel the test should rent any old place that has 20 free stalls - well you must be terribly naive. Many of you who have gone the performance way say you don't want to send your stallions away for 100 Days and turn them over to other people. Well I'm sure it's just as hard for those who decide to test their stallions. I'm sure if you ask them - they'd rather have a situation without mares in the barns.

Come on - be realistic. Not only does the TD have to oversee the training of the stallions but also work with about 20+ owners who all come with different concerns, angst, etc. I daresay few people given this set of factors would opt to then add mares to the mix. People who own their own barns with just their own horses (we do) don't have to deal with the personalities, opinions, etc. of boarders but when you bring in 20 horses that belong to other people - well there is usually a few differences in opinion on many things. And I have to believe every stallion owner who sends one to the testing believes their boy is one of the best!! Just like stallion owners who choose performance!!

As a mare owner - we'll look at both performance tested stallions and 100 Day tested stallions - don't prefer one over the other. But at least with the 100 Day testing we do get more than the owners opinion on the temperament of the horse, rideability from more than just the rider of a performance horse, etc. I'll also be honest - I don't hold it against a stallion owner if they retire the horse early from performance - 100 Day tested or not - to be used just for breeding - if the stallion has a good track record of producing good foals that go on to be good under saddle horses or broodmares/stallions.

It's rather unfair to say that a stallion that stands in a barn with open bars and mares around and behaves is somehow superior to one that stands in a separate barn and does get a bit "up" when mares call to him. It's just one factor and some horses that are a little up in hand are sometimes absolute pussy cats with a rider and some are the exact opposite. So it's up to the breeders to do their homework in the stallion selection for their mares.

Mannuscript Farm

Jun. 29, 2004, 08:07 AM

The whole discussion about stallions and mares and the 100 Day Test kinda makes me chuckle. Most of these stallions belong to breeders who "do" have mares at home. I know I do!! Waterford and Mannhattan are housed together with 14 other stallions and 52 mares! While the boys and the girls aren't kept right next to each other, they are most definitely in the same barn and/or in a paddock with just a lane separating them. The boys can and do talk to the girls. Waterford and Mannhattan both have the ability (and Waterford has when there is a llama alert) to jump out of those paddocks. Are they a distraction? Certainly. Is it insurmountable? No. Do they need to be tested daily to see if they can remain focused? No. The stallions at the testing are YOUNG!!! Part of training ANY young stallion is to teach them the basics, teach them to remain focused and introduce them to new things as they progress. Having cycling mares around "is" part of the learning process, but not one that is necessary during the 100 Day testing. Mannhattan during his competition years would often be stabled in those darn canvas, portable stalls and it wasn't unusual to have mares adjacent to him. Did I worry? You bet!! But not once was there ever an issue.

The idea of the 100 Day Test is to judge the stallions on their temperament and athletic ability. Mares around a young stallion ARE a distraction! I find that with most the young boys I work with, between the ages of 2 and 5, their focus can be a bit more easily lost. Waterford is ridden in an arena with mares and indeed hacked out with mares on the trail. I'm not sending him to the 100 Day Test to try and throw as many distractions at him as is possible and see if he can come through it just fine. I know that's not an issue! I'm sending him so that they can test his jumping ability, his rideability, his gaits, his trainability, his character, etc... The boys will have LOTS of things thrown at them over a 100 day period. As others have noted, the 100 Day Test is just one part of a stallion's "test"...ultimately, their offspring will be the final proof of their worth but that will be years down the road.

Would any of you take a young horse that you're training and immediately expect them to do upper level performance? I don't believe any of you would take a young stallion and the first time you rode him, want to have a mare standing in season outside the arena, either. Many of these stallions, that is exactly what will be occurring! Many will come to the testing with absolutely nothing but basic training. The trainers and riders at the 100 Day Test have enough challenges without adding other distractions to the equation, as well. The 100 Day Test is an indication of what a stallion is capable of...it's NOT the whole picture!! Will these stallions go on to be international performers? Some will, some won't. Just like most of the stallions competing for their performance approvals, most of those won't go on to be international performers, either. Many of those fall off the radar screen too!!! With Mannhattan he went into full competition after the 100 Day Test and did quite well until he was injured. I intend to compete Waterford after the testing as well. But, let's be realistic here! Saxony said it very succintly...the 100 Day Test is a starting point. It gives a snapshot with which to judge a stallion's abilities...not the entire movie.

Kathy ST.Martin
Mannuscript Farm
Home of the Oldenburg stallions, Mannhattan and Waterford
http://www.mannuscriptfarm.com

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 29, 2004, 08:23 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Mannuscript Farm:
Part of training ANY young stallion is to teach them the basics, teach them to remain focused and introduce them to new things as they progress. Having cycling mares around "is" part of the learning process, but not one that is necessary during the 100 Day testing. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What a lovely way to put it. You're right, of course. At least, IMVHO.

ise@ssl

Jun. 29, 2004, 09:13 AM

I really wish those who have not been to the last three tests in the US would try to temper their comments.

Actually I'd be hard pressed to find anyone who wouldn't say that if they woke up tomorrow and owned Paxton Farms they would be in heaven!! Really folks - we probably would agree this is all of our wish lists PLUS!

