the INDIVIDUAL...priority one...over pedigree etc

[FOS]

hi guys

Is it reasonable to suggest that the quality of conformation of the prospective foals to be produced from the band of broodmares owned by a breeder...should take priority over ALL other considerations (including pedigree, race performance etc) when selecting which stallions to breed the mares to.

And don't get me wrong...quality pedigree and race performance coupled with quality conformation can be the "piece de resistance"...but I suggest that one of the rarest commodities in the world of thoroughbreds is the Exceptional individual.

With that in mind...it amazes me how many breeders actually book-and-breed their mares to stallions that they have NEVER seen with their own eyes.

I believe that to succeed (over the long term) in this game a breeder must make the production of (physically) high quality individuals the keystone of their program.

I suggest that breeders that make pedigree (or race performance etc) the priority and don't select stallions that physically may best enhance their mares' chances of producing a quality individual...may be destined for financial failure at the "game."

And even if the stallion choices are good (All Things Considered)...the (physically) so-so to poor mares retained by many breeders may prove to be a bottomless money-pit anyway...regardless of their pedigrees, race records...or who they are bred to.

Shouldn't the INDIVIDUAL...be priority #1 ?

What do you think?

Respectfully

[ZiaLand]

FOS, I agree with you that conformation is a huge part of success and failure, and may be the reason why "breeding the best to the best and hoping for the best" sometimes doesn't work, unless conformation is an important part of the equation in determining "the best."

Question for you. Would you say that biomechanics should play a major role in broodmare selection, and do you personally believe in having a biomechanics analysis done on each of your broodmares?

Laurie

[steve]

I would have to say yes and no to your question Fos. Yes conformation of the mare, sire and future foals are more important if you are a market breeder. If you decide to race them yourself it may not be " AS " important. As you know there have been many successful race horses with less than perfect conformation. I myself would first put the importance on having a correct mare who could run and breed her to the best " producing " sire, even if he isn't perfect. Alot of Seattle Slew lines arn't perfect but they can produce. I have a mare who's legs ARE correct and every foal she has had has been correct. Knowing this I am breeding her to a "not so perfect " sire, but who made over two million in 20 starts. I think the foal will sell very well if it looks like all her others.

[FOS]

hi ZiaLand

You ask "Would you say that biomechanics should play a major role in broodmare selection, and do you personally believe in having a biomechanics analysis done on each of your broodmares?"

To part one...Yes. I believe biomechanics should play a role in the broodmare selection process. But the extent to which a biomechanics "hired-gun" should be involved in the selection process might best be dictated by one's own abilities (to identify and evaluate certain strengths and weaknesses etc) and one's track-record of "success."

If the track-record is spotty (at best)...why not consider credible options...including the prospects of using the services of a biomechanics "expert" (who can substantiate and corroborate his/her claims of success with historically accurate documentation).

As to the second part of your question...I suggest that most serious (and successful) commercial breeders are looking for a certain type (and look) of mare (that suits them and they have been successful with) to breed out of. And certainly pedigree will come in to play also...it always does.

But I also believe that some thoroughbred horsemen/women have an eye (for selecting individuals) that seems to translate to success in both the breeding and racing games. I suggest that the proof is in the pudding. Those successful persons may (arguably) possess their own biomechanics insights (or "gifts")...regardless of whether they recognize it or are acknowledged for it. In such cases...the analysis and insights from an independent biomechanics "expert" may be of little or no value.

I'd go one step further also and suggest that the selection of a stallion and/or mare and/or racing prospect that is highly regarded by a "biomechanics" "guru" does not guarantee anything...but arguably the biomechanical analysis may help identify certain potentials (or lack thereof).

I see little or no downside to listening to and evaluating information offered as a result of a biomechanical analysis...and possibly using it (at least to some extent) in hopes of helping to determine the best options possible.

If a biomechanics analysis seems to heavily favor (or disfavor) a potential selection (or selections)...it may very well affect one's decision(s)...All Things Considered.

Bottom line...it's probably unwise to discard quality biomechanical analysis (and insights) out-of-hand. Such information may in fact prove to be of value.

If one's success rate is not acceptable (and financial results are often a dependable indicator) biomechanical analyses may be a very worthwhile consideration.

