Artificial insemination: How prevalent is it?

[CA Michael]

As an ex-employee of the Jack Werk "use those mini sample sizes to prove or disprove any theory" school, I am not surprised at your ridiculous example here. The B.S. degree Werk bestowed upon you there apparently still works in the land of the unemployed. Except I ain't buyin.

[Sam]

As an ex-employee of the Jack Werk "use those mini sample sizes to prove or disprove any theory" school, I am not surprised at your ridiculous example here. The B.S. degree Werk bestowed upon you there apparently still works in the land of the unemployed. Except I ain't buyin.

And you never would. That's your problem. It wouldn't matter how many pedigrees I pulled for you to go over.

Says an awful lot about your character that you'd rather attack me than answer a few questions (ones that have been repeatedly asked and you've dodged every time) making this personal rather than concentrating on the subject at hand. There was nothing in any of my posts in this thread that could even come close to being a personal attack on you. Unfortunately you couldn't do the same. You feel you might be losing an argument (at least in the eyes of others) and rather than try to provide proof backing up your statements (as I did) you chose to personally attack me.... which, IIRC is EXACTLY what Rogue's public reprimand was all about.

The stupid thing is I even asked you if I should pull more QH samples and if I should pull a bunch of TB examples for comparison. How many would you like, Michael? A week's worth of cards? A month? Ten years? I'm willing to do the grunt work and post what I find, are you? The truth is you wouldn't care. You're right and anyone (not just me) who disagrees with you is wrong and it wouldn't matter how much data they threw at you to prove otherwise, you'd just continue to ignore it.

I've asked you point blank some very simple questions, and rather than answer them you attack in the most puerile manner to which you are accustom.

This is now the 4th time I'm going to ask you to answer the previous stated questions about California stallions. This is also the second time I'm going to ask if you personally believe the above cited Quarter Horses are more inbred than their TB counterparts? If I were to pull a bunch of TBs, do you believe you'd see Mr. Prospector, Northern Dancer, and/or Storm Cat show up more often, less often or about as often as we see Dash For Cash, First Down Dash and Beduino?

They are very simple, very basic questions, Michael, that require nothing more than a very simple, very basic yes or no answer. Are you going to continue to ignore them?

I'm asking you: Do you believe Al's Wizard is a stallion worth standing? How about King Excess? Kris Kross? Fun Devil? Would you personally own a stallion like those listed and stand him at stud? Would you ever breed to any of the stallions listed or stallions like them? If you wouldn't breed a mare with a page like the cited stallions, why would you breed a stallion like them (if you would)?

Answer or shut up, but leave the attacks out of it because it only makes you look like a child.

I know I'm not the only one waiting to see if you are man enough to answer the questions. I also know I'm not the only one betting you'll chose to come back with another personal attack instead.

[Sam]

Actually, forget the QH tangent you started, Michael. As I said, you'll never back down from that.

How about we get back to the idea you put forth that it would be bad for the small regional stallions to cease to exists. How about we just concentrate on the questions you've ducked 4 times rather than the ones you've only ducked twice.

I'm asking you, as a stallion owner, as a mare owner:

Do you believe Al's Wizard is a stallion worth standing?

How about King Excess?

Kris Kross?

Fun Devil?

Would you personally own a stallion like those listed and stand him at stud?

Would you ever breed to any of the stallions listed or stallions like them?

A simple yes or no will do, Michael. Try to stay on topic.

eta

If you wouldn't breed a mare like the cited stallions, why would you breed a stallion like them (if you would)?

If you do not believe the above stallions should be at stud, or stallions like them, why do you support their presence in the stallions ranks?

[CA Michael]

I counted 18 questions, sam. Which of these shall I answer? This isn't a Q/A forum, nor is it your platform to prosecute. You attempted to prove your point on QH inbreeding by the same shoddy statistical method you learned over at Uncle Jack's. I, once again, pointed out your extended holiday from reality.

Go ahead, cut and paste, pontificate and prevaricate, while you embark on another hate Michael rampage (say hi to Tucumcari and Spedie along the way), but at least have the umph to admit that the drive through Werk methodology you're using borders on the absurd. One day at Ruidoso? LMAO

[Sam]

I counted 18 questions, sam. Which of these shall I answer?

How about all of them, Michael. They only require a yes or no, that shouldn't be that hard.

You attempted to prove your point on QH inbreeding by the same shoddy statistical method you learned over at Uncle Jack's. I, once again, pointed out your ongoing holiday from reality.

Actually, I provided a few samples and asked you how many more you'd like me to provide you with. I then asked you for YOUR PERSONAL OPINION on whether those cited horses were more inbred than their TB counterparts and offered to pull as many TB examples as YOU want me to. I'm willing to provide as much data as you request to prove my stance, are you?