The selection of the riders is the best it can be - but again let's keep in mind they are testing many more horses in Europe. We are asking those riders to come here for 100 plus days - with no job here afterwards. Of the two tests I saw in the past three - I'd take anyone of these riders at my farm ...today!

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 29, 2004, 09:38 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by ise@ssl:
I really wish those who have not been to the last three tests in the US would try to temper their comments. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

To be honest, ISE, I don't think there is a person on this thread, or this board, who would dispute how wonderful Paxton Farms is. Not a one.

We're having a discussion here...raising questions, ASKING questions, voicing viewpoints. The preponderance of posters have been very positive about the value of the 100 day test. I would be thrilled if I were you that there are so many people that want to send their stallions.

Really. Honestly. Promise. The glass is half *FULL* not half empty. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

Ashemont

Jun. 29, 2004, 09:56 AM

IMO if you have not sent one of your own stallions thru the test then you REALLY don't know what it's like. Yes, you can go and watch and imagine how the owners are feeling... but there is no way you can KNOW. So perhaps those who don't have stallions should temper THEIR remarks. What's that old saying about walking a mile in my shoes???

ise@ssl

Jun. 29, 2004, 12:24 PM

Oh come on Pat - put the dagger away. I just don't subscribe to this concept that only those who have owned stallions and sent them through the testing can comment on the process. That's just ridiculous and you know it. And many of us DO have young boys that we are looking to send in the future. So our analysis of the testing is very valid.

You had a bad experience in the past - that's crystal clear to anyone who has read your threads - as is the fact that you will not ever send a stallion to the testing again. Your Choice.

But clearly this discussion wasn't a survey directed at stallion owners only and if they would or would not or have or have not sent stallions. I understood it was much broader than that.

But you certainly have to admit you have not attended the last few tests and it's totally unfair to the people who work to put them together, oversee the test, ride the horses and judge to horses to just sweep the whole concept off the table.

Having several friends who have sent stallions in the past - some with horses that were injured FYI - I wanted to see first hand - so I went. For one test I was WITH a friend who's stallion was injured in KY - so I had the benefit of HER experience. Liz Hall has weighed in here and I've known and done business with her for 16 years now - that she had sworn it off and then gave it a second chance. Clearly she related that the conditions, riding, etc. were very different than her first experience. And everyone who has followed the process knows it was the inconsistency of the testing that was the biggest problem with such huge differences in riders, footing, locations, TD's, etc. The Federation has worked very hard to assure a level of consistency and a standard of quality and it's TOTALLY UNFAIR not to acknowledge these facts.

It goes without saying and it's been said - some people are not going to be happy with the results. Quite frankly - even some spectators voice their opinions on the results and that they just didn't see it that way. But we aren't there for 100 days to see the work and/or ride the horses. Can horses get injured - YES. Do people sometimes make mistakes - YES. But this happens in all of our barns if we are in this business for any length of time.

And one thing the testing offers that a performance career DOES NOT - is the chance to see the horse in all disciplines. Most performance stallions head in one direction - so even if a mare owner is considering that stallion for another discipline they simply have no idea of that stallion's ability in other areas.

I think it would be unfortunate to have stallion owners not consider the testing process without complete information or end up with not enough stallions to keep the test going in the USA. It's a viable alternative that warmblood sporthorse breeders should have for their young stallions.

Ashemont

Jun. 29, 2004, 01:10 PM

What's good for the goose... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

The 100 DT is NOT a level playing field, though. That's the point. It USED to be when unbroken 3 year olds were sent. Part of the process was to evaluate how the horse reacted to being broken. But now... well those who can afford to have their horses well-trained before sending them stand a much better shot at being successful than horses that are not as well-prepared, for whatever reason.

And as far as performance showing only one facet... well we've competed in both dressage AND jumping with our guys - successfully, I might add. The two disciplines really complement each other and while I prefer to have my horses keep all 4 feet under them when I'm aboard, all of my riders have been either eventers or have a jumping background as well as dressage, so the boys jump too.

Maybe I haven't been at any recent tests but I've got friends who have had horses there. And a lot of the bad stuff still doesn't see the light of day. Unless you are there every day you really don't know all that happens. The final 3 days are not the same as the previous 90+ days.

And I still say, if you haven't sent a horse through it you really don't know how it feels. For how many years, Ilonaa, have you been alluding to the fact that you MIGHT send a horse? Well please do so and then I will take your comments a bit more seriously.

HFSH

Jun. 29, 2004, 01:32 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ashemont:

The 100 DT is NOT a level playing field, though. That's the point. It USED to be when unbroken 3 year olds were sent. Part of the process was to evaluate how the horse reacted to being broken. But now... well those who can afford to have their horses well-trained before sending them stand a much better shot at being successful than horses that are not as well-prepared, for whatever reason.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

EXACTLY! When people can send 5, 6, or 7 year old BROKE, TRAINED stallions to compete with 3yo stallions......

it's just not a level playing ground. I'm sorry, but a 5 point penalty just doesn't make it even. History of the past tests show, the older, trained horses generally do better.

