Larry Bramlage on breeding:

[gotpaints]

I'm not sure we are breeding horses that are genetically less sound than 20 years ago. I don't even know if it is possible to skew the breed in 20 years even if one tried.

Couple things. First, we rush 'em into the breeding sheds earlier nowadays, (3-4 year olds) so 20-30 years represent multi GENERATIONS of horses. I promise you, with advancements in surgery technique blended with the ever dominant desire for perfection, 20 years of unchecked breeding added with rampant drug usage can assuredly hurt the breed.

I do believe the use of medications to mask unsoundness is far more prevelant than 2 or 3 decades ago and I know with the advent of sealed racetracks during wet weather, racing surfaces are much harder on those horses running over it.

Absolutely.

I agree, look at Point Ashley, she was bred at 3, and if her foal is retired at 2-3 then she will be 7-8 when her granddaughter/son is born. In a 10 year stretch there will be 2-3 generations. So in 20 years there are 4 generations, a lot can change the breed in 20 years now.

[soundfast]

In an interview he did on bloodhorse.com Bramlage himself said sires of unsound offspring were tolerated. He knows there is a hereditary component to a lot of the unsoundness. Unsound SC sires like Giants Causeway and Forestry have just 8 &9 starts per runner and others like El Prado,Quiet American,Sky Classic, Dynaformer,Silver Deputy,etc. have 18 or 19. Unbridled's Song only 11 ditto for SC himself. Pulpit 11 and his sire A P Indy 12. The big differences in lifetime average starts per runner from one sire to another seem to me to be evidence of heredity as a factor in how long horses stay sound. Some sires seem to have a number of offspring that wind up having a fracture or two and some retired with a fracture themselves.

[dray33]

I used to be the biggest Forestry fan, but he, and some others have really let me down. I wish there were statistics kept on the amount of bleeders produced by a sire, and the amount of bad breathers. These stats would be unbelievably useful in selecting mates, and in improving the entire bred. What else can be tracked?

[dray33]

I agree, look at Point Ashley, she was bred at 3, and if her foal is retired at 2-3 then she will be 7-8 when her granddaughter/son is born. In a 10 year stretch there will be 2-3 generations. So in 20 years there are 4 generations, a lot can change the breed in 20 years now.

Exactly. Now imagine compounding that on the stallion side. One horse with masked conformational defects, or chemically altered racing record, can mask talent and problems for a generation, every single breeding season. 20 years of potential bad generations from one source. Now multiply that times 100.

[gotpaints]

I agree, look at Point Ashley, she was bred at 3, and if her foal is retired at 2-3 then she will be 7-8 when her granddaughter/son is born. In a 10 year stretch there will be 2-3 generations. So in 20 years there are 4 generations, a lot can change the breed in 20 years now.

Exactly. Now imagine compounding that on the stallion side. One horse with masked conformational defects, or chemically altered racing record, can mask talent and problems for a generation, every single breeding season. 20 years of potential bad generations from one source. Now multiply that times 100.

It's a lot easier to breed soundness out of then then to breed it into them. You can make a breed really weak in 20 years, but you have to breed the unsoundness back out of them and that takes longer than 20 years.

[DDT]

It is very easy to jump on the band wagon as to the loss of vigor and stamina through breeding over the last 20 years, however, since the majority opinion here is that breeding is the main reason for the supposed increase in unsoundness in the breed as a whole, I would like specific names of stallions that have contributed to this downfall. Now everybody jumps on Storm Cat, but if you look at his overall record, leading general sire twice, leading juvenile sire seven times, leading sire of stakes winners, leading sire by AEI 2004-2007, 2003 2nd, 2002 2nd and 2001 3rd I would think that even with his conformation faults and reputation for siring crazy horses, his record stands for itself. In addition he is emerging as a leading broodmare sire, so even if you hate him, he was an outstanding sire numbers wise. When you look at the leading sires for the last 20 years you see names like Mr. Prospector, Halo, Alydar, Danzig, Broad Brush, Cozzene, Deputy Minister, Storm Cat, Thunder Gulch, El Prado and A.P. Indy, have any of these contributed to the current idea that somehow breeders have bred stamina out of the breed in the last 20 years?

