BEF Futurity

I have a pony yearling i was looking to take . Her sire is part-bred Arab,the covering certificate came from the Arab Horse Society ( PBAR ) and she is not eligable to enter, I have asked.
But there are other ways I can have her evaluated/graded in the future though obviously no through the futurity.
 
elijahasgal said:
My thoughts on the futurity are this :
Hold more days, lesser rates, every horse welcome. The days used to teach people what they are looking for in detail, with the mares confirmation and suitability publically discussed.
This should lead to stallions having in their adverts what the average score of their progney is (how many entered) This should be pushed to the degree that we start to ask why progney are not entered, why the info is not in the ads.
The down side of this from them, is that if the stallion is consistently producing horses lower that first premium, graded or not, the pressure should then be on to be removed from the breeding pool.
This would then put the Onus on the stallion owners to assess the mare that is being put to their stallion, and advise (and refuse) accordingly. Overall this would increase the general knowledge of strengths and weaknesses, and confirmation. Because it will be in the owners best interest for the good and decent mares only that will compliment their boy to be used.
The best should then go forward to a final, which is where they can showcase the best of british. Everyone happy

I have looked at several graded stallions to use on my one or two girls. Some I look at and wonder how the hell they have passed. Wonky legs, sweet horses that look like little ponies, with no movement and foot problems. World breeding champion with metabolic illness. Inheratable joint problems, lamenesses. Some of the best and popular names. If we go on it is graded and lisenced alone, we fall into the danger ground of it is graded it must be ok, without looking at combination of mare to stallion. And without improvement in that knowledge generally, how are we going to improve?

I ask the advice on my mares of the stallion owners, and usually follow it. If I phone up a big name, and get, essentially, just follow the trend, use this horse, I tend not to listen, as they have not assessed my mare when looking, on either bloodlines or for strnegths and weaknesses.

When we start looking and learning we will as a nation start to improve
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more! ^^^^


Ciss said:
Their motives for doing this, especially when they imply -- contrary to about 50 years mainland European experience of the proven positive effect grading and performance testing of stallions across all typoes of studbook (not just those of warmbloods and certainly including all nativeand sports pony breeds) -- that the new rules are detrimental to the improvemnt of British Breeding defeat me.
Click to expand...

Taking the European experience as an example to emulate is a huge mistake in my opinion - actually, it should be learned from so that we don't make the same mistakes.

As with the racing breeding, the idea to breed from the best to produce the best sounds good in theory. In practice, it reduces the genepool massively (have a look at any dressage-bred "best of European bloodlines" horse for sale on the various websites, you will find the same 3 stallions in their 5 generation perdigree), and it allows issues like OCD (to name the current boogyman, it was navicular disease in SF in the 80s!) to become endemic in breeding stock, to the point when big European breeders tend to scan all their stock at 2, de-chip, then sell cheaply to the UK!!!! (that's why you can buy 4 year olds under saddle and jumping 1.40 loose, imported from Holland for less than I am willing to let my 2 year old go - and that's with import costs AND the dealer's cut!!!). That also says something about the worth of even the alledgedly very "stringent" European grading processes :rolleyes:

If we had been so restrictive in the past, Clover Hill and many others would have been gelded and we would have missed out on their amazing genetic input.

In my view, showing has deviated so much from its original brief of identifying useful animals worth breeding from, and become much more of a who's who beauty pageant (much like the dog show world, form over function), that the Futurity has to take up that responsibility.

And that means looking at EVERY animal presented, on its own merit, regardless of breeding. Because, at the end of the day, a good horse is a good horse is a good horse, and I hope the evaluators would be able to see that.

We might then just allow ourselves access to genepools from sources we hadn't thought of and that would make British breeding richer and more successful, produce more high performance horses, so that all top British riders represent the country with British bred horses, which is what we all want, isn't it?


Ciss said:
I don't think so <sigh|>.
Click to expand...