KimPeterson

Jun. 29, 2004, 01:49 PM

If they all where 3yr olds every testing, but since the testing includes 3 & 4 yr without a penalty I don't think my 3yr is the same as someones 4yr old! Not in maturity or training. So why not a graduated point deduction for every year after 3yr... My choice was to send a young immature 3yr against someone elses 4, 5, and 6yr olds or wait until he is a 5yr with a year of solid training -- I chose to wait. He was just broke and is coming along well very quickly after 3 months already w/t/c and doing ground poles. I think the testing should be for older stallions in the format we have it (every 2 years)... It does not lend itself to a level playing field for a 3yr - jumping is not recommended for horses until they are at least 4yr-- just my opinion -- I plan on riding my guy for a long long time and want a sound happy relaxed stallion.

Ashemont

Jun. 29, 2004, 02:01 PM

Graduated penalties for age would be a good start... but I just don't see it happening because we do it the way the Germans do! Until we run a truly AMERICAN testing... with our own judges (and yes, there certainly are qualified folks in the US now) we can't change the rules, unfortunately.

I am no longer bitter about the 100 DT... no matter what some may think. But I don't look at it thru rose-colored glasses, either. As long as there is an alternative to it that's the way I choose to go... because I've bred and raised my boys. They're my babies and I love them and I just won't take that chance again. Especially since my association, RPSI, allows me to keep my license as long as we're progressing towards our final performance criteria.

The 100 DT has come a long way in this country. I remember the first one. My friends in Germany knew which horses were passing BEFORE the test was even completed! But I still think it has a way to go. They need to come up with a way to level the playing field. As the test now stands, and Hilda Gurney has said this too, the test favors the jumping stallions. The horses more suited to dressage take it hard. And as Heike pointed out, you really can't compare the results from one test to the next. So how is this fair? I think the $8500+ is better spent on training and showing. But that's just my opinion.

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 29, 2004, 05:07 PM

I am lucky as I have the unique perspective of coming into this without a history, nor preconceptions. When I first found out about the 100 day stallion test I thought it was to achieve one thing: promote excellence.

Isn't that why we're all in this? To promote excellence? You as breeders, you want to produce the best your breeding stock can give. Me, I want to take babies and turn them into exceptional performance horses.

So. The question I have is this: does this test do that? Define and promote excellence? I believe after reading everyone's comments that it is trying ... sometimes not so well as other times, but trying.

You know, not to be critical of anyone, but systems—like this one—are inherently flawed. Acknowledging this, what do we do? Throw up our hands in disgust and quit? If you are goint to play the game with the big boys, you've gotta play by THEIR rules. Or play a different game.

Or a third alternative, lobby to change the rules.

Personally, and this is my opinion only, I think the age issue is a valid objection. 3 year olds, against 5 year olds? THere is a world of difference between the two ... and that's an observation from someone who in the grand scheme of things doesn't know squat.

Secondly, I think that the three year old issue is a significant one. I don't care how they're testing in Germany, France, Outer Slobovia or the moon. A three year old, from everything I've read, should not be "working" jumping. Their knees don't close until 4.

Some other points that I think are valid:
<UL TYPE=SQUARE>

• When people can send 5, 6, or 7 year old BROKE, TRAINED stallions to compete with 3yo stallions...it's just not a level playing ground. I'm sorry, but a 5 point penalty just doesn't make it even. History of the past tests show, the older, trained horses generally do better.

• I think the testing should be for older stallions in the format we have it (every 2 years)... It does not lend itself to a level playing field for a 3yr - jumping is not recommended for horses until they are at least 4yr-- just my opinion -- I plan on riding my guy for a long long time and want a sound happy relaxed stallion.

• I remember the first one. My friends in Germany knew which horses were passing BEFORE the test was even completed!

• They need to come up with a way to level the playing field. As the test now stands, and Hilda Gurney has said this too, the test favors the jumping stallions. The horses more suited to dressage take it hard. And as Heike pointed out, you really can't compare the results from one test to the next.
[/list]

OkOkOk. So what's the point of this post?

I guess to say I think EVERYONE has some valid points. What are the chances of bringing some of these points to the attention of the administrators and rule-makers?

And BTW, I don't think anyone has been nasty on this thread. We've had a civilized discussion, and we've disagreed, and respected each others' opinion. Kudos guys!

Tiki

Jun. 29, 2004, 05:32 PM

Do they allow 5, 6, or 7 year old stallions to do the 100 Day Test - or now the 30 day/70 day test? I don't think so, but I'm not sure. If not, then maybe the Federation should require those horses to go the performance route and keep it for 3 and 4 year old horses with a 5 point penalty for 4 year olds - that should keep it more in line with what they do in Europe.

I do think that if we 'water it down' by allowing pass/fail, we will NEVER catch up with the Europeans. It certainly doesn't hurt to be careful with our horses, but sometimes I think Americans in general baby some of them too much. Even the International Jumper Futurity and the Young Jumper Championships have the horses jumping decent sized courses at 4. In order to do that you can't wait until they are 4 to start them over jumps. Doesn't mean they have to be jumping 5 feet, but they have to get their feet wet.