I also acknowledged that it's a useless discussion to try having with you and tried to pull you back to the topic YOU started by asking you whether YOU, as a stallion owner, would stand any of the cited TB stallions and if you feel they are worth having in the stallion ranks.

Go ahead, cut and paste, pontificate and prevaricate, while you embark on another hate Michael rampage (say hi to Tucumcari and Spedie along the way), but at least have the umph to admit that the absurd drive through methodology you're using borders on the absurd. One day at Ruidoso? LMAO

Someone owes me $100.

[CA Michael]

sam, none of your questions is meaningful to the topic, or to much of anything. Pondering imponderables is usually a worthless exercise. In any event, it's likely any answers to them would only stimulate you into a higher interrogative RPM.

The topic is about Artificial Insemination. You opined that QH's are less inbred than TB's. I differed, based on the thousands of QH pedigrees, and tens of thousand of TB pedigrees, I have studied over 45 years. You attempt to disprove my observations by listing the inbreeding of horses entered this Friday at Ruidoso (I'm still not sure what that was supposed to prove, since you didn't compare it to anything). I say, 'so what?"

If you choose to actually do something of substance (not a word often used at Werk's, I grant you), do so over a sampling of thousands of QH's and TB's, not a few dozen. Then your conclusions might have meaning. Otherwise, they are worth about the same as a A+++ Werk Nicking.

Zero.

[Sam]

Someone else owes me $100. Thanks, Michael.

How many more times are you going to chose to personally attack me rather than answer a few, simple questions?

5th time...

I'm asking you, as a stallion owner, as a mare owner:

Do you believe Al's Wizard is a stallion worth standing?

How about King Excess?

Kris Kross?

Fun Devil?

Would you personally own a stallion like those listed and stand him at stud?

Would you ever breed to any of the stallions listed or stallions like them?

If you wouldn't breed a mare like the cited stallions, why would you breed a stallion like them (if you would)?

If you do not believe the above stallions should be at stud, or stallions like them, why do you support their presence in the stallions ranks?

What's the matter, Michael. I'm merely asking for your opinion, something you are not normally so reticent about.

In case you haven't figured it out, I shall continue to post these questions until you answer them. They ARE relevant to the AI question because you postulated that AI would drive these kinds of stallions out of the ranks. I'm asking you for your personal opinion on these stallions and stallions like them and why you feel they should be in the stallion ranks.

Prove me wrong, Michael. Show me and everyone else you can answer a simple, straight forward question instead of attacking the person behind the question.

[CA Michael]

Personal attacks? I don't think so. Mocking your methodology? You bet.

Your questions aren't serious.

I'm taking you up on your offer "to provide as much data as you request to prove my stance." I gave you the parameters. Just do it, as they say.

[Sam]

Your questions aren't serious.

I'm perfectly serious. I'm also trying to get you back on the topic YOU started -- that of AI -- by asking for your opinion on a handful of stallions based on your assertion that AI would drive those kinds of stallions out of the breeding ranks.

You're normally very eager to state your opinion on any given topic, why won't you do so now?

6th time:

As a stallion owner, as a mare owner:

Do you believe Al's Wizard is a stallion worth standing?

How about King Excess?

Kris Kross?

Fun Devil?

Would you personally own a stallion like those listed and stand him at stud?

Would you ever breed to any of the stallions listed or stallions like them?

If you wouldn't breed a mare like the cited stallions, why would you breed a stallion like them (if you would)?

If you do not believe the above stallions should be at stud, or stallions like them, why do you support their presence in the stallions ranks?

[Roguelet]

Now that I'm over my couple of days from hell, I'd like to weigh in on the original question. I can only speak for my own personal breeding experience and my own personal opinions, but I do not see the harm in allowing AI. I am a big supporter of Statebred Programs, but I do not think (at least in my neck of the woods) that allowing AI would have any effect on the program.

If the program is written that, for example, a mare has to be in the state by December 1st of the year prior to foaling and remain there until foaling in order for that foal to be a statebred, IMO it makes no difference how that sperm was inserted into that mare the previous Spring. If the rules are written that, if the mare comes into the state AFTER that date, the foal is only eligible to be a statebred if the mare is bred back to an in State stallion.... again, I don't see how it matters if that in State stallion's sperm is inserted through a straw or naturally. And, if a State's law is written that to be a statesired horse, the foal has to be sired by an in State stallion... again, straw or natural, whatever works for that mare and stallion owner.