And it would be so nice to be able to express an opinion which you disagree with without being patronised... :rolleyes: <sigh>
 
Everything Ginnie said! I was sent abroad to learn from the European system and what I learned was that any mare will grade if she is produced right and not ridden so lets have no more lectures about not breeding from mares that become unsound through injury because in two years I saw no horses that remained sound consistently and many that had tendon injuries before their fifth birthday and then after rest competing and helping boost their sires rankings in amongst time off for being lame. Very few mares are tested on anything other than what they produce so no beggar can say they would stay sound as with issues like OCD they probably didn't stay sound.
Also the European model works primarily because they produce so much they can afford to chuck the rubbish away. At one point it was estimated that 80% of Germany's sports horses were in the abattoir by the age of ten. Oh yes that is the model I want to follow, quick let me churn out as many beautiful, big eyed baby horses as possible so that we can wreck their minds, bodies and shoot them young.
My stallion has so far sent one 3 year old through Ciss, last year, he achieved a good first premium after a nightmare 4 hour journey in a hired box that wasn't what we ordered, came straight out, bruised and covered in crap, no time to eat or drink or see where he was, through the vet and in as last pony. We didn't jump due to journey so he went in as a dressage pony, now to be fair he could be either but he can really jump so there is the chance he would have scored more all things considered. As far as we were concerned he hardly moved he was so shattered and bashed but got very good marks and comments for his paces and activity so again on a good day fair to say he had a chance to be scored higher. However as it stood he did well. His full sister is not eligible this year so you might have to check your data on the other stallions too as in the case of Sports Ponies it is not quite correct. Also older stallions may now be eligible but several were helped to Grade by the results of the progeny they put through the Futurity were they not? Under todays rules they would not be sending forward.
 
I have stayed out of this till now as have been preoccupied with a poorly foal and so on however, having had a posting by a specific stallion owner/agent forwarded to me this afternoon which is discussing the new Futurity rulings posted in the magazine and online I would just like to state that whatever assumptions are currently being spouted on there about myself are beyond incorrect, however as my name is constantly being used I would just like to state that any opinions I have expressed about futurity eligibility are purely my own...and actually have no impact whatsoever on my own breeding stock as all bar one of my youngsters are eligible for it!

The 'fact' stated that says: '"eventrider23" is against the rule, is purely because she is now in cahoots with someone who owns an ungraded stallion, and has used (because it was free) that stallion on her mare. Thus she is now throwing her toys out of her pram and ranting all over the internet about the rule change...............I wonder why? ' is again wrong and it would be good if this man got his facts right as to the best of my knowledge I have NO mares in foal at the moment...and no intention of putting any in foal this year. What stallion I use next year is as it should be...my choice...and the fact of futurity eligibility does not come into it whatsoever but instead the fact of whether the stallion is what I want to use....and so if I choose a graded or ungraded stallion then surely that is again my choice.

My opinions on the futurity which I posted previously on here in a different thread would not be different regardless of the stallion I use or have used as honestly am not fussed about presenting and am quite happy with my youngsters out being youngsters....so whilst clearly he sees me as having a personal agenda for my feelings on the futurity it would be nice if someday he would realise that not everyone has to have a personal agenda to have a strong opinion on something....sometimes and in general MOST times people actually have their own feelings on things without bowing to others first.

The fact that this person is ranting on his FB using my name constantly in reference to opinions on the futurity is laughable as it makes out that I am the only person to have any opinion against or about the rules which is completely laughable. I know of many people to have opinion from all fronts on the rulings so why the heck the man should see me as the only one against it is just preposterous and some of his perpetual statements are not only incorrect but verging on slanderous.
 
Usually someone who has something to hide, that is known will go on the attack to discredit the person who knows what they wish to remain hidden, in an attempt to cow kick them into silence. Them that shout loudest often have the most they want to hide. Me I dont give a damn, I am no name, nobody of importance in the general scheme of things, nor do I plan to be

In reference to what I am saying re stallion owners assessing mares, If the rankings gain importance, and youngstock assessment included in adverts, then the onus is on the stallion owner to assess the mares, to RAISE the level of the stallions youngstock ranking. This would then discourage the use of mares that are unsuitable, as it would have a direct impact on their buisness.

I also want to know what they deem to be a leisure horse. Would like to know if something enters the leisure horse section that is clearly of (in current standings) first, higher first or elite status how this will be marked. Indeed is not gaining a second premium already the equivalant of their current leisure horse? That being the change, why change what is already in place?

As for me, I am learning all the time. I would rather choose a stallion with respectable confirmation, that has acheived higher level competition soundly,and graded on that, than one that is world breeding champion that has metabolic problems and is chronically lame. I would rather choose a stallion that has not been graded due to a field accident but with fantastic confirmation and bloodlines, and temprement, than one that is graded with joint problems, or inheritable unsoundness.