Ashemont

Jun. 29, 2004, 05:39 PM

Now there's a good suggestion: test 3 and 4 year olds and require older horses to go the performance route! Great idea. But it won't float because even allowing older horses it's still usually a struggle to get enough stallions to fill the test. I sincerely doubt if they could get a sufficient number of 3 and 4 year olds (remember, the scoring system REQUIRES at LEAST 16 stllions).

I also don't understand why we have to do everything like the Germans... why can't we improve on what the Germans are doing and produce BETTER horses??? Isn't that the American way? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 29, 2004, 06:09 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ashemont:
I also don't understand why we have to do everything like the Germans... why can't we improve on what the Germans are doing and produce BETTER horses??? Isn't that the American way? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hear Hear. I agree. I also think MOST breeders here take the slow and steady route. Back at 3, begin work 4

That does not appear to be the case in Germany.

HFSH

Jun. 29, 2004, 06:23 PM

Interesting to hear that the AHS is inspecting a 'bumper' crop of stallions this year, according to a post on wwwarmbloods. I would assume that is because this is a 'test' year. I would imagine that the test will fill this year. In the past 2 tests, haven't they filled?

Regarding the age question, how old was Contigo M when he won the testing? 6?

Sonesta

Jun. 29, 2004, 06:32 PM

I've tried to stay out of this because I do not have a stallion to send, but HAVE attended the last three 100 day testing finals and have watched very closely. I have my flame suit on and am ready.

Oh, this is WAY long but some observations in no apparent order:

1. Ashmont wants us to improve on the German system, but we are just a WAYS behind the Germans right now and need to BUILD our crediblilty by competing on the same playground before we start trying to "improve" it.

2. We are at a disadvantage because we have so few stallions going through the testings when the Germans have MANY, MANY stallions every year. In Germany no one CARES that quite a lot of them fail. It's the law of averages. Here we are whining that the testing program has a built in curve so that, in theory, it is possible for a REALLY GOOD stallion to fail. Averages being what they are, that is unlikely. I WILL say that in 2000 that very thing MIGHT have happened, but not due to the program, but because of one of the test riders. It has been brought up that two of Judy Ehlers' horses failed to pass for AHS because of scores under 90. That was in 2000, when one of the jumping guest test riders was Todd Minikus. He, for whatever reason, scored horses with one of two scores: If he thought they would be Grand Prix jumping prospects, he gave them an 8. If he did not, then he gave them a 4. There was nothing in between. I, personally, believe this skewed the scores to the point that some dressage bred stallions scored poorly and did not reach the scores they might otherwise have had.

It did NOT seem to affect the top of the heap or the bottom of the pile. It affected the straight dressage bred stallions who jumped "okay" but not brilliantly. In my opinion, they scored lower than they should have. That was a shame and, I dare say, Todd will NOT be invited back.

3. No matter WHAT happened in the past at November Hill Farm, the last few testings have been run beautifully for the most part. Even the 2000 testing, where a number of people were pissed off royally and tried to blame Rudy Leone, the problems were more on the order of bad farriers and Todd's off kilter scores rather than the day to day riding/training.

4. While at the 2000 testing, I talked to MANY owners of stallions and heard only good things about the actual riding and training. Yes, there were some complaints about a farrier (justified, I believe) and one horse developed a lameness during the test and could not finish (he was invited back). But even those owners did not blame the training director or the riders until AFTER the test results.

For that reason, for the 2002 testing, I video taped the entire final three days and interviewed most of the stallion owners while the testing was going on. NONE gave me anything but glowing reports of how happy they were with the testing. NO ONE later complained that their horses had been mistreated or not given a proper opportunity to shine. Those that did well, did well. Those that did not, sucked it up and went home.

5. While we have many wonderful stallion prospects in the US, we just cannot realistically expect ALL of them to be approved for breeding and to pass the 100 day test. And "dumbing down" the test here to allow that to happen will only hurt our crediblitly, not help.

6. I talked to MANY/MOST of the riding/training staff of the past few testings and can assure you that each one wants desperately for each of the stallions to do well and pass. I, along with everyone else, watched Rudy Leone in 2000 shed tears as he talked about "his" stallions before the results were announced. NO ONE in the testings I have viewed were in the least bit cavalier in their attitudes about them.

7. Rolling averages? Sucks. But it's the way they do it in Germany and we CAN and SHOULD stand up and accept the challenge and play their game and show them that our stallions are every bit as good (in the averages) as theirs.

8. Horses are horses (and stallions even more so) and they can, and do, get hurt sometimes. This can happen at home, at our own hand picked trainers or at the 100 day testing. It sucks, but does not mean that the testing (as it is currently run) is somehow to blame. I KNOW there were some horror stories in the earlier years. We have to get past that and move on.

9. I DO think that the older, more trained stallions have a distinct advantage. That could be solved by having an upper age limit to attend. I cheered with everyone else when Contigo M was the high scoring stallion at the 2000 testing. But he WAS a 7 year old and had been showing for a while. That does NOT reduce his quality, but I'm sure it DID have a negative impact on the youngters there competing against him. If I were to EVER send a stallion to the testing, I'd send him no younger than four and preferably five years old.