Even if one is experiencing a degree of success...if the cost is of little or no consequence...it might be wise to have such analyses done.

You make the call...what do you think?

Respectfully

[FOS]

hi steve

Having a mare (as you apparently do) that consistently produces quality individuals is a valuable commodity.

I suggest that (All Things Considered) she's the type that can safely be bred to a very commercial stallion...with the probability of ringing a very loud bell at auction.

If I may ask...who's the stallion you selected ?

Best to you.

Respectfully

[steve]

Thank you Fos. I am taking her to SKIMMING next week after she gets better from her reaction to the WN vaccine I gave her.

[yukidragon]

What a joke.
Conformation first . lol
Make straight unsound horses who break down at the track an see them vanned off. Then believe this thread.

Pedigree is first. only a fool would tell you different.
Then conformation etc...
Why do you tell these people conformation is first.

I never payed attenion to what you actually write in most of your infor threads.
You must have a crop of straight fragile horses to unload at a sale barn.
Maybe a crop of new owners listen to grab like this.
Give me a crooked sound horse over a straight weak bone horse any day.

[louis finochio]

If you stay up all night and look at the sale catalog, for the next days sale, you will have all your TB picked out before you arrive at the sale.

You have just commited a mortal sin, as conformation is 1st.
When you go to a sale look at the TB conformation and pick out your athlete, then after your finished looking at the TB go back to your sales catalog and see how your choices are bred.

If you let the TB pedigree influence your decision on purchasing a paper pedigree that doesnt match the correct conformation of the athlete your headed for trouble.

[Sysonby]

What a joke.
Conformation first . lol
Make straight unsound horses who break down at the track an see them vanned off. Then believe this thread.

Pedigree is first. only a fool would tell you different.
Then conformation etc...
Why do you tell these people conformation is first.

I'm not FOS and he can certainly speak for himself, but I don't understand your point unless you are equating pedigree with soundness. If so, I disagree with the premise. If anything, conformation and soundness have a correlation that is separate and apart from pedigree. That's often why some A P Indys and Storm Cats are sold for less than the stud fee: the market punishes offset knees, crooked front ends, upright pasterns, cowhocks etc because there are valid correlations between these conditions and viability as a racehorse. Sometimes the market is wrong and some poorly conformed individual goes onto great things. That's horseracing and breeding in a nutshell.

Your philosophy of pedigree over conformation hasn't been in vogue for at least twenty years now. I can understand you disagreeing with FOS' beliefs but I don't get calling someone a "fool" for accepting what is essentially now the common wisdom of the marketplace. IOW, FOS isn't alone: I believe on this point he's standing comfortably in the camps of Lukas (who originated the idea), Baffert (who has perfected it), and the pinhookers like Becky Thomas and Jerry Bailey. Remember even the best stallions have less than 20 % SWs and most have about 10 %. Being discerning about conformation can help increase the odds --and being discerning about conformation from lesser stallions progeny can lead to real homeruns.

[yukidragon]

Sysonby I thought about it your wright soundness an conformation go hand in hand every horse thats has a good conformation is sound eh.
or does the trainer take a soundness shaker an sprikle the horse with it.
I think its the sprikle that makes a good conformation horse sound or is it the pedigree.

[FOS]

hi yukidragon

You wrote "What a joke. Conformation first . lol Make straight unsound horses who break down at the track an see them vanned off. Then believe this thread."

Who said anything about "Make straight unsound horses who break down at the track..."? YOU did Yukidragon...No One else.

Sounds like you're supporting my premise Yukidragon. Remember? I'm the "INDIVIDUAL...priority one" proponent...Not You.

At least get the language right Yukidragon...there's a HUGE difference between a "straight" (as you wrote) horse (whether sound or unsound) and a conformationally correct horse.

I suggest that if someone does't know or understand what they're looking At and For...and how to identify and thoroughly evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and possible ramifications regarding conformation-related issues pertaining to the thoroughbred...it might be wise to consider one's options including consulting with a Biomechanics specialist (as ZiaLand mentioned).

Not only might one get a quality analysis...but also a valuable crash course in Conformation 101.