And yes I have a brilliant mare, that I have plenty of stallion owners hoping that I would use......but I will use the people that have the right stallion, not the right "name" I will use the people that look after me, and are willing to show me stuff that I am missing, and am willing to accept their guidance that one stallion is more suitable than another, NOT just the ones who want to take my money, with no knowledgable discussion on confirmation points that their boy is passing on, weaknesses that may not compliment, suitablity. In this way, coupled with my own instinct, I have bred (in 10 foals) an elite, a higher first, another brought as a stallion prospect, one (out of an unpapered rescue mare) that has been told that should be able to go grand prix dressage, two crackers that lamed themselves irrapairably in field accidents, one that has been told he should be showing county level, one that has just started eventing, and a very talented but total nutcase (I refused to breed from that mare again) And I have still got 2 or the mares that I bred! I have done ok, and have learnt a Lot, but need to learn more, which as a private breeder on a shoestring budget, according to a lot of people I shouldnt do it, I cant afford to. thanks guys x
 
CISS my ungraded chap is 12th overall on the stallion list with 4 progeny assessed - you must have overlooked him when scanning the results to back up your opinion, and thats 4 individual offspring, not the same one being seen 4 years. The mares are also all different and all ungraded - 1 is a grade A, the 2nd is a mare as yet without a competition record, the 3rd is a mare which was injured early in its ridden career and the 4th a failed event mare, although full sister to an international event horse.

Because of the new rule changes, from this year, his progeny are not allowed to come forward.

On the yard this year, I have another young ISH colt who has covered a couple of performance mares. Next year his first foals will not be allowed as things stand. I however feel it is important to assess early on if a colt can produce note worthy progeny as if not, they can be gelded whilst still young.

Ironically my graded stallion who has always been used a lot for "the leisure breeder" on family mares, can have all his progeny come forward, where as the young colt cannot have his progeny come forward out of graded and top performance mares!

When in ireland last year at the 10 international sale, our event riders and showing producers were there buying 3yo's many of which were the topped price lots. Some had excellent breeding on paper others had no breeding. Each animal was assessed as an individual by the buyers, as to its suitability for the required job! Our top riders have yet to look to the futurities as a market place - I think we have to ask the question "why". One thing I am sure of is the need for a wide gene pool and clarity within grading societies.
 
What sensible words from elija, ginnie, cherry and Angela.
The futurity was a wonderful way to confirm your breeding decisions were on track. The show ring was no longer a reliable indication of anything and the early assessing of future
performance horses was very useful. Now sadly it will become useless. If it is not about evaluating the animal in front of you regardless of it's parentage what is the point. I can put a graded stallion to a graded mare and still get a healthy but useless performance foal. Nothing in breeding is guaranteed. I am a cynical old bat on occasion but I suspect this ruling is for reasons other than improving British breeding. Sadly we now seem to have lost an impartial platform to evaluate our breeding decisions. They are however our decisions, and I for one will not base those decisions on whether or not I can present my youngstock at BEF.
Unfortunately many will, a sad day for British breeding.
 
Angela_Wise said:
CISS my ungraded chap is 12th overall on the stallion list with 4 progeny assessed - you must have overlooked him when scanning the results to back up your opinion, and thats 4 individual offspring, not the same one being seen 4 years. The mares are also all different and all ungraded - 1 is a grade A, the 2nd is a mare as yet without a competition record, the 3rd is a mare which was injured early in its ridden career and the 4th a failed event mare, although full sister to an international event horse..Because of the new rule changes, from this year, his progeny are not allowed to come forward.
Click to expand...

Does not the following extension apply to him? I must admit I thought it did whch is why I did not include him as a 'now excluded' stallion:

• Weatherbys General Stud Book thoroughbreds which have a Futurity progeny record of at least 1** progeny which has attained a Futurity premium of higher first or above and 2** further progeny which have attained a Futurity first premium or above.

The following extension also allows for proven Eventing sires with no racing record, which many people seem to have overlooked.

• Weatherbys General Studbook thoroughbreds who may not have raced or competed themselves but who have a British Eventing progeny performance record of at least two horses competing successfully (i.e. gaining BE points at) at Advanced level.