10. I don't have a stallion to send. So, am I just a big mouth? Maybe. But I can tell you that if I WERE to choose to stand a stallion (what? I'd have to lose my mind!), I WOULD send it gladly to the testing. I was even one of the ones pushing hard for the testing to include mares and/or geldings to be put through the same training so that they could recieve scores that could assist in their sales later. I would send ALL my youngsters through it - no matter if the cost seems quite a bit higher than sending them to a private trainer like Mike Huber. It would be worth it to me to have them exposed to the intense training in a variety of disciplines and with good riders who are scoring them every day. I think three months at $8500 at that intense level of training would easily equal or surpass six months of training at a top trainer's at $1500 per month.

11. The 100 day testing is a STARTING place for the stallions, not a tell all, be all. It gets them approved at a younger age and lets them get to the business of breeding instead of waiting for years to breed after a long show career. The ones who prove themselves at show have accomplished the same thing to me, but have not shown the versatility of the 100 day testing. A top Grand Prix show jumper who has gone the performance route has not shown me that he can perform at dressage (if that's what I am looking for) and vice versa. So, to each their own. I don't generally breed to the new 100 day approved stallions. I wait til they have put some good foals on the ground first to prove themselves.

Ok, there's LOTS more, but I'm boring myself now, so I'll shut up. Bottom line is: the testing is valuable, but not everything. A blanket dismissal of the testing is unreasonable. A blanket pronouncement that the testing is fine in Europe but sucks in the US is just silly.

I urge EVERYONE interested to come to the 100 day finals and judge for themselves. Oh....I'll be the one with the cooler filled with white wine! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Ashemont

Jun. 29, 2004, 06:40 PM

Just one point... yes, I'm sure ALL of the stallion owners only say nice things about the training BEFORE the results. There's a reason for that. Who, in their right mind, would criticize a judge BEFORE-hand???

At our testing we stallion owners talked amongst ourselves and complained and bemoaned the bad stuff... but none of us voiced those concerns publicly until the results were final. No one wanted to possibly sway a score negatively!

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 30, 2004, 03:33 AM

Sonesta,

What a great reply.

A couple of things I'm blown away by ... the first is the Todd Minikus scoring. Holy Points, Batman. Why was he allowed to get away with that? Just because a horse doesn't jump Grand Prix does not mean he can't jump...technically or correctly. Does this not reflect poorly on the Director?

Secondly, I couldn't agree more about the "playground" ... I want to beat them at their own game. Not change the rules to win. Victory will be sooooo much sweeter http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Third, as much as I would like the Ducster to come through this test as the winner (when and if he goes) I want the test to be TOUGH. Only the best should "pass"; if not the entire system loses credibility.

Sporthorse South

Jun. 30, 2004, 04:20 AM

Sonesta, that was a great reply. The Tood Minikus issue was a huge factor in some good horses not doing well in 2000.

I also want to reiterate the point about older stallions at these tests. It really isn't a level playing field to allow 7 y/o's to compete against 3 y/o's (even with a 5 point penalty). At one test in Germany last year, a whopping 75% of the stallions with total scores over 100 were 4 y/o or older. In fact the champion was a 4 y/o, the vice champion was a 5 y/o, and the 2nd vice champion was a 6 y/o. So, given the age factors, and the fact that the tests weight jumping ability so heavily, it is easy to see how a very nice young dressage-bred stallion could finish in the middle of the pack.

It is for this reason that some stallion owners in Germany are not sending their boys to the 70 DT anymore, but are instead focusing on the Bundeschampionat. Stallions that do well on their 30 DT can receive their permanent breeding license if they qualify for the Bundeschampionat - it is considered another option for the "performance route", and the 70 DT requirement is waived for these stallions. This allows a young stallion to not have to endure the rigors of the 70 DT, and he can meet the performance requirements by competing on a level playing field against other stallions his own age and in his own discipline, and under a rider hand-picked by the owner.

We are of course a very long way in this country from having anything comparable to the Bundeschampionat, so we only have two options available to us here: the long, hard road via competition, or the shorter, more grueling route via 100 DT. It's a tough decision, and I can't fault a stallion owner for picking one route over the other.

Marieke

Jun. 30, 2004, 04:20 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Oldenburg Mom:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ashemont:
I also don't understand why we have to do everything like the Germans... why can't we improve on what the Germans are doing and produce BETTER horses??? Isn't that the American way? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hear Hear. I agree. I also think MOST breeders here take the slow and steady route. Back at 3, begin work 4

That does not appear to be the case in Germany. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm sorry, but I completely disagree with you. I have extensive experience in Europe, and I just can not believe what people expect and do with a young horse in the US. I am totally shocked!

ise@ssl

Jun. 30, 2004, 04:55 AM

The situation with Todd Minikus was not right - but who KNEW this guy was going to basicly go to a PASS/FAIL scoring system. For those who would advocate such a system - this is the result. What was even more frustrating was he JUMPED THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS out of every single horse. I was there and horses were jumping into the twilight becuase he wanted so many jumps changed and upped and downed. It was then infuriating that while he used up these horses and took up everyone's time - HE couldn't take the time to score them appropriately.

