"Do We Need a Sturdier Racehorse?"

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

If you pull up the TDN Magazine and look at the graphs, the stallions that one would consider the "best" are nowhere to be found on the list of stallions with progeny with the greatest amount of starts. So does the theory of allowing "flawed" horses in the gene pool really hold up? How does one define "flawed?"

One of the problems with stats is that the vast amount of context that must be considered is often not.

The current roster of stallions is not really relevant in discussing the rapid and large expansion of foal crops in the 70's. However to try to answer your question we have to point out several factors that make the raw numbers less than telling.

1. Fillies by expensive (best) stallions are almost never found running in the groups that likely produce the most starts, bottom level claimers. Because virtually every mare bred to a top stallion has residual value as a mare, they wont ever have a large number of starts as compared to lesser options. If you have a filly by AP Indy who has proven not to be stakes quality why would you continue to run her? If you have a filly by a $5000 stallion, high on the list, you dont have many other options and wont breed her until she can't earn on the track anymore. That doesnt prove that horse A is less hardy or durable than horse B despite horse b having many more starts.

2. Horses by those same stallions will generally have fewer options/fewer tracks to run at. A horse who is a 10 claimer can find that race at everytrack in the country. A horse who is a nw3 allowance horse will have far fewer opportunities, especially if they run long on the dirt.

3. By far the "flaw" mostly comes in the mare since they make up a huge percentage of breeding stock versus stallions. Mares that are really crooked. Mares that bleed. Mares that produce weak foals. Mares with poor breathing apparatus. Mares that dont have good pedigrees. Mares that are proven poor producers. Mares light on pedigree with poor race records. Mares with poor feet. Mares that are unusally small. Mares that are unusally large. Mares with mental issues. These are all examples of flaws. Obviously there are varying degrees for each issue.

Of course a mare with flaws can produce good horse. But the vast majority don't. But they do continue to pass on their physical and/or mental issues which isn't a good thing. The great breeders of yesteryear who's exploits have lived on were all adamant about culling their herds agressively. That just stopped happening in the 70's as the numbers exploded.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

3. By far the "flaw" mostly comes in the mare since they make up a huge percentage of breeding stock versus stallions. Mares that are really crooked. Mares that bleed. Mares that produce weak foals. Mares with poor breathing apparatus. Mares that dont have good pedigrees. Mares that are proven poor producers. Mares light on pedigree with poor race records. Mares with poor feet. Mares that are unusally small. Mares that are unusally large. Mares with mental issues. These are all examples of flaws. Obviously there are varying degrees for each issue.

Of course a mare with flaws can produce good horse. But the vast majority don't. But they do continue to pass on their physical and/or mental issues which isn't a good thing. The great breeders of yesteryear who's exploits have lived on were all adamant about culling their herds agressively. That just stopped happening in the 70's as the numbers exploded.

Yet everyone panics that the amount of mares bred in the last few years has gone down. (Understanding of course, that they are more considred with getting stud fees paid than the long term picture)

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

Yet everyone panics that the amount of mares bred in the last few years has gone down. (Understanding of course, that they are more considred with getting stud fees paid than the long term picture)

I think the panic is mostly from breeders, stud farms and sales companies. Overall the reduction in the number of mares bred should be a positive for the breed as a whole. Of course since we have new dynamics like surgeries on foals, stronger regional markets, huge books for stallions, etc the effect may be hard to see for awhile.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The great breeders of yesteryear who's exploits have lived on were all adamant about culling their herds agressively. That just stopped happening in the 70's as the numbers exploded.

Absolutely true, and something nobody talks about.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The great breeders of yesteryear who's exploits have lived on were all adamant about culling their herds agressively.

Like the Phippses did with Supercharger.

[Riot]

Everybody forgets that when the TB business "exploded", so did Arabians, so did sport horses, etc. Geesh, even alpacas and ostriches went for $20K a breeding pair. When there are lines of people who don't know a horse from a cow standing there saying "take my money, I want in and I want to win", the pyramid schemes go crazy. And they did through the 1980's.