As I have said many times, look at the rules very carefully and do not asume the worst. And even if the worst does apply now, progeny of currently ungraded / ineligible stallions are allowed to enter in 2012, provided that those stallions achieve successful approval by 31 May 2013. For those with what they consider 'late maturing' stallions who wish to prove their talents as a sire (either in the Futuirty or in ridden competition) before having them assessed / licenced by a studbook) then surely this is an incentive to work towards this in a more planned way.

One thing I am sure of is the need for a wide gene pool and clarity within grading societies.
Click to expand...

Couldn;t agree with you more there Angela. I did try to show some light on this in a generic way with a table I developed for The British Breeder a coupleof issues back showing the 10 levels of breeding approval currently in place in the UK but even that was a pretty major task <sigh>
 
I couldn't agree more with Ribbons.

On a slightly more personal note, I'm sorry to say that I agree, every time I see Ciss with her <sigh> I want to ring her neck as it seems so very pompous and condescending and totally unnecessary.
 
oh come on guys lets not do the personal thing! This has been a really interesting thread and valid from whichever stand point you have.
Its always difficult to get things across in the typed word as opposed to the spoken and although you may not like or agree with whats said or how it delivered there is no question that Ciss has a huge knowledge , probably forgotten more that most of us will ever know especially when it comes to the ins and out s of stud books and breeding.
I for one think the Futurity is an interesting tool, comments are taken into account and there is nothing else like it on the continent.
 
Nobody disputes Ciss's knowledge at all.

I agree, this has been an interesting thread.

When the Futurity was first announced and started I was actually quite excited about it, seeing it as a way forward, but the more it's gone on the more disillusioned I've become and the new rules do nothing to stop that. It should be open to all, it's been such an encouragement to many as it's been, why spoil a good thing.
 
Last edited:
Partoow said:
oh come on guys lets not do the personal thing! This has been a really interesting thread and valid from whichever stand point you have.
Its always difficult to get things across in the typed word as opposed to the spoken and although you may not like or agree with whats said or how it delivered there is no question that Ciss has a huge knowledge , probably forgotten more that most of us will ever know especially when it comes to the ins and out s of stud books and breeding.
I for one think the Futurity is an interesting tool, comments are taken into account and there is nothing else like it on the continent.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that Partoow, as you know from personal experience both as an evaluator and as someone with years of experience in preparing young stallions and riding horses for the European gradings and classes my sighs are actually just an expression of sheer frustration at the inability of a small (but very voluble) group of breeders in this country to realise that the amount of time they spend thinking of reasons why they should not grasp the nettle of progress could actually be spent far more productively in helping move the whole of British breeding move on. In the wider picture it is also the reason why other countries, in which breeders have a far more realistic (less me-centred and excuse ridden)attitude to national and studbook breeding policies continue to move on far more quickly in comparison.

Sadly an almost empty can with only a few pebbles in it makes more noise than a full one and this certainly what statistics show as far as the what I call the 'the Futurity has shot itself in the foot with this one' groups views are concerned.No, the Futurity certainly has not shot itself in the foot with this one, and the entries this year are as high (probably actually faster) than in previous years despite (though perhaps some might say becuase of) the new stallion rules.

In fact the policy change has been well adertised for the past four years in the Fact sheets and as everyone entering the Futurity is legally required to sign a form saying that they have read and understood these Facts sheets as part of the entering process, those posting who feign ignorance of the changes have either (if they have entered in the past few years) signed a legal document without reading it or are criticising a series that they have never entered or never intend to enter.

Neither of these would be a recommendation of good judgement to me -- and certainly not the real way forward for British breeding -- but perhaps others have different criteria.
 
Ciss said:
an expression of sheer frustration at the inability of a small (but very voluble) group of breeders in this country to realise that the amount of time they spend thinking of reasons why they should not grasp the nettle of progress could actually be spent far more productively in helping move the whole of British breeding move on.
Click to expand...

Ciss said:
Sadly an almost empty can with only a few pebbles in it makes more noise than a full one and this certainly what statistics show as far as the what I call the 'the Futurity has shot itself in the foot with this one' groups views are concerned.
Click to expand...

It is exactly this sort of condescending comment that gets people's back up.