I don't think we are that far off from having something comparable to the Bundeschampionat here in North America. The Young Horse Championships and North American Young Horse championships are attracting more sponsors and participants and people are LOOKING for prospects for these competitions. I can certainly foresee the registries considering using these results as Performance records for young stallions.

Hey Pat - off topic - but I thought of you a few weeks ago. There was a rather long article in the paper about Sally Starr!! She has a radio program now in Philly and by gosh by golly the photos of her in the article were pretty impressive. Hope the rest of us "cowgirls" look that good at her age!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 30, 2004, 05:04 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Marieke:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Oldenburg Mom:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ashemont:
I also don't understand why we have to do everything like the Germans... why can't we improve on what the Germans are doing and produce BETTER horses??? Isn't that the American way? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hear Hear. I agree. I also think MOST breeders here take the slow and steady route. Back at 3, begin work 4

That does not appear to be the case in Germany. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm sorry, but I completely disagree with you. I have extensive experience in Europe, and I just can not believe what people expect and do with a young horse in the US. I am totally shocked! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Marieke,

Ok, if I was wrong I was wrong.

It is my understanding at the tests (30 & 70), however, the vast majority are in their 3 year old year.

Please. I'm all ears. Without prejudice, I would love to hear your viewpoint. I'm sure others would too, especially since the German test(s) are pretty much our benchmark.

Tiki

Jun. 30, 2004, 05:27 AM

I may be wrong, but I don't think Marieke was talking about warmbloods. I am also shocked at what I see in the Quarter Horse and Paint Horse Futurities with 2 year olds going under saddle. Even the International Hunter Futurity starts a little young for my taste.

However, I see no problem - if the horse is mentally ready - with starting as a 3 year old and doing Materiale classes. I see no problem with starting late in the fall of the 3yo year starting baby jumps and logs to get a horse ready for the Young Jumper Championships (YJC) and International Jumper Futurity (IJF) at 4. Both the YJC and the IJF are looking for the most clear rounds. They do not overface the young horse and the horses don't go for time. The one with the most clear rounds at the end of the season wins.

I've also heard people complain about how hard the FEI 5 Year Old Young Horse tests are. Really, all they have to do is walk, trot and canter. They do need to do a medium trot and canter and a counter canter, but ANY 5 year old should be able to do that. This test is equivalent to an upper 1st level/lower 2nd level test. Any 5 year old should be able to do that. The 6yo test requires lateral work and flying changes. Again, almost any 6 yo should be able to do that. If we can't do that - AND competitively - and we dumb down the stallion testing, we will NEVER be competitive with Europe.

I have been to the 100 Day Test, but obviously I've never sat in on any orientation given to the guest/test riders. I assume there is one??? If not, the TD should strongly consider doing one, or redoing the one they have to prevent things like the Todd Minikum incident from ever happening again. The purpose of the test and the scoring system should be WELL explained. If it was, and he ignored it all, he'll never get to ride one of my horses, no matter how good he may be.

Marieke said that older stallions DO complete the stallion testing. Maybe Europe and the US should consider a sliding point penalty on age to level the playing field. Rather than a straight 5 point penalty, perhaps 5 points per year for each year over 3. That would either level the playing field or send the older, well trained, fit, competitive stallions out on the performance route.

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 30, 2004, 05:40 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Tiki:
I may be wrong, but I don't think Marieke was talking about warmbloods. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Duh. I guess. Got it wrong again. I think.

Marieke

Jun. 30, 2004, 06:22 AM

Well, actually, I was not talking breed specific. But let me tell you how I/we work.

For stallion prospects. They are born, weaned, turned into a field with other colts, we check on them when we do the water etc. In (late) september, when they are 2 1/2, they come in from the field, they get 6 weeks of ground work, which includes, "hello, this is a halter" and other real basic stuff, good grain etc. They go to the inspections in november. They have some free jumping at the first inspections, but horses who have been trained to free jump get severly penalized (you can easily tell, and they usually get excluded).

The ones that don't make this first cut, get gelded, and back to the field, see ya next summer/fall.

The ones that do make it to the second round, go back in the stallion group for a few months. Right before Christmas, they come back in, go back to the routine of "hello, this is a halter". They get some longing, usually twice a week for a max of 10 min. Early Feb they go for the second and third round.

The once that don't make it go back out. The once that do, we keep in. Now you have to find a balance. They need some work and conditioning, otherwise they are not going to make the testing. However, if you do to much, they will burn out during the testing.

The testing is hard on them. When they come back they get some time of, they need it mentally. Then in late summer we do the young horse routine. They get ridden about 3 times a week for a max of 30 min, w/t/c. We built it up to 5 times a week by age 6 for 45 min. It is not untill age 5 that they really have to do much more then w/t/c.

For mares, they have a baby in the year they are 4 and after weaning we start them. Geldings get started in their late 3 yo.