If you can, give me examples by name.

DDT

[hpkingjr]

I hate it when you have to apply logic and give specific examples in these discussions. Takes all the fun out of pontificating.

[DDT]

The problem with pontificating is a whole lot of opinion with little or no facts to back the opinion.

DDT

[Shammy Davis]

DDT on another thread pointed out the fact that "opportunity" plays a key role in the significance of a sire. I think that "opportunity" plays a key role beyond the breeding shed. I personally believe that the issue of "starts" is insignificant. Further, we know historically that less than disirable conformation often does not necessarily effect the racing ability of TB's. Many great horses and many not so great have had productive careers. To take one step further, it is important that training regimen and race selection be advantageous for the horse. If the trainer can't read a condition book and continues to place a horse in unsuitable races, breakdown and injury is a high possibility. I've loss track of the horses that I've researched prior to considering purchase that have come off of bull ring tracks that's breeding was for classic distance and beyond. It's no wonder they were not successful. None of the stallions that have been mentioned in the previous posts were unproductive either for their stud fee or for their racing offspring. If they had been unproductive they had been moved from KY to PA, FL, MD, or CA. If they didn't make it on the second flight, they'd been standing in TX, AZ, ID, VA, or NC. You know what is next. I believe that the industry is not being honest with the public. Further, I think we are not being honest with ourselves. I remember as a child watching Boxing every Friday night on TV. Boxing was a mainstay of TV sports in the 50's and 60's. Boxing began to neglect its own industry and failed to care for its image and the boxers themselves. What happened? It is went down the tubes because it got greedy. BIG BROWN might be the finest example of this. The evening of his Belmont loss, I watched an interview on TVG with Hall of Fame Trainer Jack Van Berg. He said (I paraphrase) that he thought the hooves were bothering this young colt and down the road they will realize that. As a retired farrier, I think he is right. But even if Jack and I are wrong, the fact that this enormously talented colt could not properly train was enough to insure his failure in the Belmont Stakes. No one was being honest with themselves concerning this colt. It's becoming a bad habit in the horse racing industry. We need to start looking after our horses, our people, and our industry. We need to insure better "opportunities" for ourselves.

[dray33]

I think it's much about opinion, and blending empirical data... that is the information available about the soundness and racing ability of our horses. Remember, there is much that is not recorded, thereby difficult to assess, in specifically establishing facts or statistics. But we can draw opinions from these. Examples. Nobody tracks cosmetic surgeries. Or even myectomies for breathing issues, yet they are become more prevalent and with todays horses. What is the effect of race day medication, or performance enhancing medications on stallions and there breeding records?

But you asked a question, so let me address it specifically:

If you can, give me examples by name.

I would look at it this way: A recent report on "stallion durability" set up some interesting guidelines to determine exactly what you ask. This included:
• Stallions that stand or stood in North America
• Statistics include racing in Northern Hemisphere (excludes Japan)
• Stallions whose first crop was foaled in 1995 or later, who have at least three crops of foals 3 years old or older, and who have at least
100 foals of racing age
• Current 2-year-olds are excluded from all statistics
• Stallions with identifiable stud fees as of 2005 or later (even if now deceased or pensioned, a stallion that stood in 2005 likely will have
yearlings of 2007)
• Stallions with a lifetime percentage of at least 70% starters from foals (the national average fluctuates around 70% annually)
So we HAVE national averages, which should aid in establishing "stallion durability".

This chart gives us % starters per foal, and Averag starts per starter. 2 Excellent statistics to form both a factual opinion, and personal opinion. Some finding and notable names for you:

Above the National Norm (all above 80% starters):
Langfuhr
Is It True
Storm Boot
Storm Creek
Cherokee Run
Yes It’s True
More Than Ready
Not For Love
Malibu Moon
Distorted Humor
Forest Wildcat

Some of the lower ones (in the 70% - 74%):
Siphon
Cat Thief
Boundary
Awesome Again
Behrens
Grand Slam
Fusaichi Pegasus
War Chant
Unbridled’s Song
Giant’s Causeway

Again, this is data to form opinion, so yes, I would say that Unbridled's Song, Awesome Again, might be less "sturdy" in general.