I happen to have a different opinion, which just as your opinion, is a valid and informed one - though I will accept a less experienced one. EVERYONE is entitled to have an opinion about how the future of British breeding is best served, but some have more power to influence the decisions made than other.

Implying that people who have a different opinion are nothing more than idiots with no brains, who are frankly no more than a mild irritation to the quasi-monarchy of the handful of power-wielding people around the BEF, is not only incredibly patronising and offensive, it's actually plain wrong.

Your opinion is only one of many, after all.


Ciss said:
In the wider picture it is also the reason why other countries, in which breeders have a far more realistic (less me-centred and excuse ridden)attitude to national and studbook breeding policies continue to move on far more quickly in comparison.
Click to expand...

If you care to read my previous post and a couple of others' adding quite rightly to the point I made about the issues surounding the Continental breeding programmes (particularly the Dutch and German ones), about genepool depletion and endemic inheritable traits, as well as the number's game played by the big players, you will see what specific problems some of us have with following the same route - the numbers' game would be even worse in this country where there is no horse meat industry to act as an outlet and people are reluctant to pts when something isn't good enough.

I note that you have not in fact responded to those concerns, preferring instead to just tar everyone with the same brush and post in a schoolmamish sort of way - "I know better, don't worry your pretty little heads with details and don't listen to those who do, they are idiotic troublemakers".

I would very much like to hear your view on the specific points I and others have made about the Continental system... Now, that would be constructive.

Please note I have no personal agenda. I don't own a stallion and have no intention to. I don't even have a broodmare at the moment. I have a youngster by a graded stallion, who will be going to the Futurity this year and next if I still own him, as I think the Futurity is a great scheme... shame it will now not be open to ALL British potential future stars, regardless of where their talent has come from!
 
Last edited:
Why is it that none of us seem able to hear each other? No one has said they are against grading as a useful tool, I have issues about how we can all pretend not to see how often licenses and gradings miss certain extremely important things and how this gets swept under the carpet and how the bloody hell these things get past the paid official in the first place <sigh and stamp and rattle my tin of stones>( incidentally if you really want to make a noise then a metal dog bowl against the wall of the house is much more effective and only takes one person to do that ; )) and how that makes a mockery of the whole theory that they are being used to improve breeding. The whole tangle of loose ends that gets brought along with the mish mash effect is something that would be better kept away from for the futurity. And I have known that the rules were going to change and in fact didn't enter in 2010 (not a clue how I'd have managed but would have got there hook or crook) because I thought they already had and had remembered the year wrong from previous reading. My fail clearly of course but to say we hadn't read the rules and judging because of this is wrong. Some of us loose pebbles have been writing letters and expressing opinions for some time and are shouting now because of the total lack of response we got. I do think that there must limiting on the amount of rubbish a stallion can send through if an owner is clearly not making any effort to improve stock but cannot see why the Futurity cannot include a Stallion approval system of its own, I'd be more than happy to pay a fee direct to British Breeding or into the Futurity pot to let my stock in and have their results recorded for the purpose of gaining this approval and would also happily submit my vetting reports direct to prove I am not breeding heritable defects (unless you count a universal loathing of Intelligent Horsemanship as a defect) or other terrible things.
I am slightly against the new ruling that allows certain stallions in if they have a certain amount of higher first or elite results and then first premiums thereafter, why do they have to do better than Graded or licensed Stallions? Some of the top scoring stallions also presented 2nd premium stock for sure, I haven't really looked through the results or the numbers on that one though.
I think we all understand that lines must be drawn somewhere but surely if we were trying to improve breeding standards we should be looking still at education and inclusion not shutting out the.. oh round, spherical male appendages to this we could speak our version of sense til the cows come home and have opinions that could at least be aknowledged but while we are considered a tin of pebbles who's main points are not actually being heard we might just as well accept that we have a tory government that would like to keep all the commoners in compounds and we have a Futurity set to do the same.
I am tired I have a head ache, in essence I support the Futurity and understand how hard you work for breeders and breeding Ciss so am not deliberately being personal but how the powers that be are hearing that only breeders who wish to drag breeding backwards and refuse to change are against this rule change is beyond me. That sounds like selective listening to me as I have heard several owners of popular graded stallions also state this is a retrograde step and with people who do not seem to hear what is being said on grading and evaluation panels is it any wonder that people become afraid to take horses for grading especially after expressing opinions that are not liked on this or any other related subject.
 