Now, I have two 2 yo colts. And a dilemma. I will present them at shows this fall. I read and see all these people who have longlined, and some even backed their 2 yo. I can't compete with that. These 2 yo will have more muscle devellopment then mine, and will look better, no question. I sometimes even feel pressured to start something with them. Just to give them an advantage. But I know I shouldn't. I have them for the long haul and am not going to jeoperdize their devellopment mentally and physically just to make an impression this year. They can be young goofballs. They bring me joy with their silliness, and the BO too. It doesn't matter how early she feeds them (they are the first on the farm), they await her in their run-in with the expression, "well, you're late". I look at them in their field with the traffic cone, which is in a different place every day, and am glad they are just young. Then I think about that clinic where when I asked about the horse we were working with and the rider told me "he'll be 2 next week". Or listen to people who ask me what is the best way to start longlining their 2 yo of incredible bloodlines. Yep, it is sad. Sorry for rambling, but this bothers me so much.

Marieke

Jun. 30, 2004, 06:24 AM

I would like to add, that I know how easy it is to see how much work/training a young horse already had, and that it usually is not favored by judges here in Europe.

carosello

Jun. 30, 2004, 10:33 AM

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee/forums?q=Y&a=tpc&s=6656094911&f=3206053911&m=9796009951&p=1

Here is a chat after the last test in 2002

Oldenburg Mom

Jun. 30, 2004, 11:27 AM

Carosello,

WOW! What a great thread. Thank you for bringing it to my/our attention.

Liz, thank you for posting such detail on your guy. It is fascinating for all to see a very specific example of what happens.

I've only made it through the first page. I've got a LOT of reading to do!

LLDM

Jun. 30, 2004, 07:04 PM

Marieke - I absolutely agree.

SCFarm

benno

Jul. 8, 2004, 04:57 PM

I know this is a very late entry into this discussion but - I want to thank everyone for so much very helpful information. It was critical in my decision-making. I was going back and forth in my mind about sending my 5 year old pony to the 30 day test. I had already decided that I would not send my physically and mentally young 3 year old to the rigors of this testing. I found out that for the 30 day test for the ISR, the stallion owner sends their own rider and this is what made the big difference for me. I am very much in favor of a stallion test in principle and from seeing stallions who have gone through it in Germany, but the idea of leaving my stallion in someone else's care was something I could not do. So, just a quick thank you to everyone for all the helpful information - and I hope to meet many of the BB posters at the test in November.

Mannuscript Farm

Jul. 8, 2004, 06:48 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by benno:
So, just a quick thank you to everyone for all the helpful information - and I hope to meet many of the BB posters at the test in November. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh goodie!!! We can chew our fingernails together <grin>... Waterford leaves sunny California the 20th of July http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif The time is flying by and as we'll be on the road beginning the end of August, I won't see him again until the final days of the testing. Can we say STRESS????!!! Luckily, I have lots of friends out that way that will be checking up on him for me.

Kathy St.Martin
Mannuscript Farm
Home of the Oldenburg Stallions, Mannhattan and Waterford
http://www.mannuscriptfarm.com

and

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

evenstar

Jul. 9, 2004, 05:24 PM

If this is a little too OT, let me know and I'll start a new thread...
We have a young stallion prospect who is now going out with a gelding as a companion. It's great because the gelding is doing a lot more to show him how to behave than his indulgent mother ever did. Our hope is that our boy will be able to continue to be turned out with another horse even as he grows older. I know that ultimately it depends on the individual horse but so far so good.
I've read quite a lot on this BB to the effect of "begin as you would like to continue" as far as turnout of a stallion with other horse(s) is concerned.
So here's my question for those who send their young stallions off for 100 very structured days: If they've been accustomed to turnout with their buddy before the test, are they able to go back to that after. Or is it more likely that once they've been separated they can never safely go back.
This question came up at our barn because we're thinking of having him prepped for some breed shows next year that would mean sending him away for about 30-60 days, and then in the next year, he'd be possibly going to the 100 day test. So any experiences related to the this would be appreciated.

pintofoal

Jul. 9, 2004, 05:45 PM

Hall of Fame was turned out with other buddies until he as sent off to the testing, but the separation was not due to the testing but hat his buddies moved--one was sold, one left with his boarder. Before the testing he (Hall of Fame) was often off for days if not weeks at a time at shows or trainers and he always did well going back out with his two gelding friends this was also after he had been breeding for several years. You do have to be careful and keep an eye out to make sure no one is getting too rough--they have (stallions) been known to get hostile quickly. Other then that I'd say its OK as long as it is the same horses he is use too and you are not observing any behavior changes amongst the group/buddies.

Good luck with your guy and the testing if you send him.

Norsire

Jul. 9, 2004, 05:59 PM

Zillionair and Billionair lived out with two other geldings and each years foal crop of weanlings until they were 4 years old...at 4 they started playing too rough with one old gelding and the little ones. Pure White Gold is 2 now and had bred 3 mares and is out with the new weanlings and is doing fine, I hope to keep him out with the group until at least 4...maybe longer as long as every one is getting along with each other.

hunt_jump

Jul. 12, 2004, 02:19 PM

Well, a little late to the party here, but I read through this entire thread last night. It is a wonderfully informative thread. But it left me with a few questions.

1) I know that somewhere in this thread it was stated that the current US 100 DT is cosponsored by AHS and ISR/Old. Do all of the other US versions of the European Warmblood registries (KWPN, GOV, AHHA, ATA, RPSI, etc.) recognize this 100DT /30 day short test for their stallion approvals?

