Black filly for sale....

Kari · Postby **Kari** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 6:36 pm

http://www.equinenow.com/horse-ad-185468

springboro · Postby **springboro** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 6:19 pm

dark bay is ever i saw one

accphotography · Postby **accphotography** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 7:22 pm

And I don't see anything bay about her. Looks black as night to me.

RiddleMeThis · Postby **RiddleMeThis** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 7:46 pm

accphotography wrote:And I don't see anything bay about her. Looks black as night to me.

Agreed 100% black.

accphotography · Postby **accphotography** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 8:01 pm

FWIW... Airdrie Apache is known to produce blacks (and may not even HAVE a bay gene). The dam of this foal is REGISTERED black (and I'm sure you know how rare that is with TJC) and this horse has at least 4 full siblings who are all very much black.

springboro · Postby **springboro** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 9:23 pm

what are u all talking about..... she has a brown nose. It's quite clear

springboro · Postby **springboro** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 9:27 pm

According to the JOCKEY CLUB, whose rules are the ones we follow with TB breeding:

Black: The entire coat of the horse is black, including the muzzle, the flanks, the mane, tail and legs, unless white markings are present.

Dark Bay/Brown: The entire coat of the horse will vary from a brown, with areas of tan on the shoulders, head and flanks, to a dark brown, with tan areas seen only in the flanks and/or muzzle. The mane, tail and lower portion of the legs are always black, unless white markings are present.

RiddleMeThis · Postby **RiddleMeThis** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 9:36 pm

springboro wrote:According to the JOCKEY CLUB, whose rules are the ones we follow with TB breeding:

Black: The entire coat of the horse is black, including the muzzle, the flanks, the mane, tail and legs, unless white markings are present.

Dark Bay/Brown: The entire coat of the horse will vary from a brown, with areas of tan on the shoulders, head and flanks, to a dark brown, with tan areas seen only in the flanks and/or muzzle. The mane, tail and lower portion of the legs are always black, unless white markings are present.

And the JC is wrong. I will go with CORRECT over a registry ANY day.

They don't have colors for smoky black, cremello, or perlino. I guess those just don't exist. :roll:

accphotography · Postby **accphotography** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 9:38 pm

This is a brown muzzle

What she has is most definitely not brown. If it's anything it's sunbleached. But that horse is black as the day is long.

The Jockey Club is a lousy resource for color. They don't care to be accurate at all.

If the dam is black (per TJC) and the sire can't produce bay by himself... then it's clear the filly is black (along with all of her full siblings).

springboro · Postby **springboro** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 9:40 pm

you think that filly has a black nose, eh?

You can dismiss TJC all you want, color breeders, but the rest of the industry has an established lexicon. Call 'em purple if you want, but the rule book is there as the gospel!

RiddleMeThis · Postby **RiddleMeThis** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 9:43 pm

springboro wrote:Call 'em purple if you want, but the rule book is there as the gospel!

And THAT is why we need to be CORRECT. If NO ONE cares about being CORRECT then NOTHING changes.

You can continue to follow the rules, and continue to be ok calling your horses the wrong thing, but I will continue on calling my horses the right things, and attempting to fix the problems, and the inaccuracies, and actually IMPROVE the registry.

accphotography · Postby **accphotography** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 9:46 pm

I hate to tell you, but I'm not a color breeder. I'm merely a person who believes in genetic accuracy and not some line sold to the masses written by people who have no clue what they're talking about.

People who know the owner/breeder of that filly post here. it would be quite simple to find out what she really is (OBVIOUSLY black) I'm sure.

springboro · Postby **springboro** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 10:03 pm

it's actually quite simple... the color is not important one bit to the racing industry. And it's a phenootypic description, genetics folks. It's so the horse can be identified. That's all. No one is going to suddenly yell out, "Wait, that's a black horse - just look at the blood results"

why buck the rules of the industry? That's the main reason I am weary of the whole color fad. Just play nice and quit trying to make changes to a system that has worked fine for years.

RiddleMeThis · Postby **RiddleMeThis** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 10:15 pm

springboro wrote:why buck the rules of the industry? That's the main reason I am weary of the whole color fad. Just play nice and quit trying to make changes to a system that has worked fine for years.

Because the rules are wrong. Just because something has "worked fine for years" doesn't mean its right, or that it will work fine now.

springboro · Postby **springboro** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 10:30 pm

my final post on the subject:

fine, this esteemed and well known group has decreed that the Jockey Club is wrong. Let's see you fix it. And again, it's a phenotype issue.... all your genetics (which, by the way, I totally understand and agree with) tests to show the various and unusual colors of the TB are pretty much useless when calling a race.

I love the way you just say without one pause that the rules are wrong. Really? really? 'k... a whole industry plays by those rules and seems to be doing just fine.