Ginny Redwings wrote:

.........................................................................................

If you care to read my previous post and a couple of others' adding quite rightly to the point I made about the issues surounding the Continental breeding programmes (particularly the Dutch and German ones), about genepool depletion and endemic inheritable traits, as well as the number's game played by the big players, you will see what specific problems some of us have with following the same route - the numbers' game would be even worse in this country where there is no horse meat industry to act as an outlet and people are reluctant to pts when something isn't good enough.

I note that you have not in fact responded to those concerns [personal abuse deleted],
I would very much like to hear your view on the specific points I and others have made about the Continental system... Now, that would be constructive.
............................................................................................

I have never said that those issues do not exist -- with a considerably larger breeding population (especially in the sports horse / pony field) than we have they are bound to occur -- and in larger numbers too of course. What I would say is that the very reason you know about them is becuase of the transparent and exhaustive monitoring of stallions and their progeny that goes on in studbooks abroad, the results of which are freely available to breeders, vendors and purchases in publicly accessible databases. This data is constantly used by the studbooks and breeders to address the issues that arise by either removing stallions from the approved breeding lists, recommending or disencouraging certain matings or close breedings, and by advancing certain bloodlines and removing others.

Unfortunately, except in those cases where mother studbooks abroad insist on transparency of the results of certain verterinary inspections (eg X-ray results of mares, not just stallions, in BHHS and KWPN in the UK inspections) nothing like that exists in the UK and the only thing breeders have to go on is the results of the inspections and licences of the studbooks, however incomplete or variable they may seem to be. There is NO requirement for any owner of any stallion that is NOT approved by a studbook to be in any way forthcoming on the stallions faults (if any) and in the case of such stallions there is no independent stalllion inspection authority / recording organisation to which a mare owner can refer for verifiable data on the stallion concerned. As many of the ungraded stallions at stud in this country are almost certainly not presented at any form of inspection (even the most basic one for freedom from hereditary disease) becuase their owners know they will fail for whatever reason, it defeats me as to why any system designed to postively reinforce and improve the quality of British-bred sports horses and ponies should promote them.

Sadly the many attacks on NED which has led to its demise (and a replacement that will almost certainly be one dediated only to recording identity and UELNS and without any facility for recording any breeding or related data) removed any possibility of any sort of UK database that could co-ordinate such information, which would again have been a positive help for British breeding. It wouldlalso hopefully have highlighted that many UK stallions and their progeny have just the same issues and would have helped the studbooks address them, but that was not to be -- and even if it had happened, the ungraded stallions would still have been free to spread their unexamined, unmonitored genes free of any control or verifications. Not a good scenario I think most of us would agree, but at least now mare owners wishing to breed progeny that they want to enter for the Futurity will not have to risk that.
 
Cherrygarden said:
cannot see why the Futurity cannot include a Stallion approval system of its own, I'd be more than happy to pay a fee direct to British Breeding or into the Futurity pot to let my stock in and have their results recorded for the purpose of gaining this approval and would also happily submit my vetting reports direct to prove I am not breeding heritable defects (unless you count a universal loathing of Intelligent Horsemanship as a defect) or other terrible things.
Click to expand...


Just to clarify, the Futurity cannot do this as it is not a stud book or breed society, cannot be under current EU Zootechnics regulations and was set up specifically to work with the studbooks / breed societies /inspecting organisations rather than against them, which is what setting up a Futurity grading for otherwise ineligible stallions would do, especially bearing in mind that quite a number of them will already have failed approval with their relevant birth or WBFSH member studbooks.
 
