elijahasgal
Well-Known Member
And that includes if I read their site correctly, also the price of showing the foal and having it assessed and graded? £75 with all the extras, versus £66 for the futurity?
BEF Futurity
- Thread starter elijahasgal
- Start date
ribbons
Well-Known Member
This is what completely baffles me,
If the supporters of this ruling are right, and using graded stallions will produce better quality youngstock, why then not leave it for all to enter, if their assumption is correct cream will always rise to the top and their case will be proven in BEF results. Graded sired youngstock taking top awards.
However if they are wrong the opposite will happen.
My own opinion is that if all are allowed forward the top results will be a mix of the two.
So I still have no idea why this ruling is needed to improve the youngstock entered. The proof of the pudding as they say is in the eating.
I'm sorry to have to say this, but I could no longer have confidence in the futurity results because either the evaluators do not have the confidence to judge these young horses entirely on their own merit, OR there are ulterior motives behind the rule being introduced.
Either way leaves a useless evaluation process for me as a breeder, and for this reason, I'm
out.
If the supporters of this ruling are right, and using graded stallions will produce better quality youngstock, why then not leave it for all to enter, if their assumption is correct cream will always rise to the top and their case will be proven in BEF results. Graded sired youngstock taking top awards.
However if they are wrong the opposite will happen.
My own opinion is that if all are allowed forward the top results will be a mix of the two.
So I still have no idea why this ruling is needed to improve the youngstock entered. The proof of the pudding as they say is in the eating.
I'm sorry to have to say this, but I could no longer have confidence in the futurity results because either the evaluators do not have the confidence to judge these young horses entirely on their own merit, OR there are ulterior motives behind the rule being introduced.
Either way leaves a useless evaluation process for me as a breeder, and for this reason, I'm
out.
sallyf
Well-Known Member
Certainly not the case for SHBgb which who i was refering too
elijahasgal
Well-Known Member
Again, another point for ungraded stallions has been given to me.
Stallions that nearly wernt.....
Cor de la Bryère refused his grading by the french, as not the "type" they were looking for, they were told to geld him.....accepted by Holstein and gone onto be who he is. (because his owners had faith in him)
Landadel, best son of Landgraf, refused his grading, for being "too light"
Leased to Böckmanns who bred him for 10 years, in which he was in the top 3 sires. Unlicensed.
Libero....failed on his performance test
Grannus, scored under 87 and was 58th out of his class of 66. His owners had faith in him and he got in on performance.
Sandro Hit, scored under 100, in his 100day test, claimed now because he was not strong enough or ready to do it....
Sandro....refused approval by Holsteiner, purchased by Denmark, did a good performance test, competed well before being brought back by germany
Andiamo excluded twice, first time injured in his performance test, spent two years recovering. reentered, not selected, re-inspection committee allowed him to go on3 week performance test, and was accepted. He was then thrown out for not having a collection of foals to present to the KWPN. 10 years later accepted back into their books.
Mr Blue (Sire of world cup winners) rejected until he started winning Grand Prix
Heartbreaker, not presented until he was 8yo
Cardento, who failed, had to proove himself in competition, in sweden before holland would accept him
Voltaire, rejected by Oldenburg, brought and presented in holland, was 14th of 14, and only just made it to stallion status.
Irco Marco, one of Swedens most influential jumping stallions, was first presented for licensing in 1976, the Swedish Commission, headed by Olle Kjellander, the National Studmaster at Flyinge, said they would never license the horse according to the commission, he wasnt even a sport horse. Represented, refused again, even though he was winning competition, and jumping 1.60, In the light of these performances, the stallion was granted a provisional cover license, which meant he could produce foals but they could not be registered!
Galoubet, rejected as a 3yo
Quidam de Revel, was accepted only after going the competative route.
Rubinstein, rejected by Westphalia, finally accepted by Oldenburg.
Welt Hit, refused, probably because of being an extreme late developer
And then to the other extreme, these names,
Elektron, Derwisch, Erbherzog, Gluecksstern, Grossmogul, Maurice, Gluecksgriff, Buenos Aires, Fontainebleau, Golden Champ, Williams Gold, Nobleman, Go on Top and Lauda.
they are licensing winners in Hanover from 1980 to 2007, a list where 14/27 have vanished without a trace.....
Over the border in Oldenburg, if we look at their last 20 licensing winners, there are some good sires there including Rohdiamant who is ranked 4th on the WBFSH stallion rankings the unavoidable truth is that not one of those 20 licensing champions features in the 2009 German FNs top 1% of sires lists for either dressage or showjumping.
So based on that, can we rely on Lisencing?
Stallions that nearly wernt.....
Cor de la Bryère refused his grading by the french, as not the "type" they were looking for, they were told to geld him.....accepted by Holstein and gone onto be who he is. (because his owners had faith in him)
Landadel, best son of Landgraf, refused his grading, for being "too light"
Leased to Böckmanns who bred him for 10 years, in which he was in the top 3 sires. Unlicensed.
Libero....failed on his performance test
Grannus, scored under 87 and was 58th out of his class of 66. His owners had faith in him and he got in on performance.
Sandro Hit, scored under 100, in his 100day test, claimed now because he was not strong enough or ready to do it....