2) I have been looking at the different registry websites quite unsuccessfully to try to get an idea of which registries have a performance option for stallion approval and what the performance option entails. The only registries I have been able to find information on are ATA, SWANA, and AHS. Can anyone tell me about the other registries?

Thanks

Ashemont

Jul. 12, 2004, 02:32 PM

The 30DT part of the 100DT is recognized by Old NA/ISR (and someone mentioned AHHA?) but I don't think any of the German registries recognize it because it is the LAST 30 days of the 100 day test, as opposed to the 30 DT that the RPSI is sponsoring which is the normal 30 DT... or the beginning of the 100 DT.

RSPI recognizes the performance route and while most other registries will not allow a stallion to maintain a license as he goes up the levels, they all will allow for presentation of a stallion once he has met the criteria at the highest required level.

Oakleigh

Jul. 12, 2004, 02:55 PM

Hunt_Jump and Pat,

Yes, the AHHA recognizes the 100 day test as well as the shortened 30 day test.

There is also a performance option, the specifics of which are published once a year in the Impulsion or in an update newsletter. The performance options are subject to change yearly, although there have only actually been a few changes over the last couple of years. These performance requirements are kept in the policy manual of the AHHA.

Check the spring Impulsion online at the AHHA website. They were published in that issue.

Oakleigh

hunt_jump

Jul. 12, 2004, 02:56 PM

Do you know if the details of the RPSI performance route for approval are published anywhere online? It seems to me that if a stallion is continuing to progress up the levels and win in the show ring while working towards completing his approval requirements that would be a nice option for the SO as well as the stallion.

The jumper requirements listed on the AHS site for performance route seemed rather vague to me as the stallions have to have five to 3 finishes in the Open jumpers at A shows. Yet it does not seem to have a set requirement as to the level the Open jumper classes have to be set (and the Level the Open jumpers jump depends on where the horse shows).

Also, how do the young horse championships (I believe that they have them for both dressage and jumpers?) play into trying to get a young competition stallion approved? Are those stallions who are to be pointed for these championships simply sent to complete the 100DT before they are pointed to the championships as 5 and 6 year olds?

hunt_jump

Jul. 12, 2004, 02:57 PM

Thanks for the link Oakleigh. It was a very interesting read and very informative - just what I was looking for http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

cyriz's mom

Jul. 12, 2004, 04:49 PM

The 100 day in the US is put on by the Stallion Texting Federation which is a subsidiary (if you will) of the Sporthorse Federation. Their website (www.sporthorsefederationl.org (http://www.sporthorsefederationl.org)) has a page where all the member registries answer a list of the same questions. I think you'll find the answers to at least some of your questions there.

shoos

Jul. 12, 2004, 04:55 PM

Quick curiousity. I was at an ISR inspection last year and there was a discussion regarding breeding. I asked what was more popular in Germany, Dressage or Jumping. He responded Dressage. Is Dressage more popular here as well? as opposed to Jumping? I don't know I am asking, completely subjectively, I answer in my opinion, yes it is.
Since the stallion testing has evolved through the ages, why is so much emphasis placed on jumping. I haven't been to a stallion testing so I may be wrong. But if dressage is a significant "sport", at least equal in number and probably more,(I am not belittling Jumping at all, WAY MORE INTERESTING TO WATCH than a training level test, over and over and over... (You get my point.)
My question is why is this still a much more determining factor then the ridability and movement?
I personally like dressage and could care less how a horse jumped, bypass that information altogether. Is the 100D test (and registries) saying that jumper stallions produce better dressage horses?
Am I way off in my thinking? Just curious, not trying to pick a fight with jumpers or side with the dressage enthusiests.
It is something that seems to annoy me about the 100 day test the most.

Equine Reproduction

Jul. 12, 2004, 05:08 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by shoos:
Since the stallion testing has evolved through the ages, why is so much emphasis placed on jumping. I haven't been to a stallion testing so I may be wrong. But if dressage is a significant "sport", at least equal in number and probably more,(I am not belittling Jumping at all, WAY MORE INTERESTING TO WATCH than a training level test, over and over and over... (You get my point.) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Warmbloods are bred, as a whole, to excel in the Olympic disciplines. The selection process addresses jumping, dressage and combined training and scores are given for all of those categories.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> My question is why is this still a much more determining factor then the ridability and movement? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not sure what you mean. There are scores for free jumping and stadium jumping. But there are also scores for the various gaits, rideability, temperament, trainability, etc...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Is the 100D test (and registries) saying that jumper stallions produce better dressage horses? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No. But it "does" give mare owners guides to help select a stallion that may (or may not, as the case may be) compliment their mare...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> It is something that seems to annoy me about the 100 day test the most. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Look at the scoring system...I believe someone else posted it here on another page. But it does go over a variety of criteria including jumping, gaits, rideability, trainability, willingness to work, etc...So you can have a phenomenal jumping horse, but he may have a horrible work ethic. Or a good dressage horse that has a phenomenal work ethic which will make him one of those that can be trained to become a phenomenal dressage horse. So, it's not just about one discipline or the other...

Kathy St.Martin
Mannuscript Farm
Home of the Oldenburg stallions, Mannhattan
http://www.mannuscriptfarm.com