Just to clarify, the Futurity cannot do this as it is not a stud book or breed society, cannot be under current EU Zootechnics regulations and was set up specifically to work with the studbooks / breed societies /inspecting organisations rather than against them, which is what setting up a Futurity grading for otherwise ineligible stallions would do, especially bearing in mind that quite a number of them will already have failed approval with their relevant birth or WBFSH member studbooks.
Does not need to be a breed society as far as I can work out from reading through DEFRA's treacle trap legislations. As long as there is no wish to issue paperwork or passports I can't see the problems with a star system especially if you can give stars to Graded stallions too to make it fair.
Some stallions have not already failed approvals and gradings from their own studbooks though and some have gone to the expense of getting vetted for licenses but because they are VII instead of nutty Welsh show monsters they can't now use those. I haven't gone to the expense of buying a license for either of mine even though that might be the easy route, I still hold that Grading is best and if there is a way and I think I am mentally up to being a breeder then I will still be working towards that but even were I to go the license route I'd have one on a partbred license eligible to send stock forward and then his dad very likely on a VII license due to un verified parentage(could change if they turn up alive and to be his parents but unlikely) who is not eligible to send stock forwards but with a very similar license it just happens in my opinion to have a stronger vetting applied. Surely it would be better for BEF to state the conditions under which stallions could send stock forward at least in terms of the vetting to give some clear guidelines on soundness to people choosing stallions if nothing else.
 
I think it should be made clear that major studbooks like Hanover are continually upgrading their evaluation of stallions. The current rules require leg xrays inc the stifle up to grade 2 and specify that testicles shall be of an equal and generous size(scanned). New stallion performance requirements take into account the estimated breeding value of the mare performance test and the examination of mares for the select auctions. Studbooks are concerned to use the new dna research on the transmitted heritable susceptibility to disease which has identified 142 complaints from sweetich to sarcoids. Things move on in a competitive market.
 
Exactly so, things move on VERY fast and people do need to take this on board. Most EU countries adopted publicly accessible results for all aspects of legally compulsory stallion grading for ALL breeds (not just sports horses and ponies) at least 40 years ago, so given how fast they have moved on
 
we could well be more like 60 years behind (Farouche, basically a product of the German system of course excepted). When I listen to the level of debate and expertise in the WBFSH General Assemblies and watch the superb démonstrations by its member studbooks I am always amazed, and not a little humbled by just how far we have to go to catch up, which again is why I feel so frustrated at times by the little progress wé have made in even getting the basic building block of stallion grading universally accepted as the power for good it is seen to be by our neigbours and competitors.
 
It is a shame that it is becoming so elite and closed off just like studbooks?I think it wont make much difference as people will still use what they want? I have never taken anything to the bef nor will i ever, i have not sold a single foal that anyone was interested in the bef results, i do however have two mares who recieved a diploma mare award for there first premium stock, one by a graded stallion and one not graded. Even the Kwpn register foals with b passports from ungraded stallions so it still goes on abroad using ingraded stock.
 
These debates never really go anywhere but over the same old arguments. And the insults against others for not sharing the same views, same old, same old. Like being stuck on a merry-go-round.
 
Well for me it's not the same old argument. I can sort of see why some of you think that this will exclude some of your young stock but also think it's a pretty wide remit and if you're breeding outside that then I sort of wonder what were the reasons?
It would be nice to believe that poor results would mean a stallion would not remain so but I feel that that does not happen.
I don't think that all mares need to be graded but with my own stallion I was pretty selective and have only used performance tested mares.
I do think many stallions , especially on the continent are the product of really good marketing campaigns and a few are there on an 'emperors new clothes badis'.
Some stud books become obsessed with certain bloodlines only to move on to the next great thing but they also di look at themselves as the KWPN is doing with respect to genetic diseases and the potential to pass these on.
I believe the Futurity is inclusive progressive and educating and if those of you with your obviously active and informed ideas would come along and join in it could be even better! Another perspective is always useful.
 
I absolutely agree with Partoow's comments about some European stallions being famous and heavily used solely because they are extensively and cleverly marketed. If that same stallion was at a different stud no one would look twice at them.

My pet peeve is that many of the European studbooks are placing modern type and massive movement ahead of soundness and trainability in their dressage youngsters. It is well known that huge walks don't collect. That enormous trots with lax hind fetlocks break down easily. That long legs aren't as strong as shorter ones. That the modern warmblood frame is often weak through the loin and therefore cannot collect enough for GP work, no matter how hard they try. That difficult temperaments are unsuitable for most riders, including the professionals.

So why do so many British breeders use foreign stallions that they've never seen and don't really know what they are like?

My other, related frustration is why do the SHBGB reject so many good stallions? Mister Maccondy springs straight to mind. And One More Tiger, the only stallion son of Java Tiger. He should have been approved on that alone. And Chilli Morning, the 4**** eventing stallion who was initially rejected. The SHBGB have lost credibility and the UK has lost access to some outstanding stallions that should have been approved.