Yuki you wrote "Pedigree is first. only a fool would tell you different. Then conformation etc."

Respectfully Yuki...your premise (that pedigree takes precedent over conformation etc) is clearly your opinion, but I suggest that many horsemen/women that have experienced significant success over the years might take issue with your "only a fool would tell you different" etched-in-stone premise.

I suggest that a very good individual connected to a poor pedigree may be acceptable...your premise "Pedigree is first" excludes that possibility. Example...if pedigree took precedent over conformation etc (as you indicate it MUST)...I suggest that often-successful horsemen such as Lucas...Baffert and Sekiguchi would stay clear of horses like Fusaichi Rock Star. Obviously they don't live by your premise "Pedigree is first" and are willing to pay $800,000+ for a colt that arguably had a $5 pedigree...and is now a G2 winner at Santa Anita and on the Derby trail.

Yukidragon you also wrote "Give me a crooked sound horse over a straight weak bone horse any day."

Fine Yuki...that's your completely fabricated...red-herring comparison...NOT MINE.

Regardless...what if the "straight weak bone horse" (that you clearly indicated is not your first choice of the two) has the super star-studded pedigree...and the "crooked sound horse" (that at least conformationally was your first choice of the two) has a $5 pedigree. Based on your own premise that "Pedigree is first"...it seems clear that you MUST select the "straight weak bone horse"...hmmm.

As I wrote previously Yukidragon "I believe that to succeed (over the long term) in this game a breeder must make the production of (physically) high quality individuals the keystone of their program."

I stand by that.

Respectfully

[yukidragon]

FOS your name says it all
You come to a pedigree forum with your "opinion" that its straight=conformation horse is what its all about.

Well tell me how many conformation web sites vs pedigree sites you find.
Same with books an forums .

I may not take the time to type the correct language for you but, anyone with common sence can figure out what im saying.

I your case money cant buy common sence.

Your all hung up on "Biomechanics" this is a pedigree forum last I checked.

You need spend alittle money for a pedigree analysis like
Example- Ellen Parker ect..., I think she has a web site that if you know the "language" you can understand it.
I believe its a free site doh.

FOS writes
"I suggest that a very good individual connected to a poor pedigree may be acceptable...your premise "Pedigree is first" excludes that possibility. Example...if pedigree took precedent over conformation etc (as you indicate it MUST)...I suggest that often-successful horsemen such as Lucas...Baffert and Sekiguchi would stay clear of horses like Fusaichi Rock Star. Obviously they don't live by your premise "Pedigree is first" and are willing to pay $800,000+ for a colt that arguably had a $5 pedigree...and is now a G2 winner at Santa Anita and on the Derby trail. "

I suggest that late Dale Earnhardt could also beat most corvette drivers with a ford pinto.

Going around the bush,I'll play that game with yeah.

It all has to work The Pedigree,trainer, for those who like a pretty horse as I do may self conformation an a good farrier.

To tell people conformation over pedigree you need a different breed of horse bud.

[madelyn]

My yukigragon, for you a very long post, but as usual mostly incomprehensible. I agree with FOS, though, about the individual, which is why I believe people who bother to visit my very perfect stallions will want to send mares to them. While I cannot get to the bottom of your ill-formed rhetoric, I can agree with FOS that conformation is very important, because it is the foundation of soundness. You know, yuki, if I may call you that, a little work with your keyboard skills... English is not my mother tongue and I would most fully understand where you were coming from if it was not yours also, it also might help explain to others on the board.....

[steve]

I definitely agree more with Fos than Yuki. Yuki you generalized your stand on pedigree. Pedigree what ? Pedigree as far as the sire and dam are concerned or like Ellen Parker who puts faith in 6 to 8 generations back?
Do you look for sire lines only or female lines ? Please define what you mean by pedigree Yuki ?
The main reason horses break down is because of conformation flaws and over training. So you are not really making any sense

[louis finochio]

If your a pedigree student and would breakdown Successful Appeal's pedigree, you wouldnt fall in love with it, you would select another TB that had a stronger and more class in his pedigree.

If your a conformation student and looked for conformation first, you would pick Successful Appeal. As his conformation is hard to fault.

There are many roads that lead to Rome, but you must find the one that will get you there.