Where it would be beneficial to mare owners, I think, is if there is a stallion far away that you really want to breed to. Let's assume that you live in Maine and you really want to breed to a stallion who is standing in Iowa, for example. Let's say you just really like that particular stallion and feel that he is an excellent match for your mare. Are you going to ship your mare, possibly with a foal by her side, to Iowa? Maybe, but most likely not. If you could ship that semen, you would be able to breed to that stallion that you really want to, instead of settling for whatever has similar bloodlines closer to you.

Will it affect book size? Maybe a little, but honestly I don't think so. The books that would be a concern, IMO, are those that are already huge, and those are usually for stallions who command a pretty high stud fee. I love A.P. Indy. However, if I could breed to him using AI, it is not going to make his stud fee any more affordable for me, so it still isn't going to happen. Those who have the money to pay the big guns will do so whether there's AI or not, IMO.

And speaking of cost, I don't really think that people are going to suddenly be able to afford a $10,000 stud fee by AI when before they could only afford a $2000 stud fee. There SHOULD be an AI surcharge added to the stud fee, because collecting, testing, extending, shipping, etc. takes time, work, and expensive equipment. You may not be paying mare care at the stud farm, but you will be paying associated fees to everyone on the shipping end, as well as to the vets on the receiving end who have to spend a lot more time (which equals money) working on your mare to ensure that she becomes pregnant. And, if she doesn't take on the first cycle, you get to pay it all again.

As some have mentioned, making it recognized by the JC would not make it mandatory or even reasonable for everyone to use. There are many TBs now that offer AI to non-JC mares; those would continue to offer it. Some who don't currently offer it now would begin to, and others would say, "screw it, it's too much hassle." We have had our stallion collected, extended, tested, all that stuff, because there was a lady in VA who wanted to use him to breed to her Cleveland Bay mare. It so happens that our stallion extends and ships VERY well, so that is an option for us. We are lucky. Many stallions DON'T do well with the process... and in that case it makes no difference if the stud farm wants to use AI or not; if the swimmers can't handle it, you won't be using that method.

I, personally, much prefer live cover. We don't have an on-staff vet or a driver standing by at the drop of a hat to haul in to a vet. I don't want to have to ultrasound mares constantly to figure out when they will likely ovulate, when I should collect the stallion, when I should ship, and hope that the stars all align perfectly timing-wise. I don't want to spend hours each day loading and unloading horses, hauling them around, dealing with the vet, etc. I prefer to let the stallion tell me when the mare is ready, let him do his thing, and then be done with it. If I had a stallion who was not an easy breeder, or one with hind leg issues, I might feel differently, but my guy is very good at what he does and gets the job done very efficently without all the extra fluff.

But, I would certainly offer it to JC mares if it became an option. I would hope that most mares, especially local mares, would continue to come to him personally, but I would welcome the occasional chance to offer his genes to someone several states away who otherwise might not consider him.

Case in point: There are currently two mares standing in our field that are from the east coast. Their owner has wanted to breed them to Indy Mood for several years, but the distance has always been a stopper. This year, it just so happened that these mares did not have foals by their sides, and the owner decided to bite the bullet and haul them out here to be bred. They will be hauled back to the east coast to foal. If AI was legal for JC mares, would this owner have already bred to our stallion? While I will not speak for this owner, I would venture to guess that he likely would have. He may have even done so a couple of times by now.

[zinn21]

I'll answer the King Excess question based on personal knowledge. I like him and will probably breed to him in 2008. That's Casey Doyle's stud and his babies are gorgeous. You will see a very fast one on the scene in the next several months.

An FYI this horse was graded stakes placed running on knee chips. He was very tough.

[Sam]

An FYI this horse was graded stakes placed running on knee chips. He was very tough.

No, he's not. Neither the Sam Whiting nor the Sunny Slope are graded stakes. He may have run in graded company but he never placed in graded company.

[zinn21]

Sam, you are right. I must have flip flopped the Sunnyslope 3rd with the Hollywood Prevue (G3) 4th.

With that correction stated, he was still a tough guy running with alot of nice horses at less than 100%.

[Sam]

Sam, you are right. I must have flip flopped the Sunnyslope 3rd with the Hollywood Prevue (G3) 4th.

With that correction stated, he was still a tough guy running with alot of nice horses at less than 100%.

Same could be said for Snow Blink... I still don't think either stallion should be stallions. At least not for racehorses. There are so many wellbred stallions who showed more ability at higher levels that flotsam like this just muddies the waters.

I was going through the current list of CA stallions for a friend last night with an eye toward a mare she's looking to pick up... 348 stallions and I barely found 10 that MIGHT match up well. That's depressing.

[griff]

I ws hoping Rogulet's post would get this back on track.

griff