This is my main worry about the changes to the Futurity rules. I don't trust the UK stallion inspectors to make the right choices on which stallions to approve and which to reject. The AES seem to be getting it right more often and have approved several stallions that were turned down by SHBGB. But what about the rare bloodlines? The outstanding performers whose owners have lost faith in the system? The stallions who should have been approved but weren't?

IMHO it's only correct to exclude non-graded stallions from the Futurity when we have a stallion grading system that we can rely on. And at the moment I do not think that is the case.
 
Well for me it's not the same old argument. I can sort of see why some of you think that this will exclude some of your young stock but also think it's a pretty wide remit and if you're breeding outside that then I sort of wonder what were the reasons? - Well previous excuses have been varied but seems that there are one or two who just want to churn out cheap foals. I can understand the likes of Brendon stud who will test out a 2yo & if it does not come upto scratch will have it cut. They have years of experience of producing horses at the top end. Not so sure the lower end of the market, but then they are always spouting off about temperment. A 2yo on the ground can be different to when it is a 4yo under saddle, maybe not so compliant! Again though this debate has been done to death.



It would be nice to believe that poor results would mean a stallion would not remain so but I feel that that does not happen. - Not all the time, but that is to be expected.


I don't think that all mares need to be graded but with my own stallion I was pretty selective and have only used performance tested mares. - A stud owner was quoted in Horse Deals as saying if we dont cover her another stallion owner will. We cant afford to turn mares away.


I do think many stallions , especially on the continent are the product of really good marketing campaigns and a few are there on an 'emperors new clothes badis'. - No different to here really!


Some stud books become obsessed with certain bloodlines only to move on to the next great thing but they also di look at themselves as the KWPN is doing with respect to genetic diseases and the potential to pass these on.
I believe the Futurity is inclusive progressive and educating and if those of you with your obviously active and informed ideas would come along and join in it could be even better! Another perspective is always useful. - Agree 100%
 
Partoow said:
I believe the Futurity is inclusive progressive and educating and if those of you with your obviously active and informed ideas would come along and join in it could be even better! Another perspective is always useful.
Click to expand...


Partoow, that is the point, some of us WANT to join in

Some of us want to take our youngsters, get that honest feedback, but now cannot
Some of us want to quiz the experts as to what the best stallions for our mare are, what confirmation points they believe we need to work on improving are.
Some of us think that by excluding those lower down the chain, you exclude those who who want to learn, who want to improve on what we have. That is why I say include assessments of the mares, publically. Good and not so good points.
Reach the grass roots.
You say that in a couple of years a leisure horse class is going to be introduced. That should be second premium or lower. What happens if a horse comes through that should be first or elite. How will that then be graded? I mean it cant possibly be good enough from a not good enough stallion......
Personally I think that there should be incentives to show young horses at the futurity, not just a few, but nearly all the youngsters, at least once.
I believe that the stallion owners should assess the mares applying for covering to their stallion for suitability.
THEN the results will start to show through the futurity. The studs that offer the best advice and service, not just those that promote themselves the loudest.
Graded or ungraded, let the youngsters come in without even saying what type they are for. Let the Judges decide and mark on suitability, without knowing any breeding and bloodlines. The marks can be added to a database, where excellence of service will show, excellence of the horses progney.
If grading is totally getting it right, then those results will show. It will be proof for those that disagree. It can be used as a tool for the studs to promote their stallion to a degree that if it isnt in there, people ask questions.
Maybe what I am suggesting is not Anti the futurity as you see it, but making it a bigger picture, as a way of capturing the stallions that have the right stuff early, that if ungraded for WHATEVER reason can then be assessed, and maybe a catagory for their aproval on results.
Use it, on results, as a way of pressure for stallions that are not passing the right stuff on to be gelded or not used.
You have to use it as a tool to get everyone on side, change the way that people think, use the proof, and change peoples perspectives by full open unedited listings, (that personally I think should include a breakdown of good and bad the stallion is passing on, ie temprement, confirmation plusses and faults etc) You have your proof against substandard stallion, and proof for the owners of ungraded stallions (for whatever reason) or what is being produced.
Maybe my dreams for the futurity are bigger than yours, maybe mine would include it being heavily subsidised for a few years to get this into place and a higher percentage of youngstock graded, and a bigger pool of information.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top