But then, they also show starts per starter. These are the $750 dollar (Gold Spring) to 8,500 (Judge T C) stud fee horses. That too says something.

Anyway, Because of the rampant use of race day meds, hidden surgeries, performance enhancing drugs, et al... I think it gets harder and harder to know what we are dealing with. That's why it needs to be changed/improved.

[diomed]

The problem with pontificating is a whole lot of opinion with little or no facts to back the opinion.

DDT

Great point!
BTW, you left Seattle Slew off that list. Shame on you...

Speaking of Slew, AP Indy appears to be a very good source of stamina.

There are so many factors involved in why horses retire it would be damned near impossible to pinpoint.
To me, if anything(if there is truly a problem) it's environmental more than anything else.
(Fashion, drugs, training methods, upbringing, etc.)

[madelyn]

I used to be the biggest Forestry fan, but he, and some others have really let me down. I wish there were statistics kept on the amount of bleeders produced by a sire, and the amount of bad breathers. These stats would be unbelievably useful in selecting mates, and in improving the entire bred. What else can be tracked?

I think to an extent some fault might be attributed to huge books and the resulting lack of quality control on the side of the mares. There might some stud farms out there that will happily take a breeder's money with barely a glance at the mare, her record, her family, her pedigree, etc. Certainly some of the factors that cause bleeding are hereditary. I have a very favorite book on that topic. It is called "Speed in the Racehorse: The Airflow Factors." It might be hard to determine if it is coming from the sire or the dam.

[DDT]

dray33

I am not saying that drugs, race day medications and corrective surgery have not played a part in a loss of stamina and breakdowns through breeding to stallions that otherwise would not get a chance in the shed, I am all for hay, oats and water. What I am saying is that everyone jumps on the band wagon about breeders breeding out stamina, but when put to the test all we can come up with are stallions like Unbridled's Song, Awesome Again and others that clearly sire champions and good stakes winners but have less than stellar starters per foals and starts per runner. Commercial breeders have always bred to the market, in the last 20 years that market has grown to include 2yo sales. Environmental aspects are far more the cause of an apparent lack of stamina in the breed than breeding patterns. If there was not a top market for these hot house show horses breeders and pinhookers would change the pattern. As long as yearlings by Unbridled's Song and Awesome Again are capable of bringing a 7 figure bid, commercial breeders will use them.

The breed, as a whole, has not suffered from a loss of stamina, the game has changed somewhat and because of the influx of opportunity to earn blacktype and the availability of large purses, training tactics have changed, this, more than anything, is the reason for fewer starts per horse, not a loss of stamina or a failure to stand training.

DDT

[dray33]

I am not saying that drugs, race day medications and corrective surgery have not played a part in a loss of stamina and breakdowns through breeding to stallions that otherwise would not get a chance in the shed, I am all for hay, oats and water. What I am saying is that everyone jumps on the band wagon about breeders breeding out stamina, but when put to the test all we can come up with are stallions like Unbridled's Song, Awesome Again and others that clearly sire champions and good stakes winners but have less than stellar starters per foals and starts per runner.

I agree. I am more concerned about drugs, race day medications and undisclosed corrective surgery than I am unsound breeding practices... however, I think all the hijinx that plays right into the hands of lousy breeding practices. And what's worse, the distortion of factual data due to all the above make responsible breeding practice a wavering, moving target. Without ethics and honesty, without fair play and level playing fields, without integrity and real concern for the horses... the breed will suffer from ALL directions: Unsound breeding practices included.

[dray33]

One more thing, and Jess Jackson just reminded me of it today, speaking to congress. Unsound breeding practices includes too much, and too close inbreeding, and breeding speed to speed, has given us horses that have Arnold Schwatzenegger chest with Don Knots knees. Our bloodlines and breeding has made it so many breeders, like Jackson, go outside to Germany/Europe and Argentina... basic outcrossing, to add vigor and sturdiness to our horses. Unsound breeding mixed with masked performance and hidden conformation flaws mixed to leave us where we are today.