Sandro....refused approval by Holsteiner, purchased by Denmark, did a good performance test, competed well before being brought back by germany
Andiamo excluded twice, first time injured in his performance test, spent two years recovering. reentered, not selected, re-inspection committee allowed him to go on3 week performance test, and was accepted. He was then thrown out for not having a collection of foals to present to the KWPN. 10 years later accepted back into their books.
Mr Blue (Sire of world cup winners) rejected until he started winning Grand Prix
Heartbreaker, not presented until he was 8yo
Cardento, who failed, had to proove himself in competition, in sweden before holland would accept him
Voltaire, rejected by Oldenburg, brought and presented in holland, was 14th of 14, and only just made it to stallion status.
Irco Marco, one of Swedens most influential jumping stallions, was first presented for licensing in 1976, the Swedish Commission, headed by Olle Kjellander, the National Studmaster at Flyinge, said they would never license the horse according to the commission, he wasnt even a sport horse. Represented, refused again, even though he was winning competition, and jumping 1.60, In the light of these performances, the stallion was granted a provisional cover license, which meant he could produce foals but they could not be registered!
Galoubet, rejected as a 3yo
Quidam de Revel, was accepted only after going the competative route.
Rubinstein, rejected by Westphalia, finally accepted by Oldenburg.
Welt Hit, refused, probably because of being an extreme late developer
And then to the other extreme, these names,
Elektron, Derwisch, Erbherzog, Gluecksstern, Grossmogul, Maurice, Gluecksgriff, Buenos Aires, Fontainebleau, Golden Champ, Williams Gold, Nobleman, Go on Top and Lauda.
they are licensing winners in Hanover from 1980 to 2007, a list where 14/27 have vanished without a trace.....
Over the border in Oldenburg, if we look at their last 20 licensing winners, there are some good sires there including Rohdiamant who is ranked 4th on the WBFSH stallion rankings the unavoidable truth is that not one of those 20 licensing champions features in the 2009 German FNs top 1% of sires lists for either dressage or showjumping.
So based on that, can we rely on Lisencing?
ribbons
Well-Known Member
The above post says it all.
Now, is anyone listening.
Now, is anyone listening.
HBM1
Well-Known Member
You may want to take a look at the above post then. Thank heavens for owners who did stick by their belief in their horses.
sywell
Well-Known Member
Hanover has 120 stallions come for licensing at the final round each year and about half are licensed. You come back to what the judges saw on the day and I have no idea how many stallions in total were at the gradings where you have picked out these that failed on the day. So what percentage of the ones you quoted were they of total number of horses shown? There are always going to be ones that have an off day or are late maturing. The Hanoverian Society has around 400 stallions and the WBFSH book lists 9000
Anastasia
Well-Known Member
The BEF Futurity can only be seen as a "guide" for breeders. It is not the definitive answer on what stallions to use, as it’s only as good as the horses being put forward. Plus it does not cover the whole of the UK, so essentially all the stock in the North of Scotland (for example) is not even covered.
The Futurity (as any grading world wide) is only looking at a horse for a matter of minutes and can therefore only be guided on what it sees for a small snapshot of that horses life. Hence why some of the stallions above slipped through the net via different breeding associations. However as has been mentioned the above stallions are only around 0.2% of all the stallions that have likely gone forward in that year. Yes there are licensing winners who disappear, but that will always happen, because people still need to assess the foals, youngsters and ridden stock.
The Futurity certainly DOES NOT help breeders sell their stock. I have only been asked by about 3 people over the years whether I take my stock to the Futurity. All my foals have been sold on their own merit and that of their bloodlines.
Personally I give far more credibility to breed gradings by the KWPN, Hanoverians and Oldenburgs than I would to the Futurity, mainly because of the wealth of knowledge these judges have. Plus they are judging you on a system that is used worldwide and against the same quality of horses from abroad.
I would also love to see the correlation of the Futurity results and those horses that have gone onto do well in competition, and whether a 2nd or 3rd Premium foal or young horse has actually gone on to do well in competition, because at the end of the day, the horse is as only as good as the rider producing it! You can breed a long list of Elite horses, but if those horses do not realise their potential under saddle then what worth does the Futurity have? Breeding a good horse is only one part of an equation.
I personally think the descriptions for each Premium should be changed. For instance the KWPN give 1st Premiums over a certain score but they by no means state that this foal will go on to be the next Olympic gold medallist, and I think the Futurity needs to look at this because they cannot guarantee, especially on their limited knowledge, what horses will actually go on to do this.
If this is the stallion I am thinking of then the first time he failed his grading was not down to immaturity. The judges clearly stated to the audience that they did not like his hind leg conformation, and that he would be a super competition horse but not a stallion. They never mentioned once about him being immature or for him to be re-presented (which can be recommended if a young stallion coming forward needs more time to mature).
The stallion I am speaking about was put forward for general grading as a 2 year old and received a score of 5 out of 10 for conformation and 7 out of 10 for movement and a 3rd Premium overall. In 2009 as a 4 year old he went forward for grading and failed due to the same points on his hind legs, and then he failed stallion grading again in 2010. I have to say that I think this stallion is a stunning horse (although I dislike his hindleg conformation greatly) and he is doing very well in dressage and of course his stock have received good premiums and he definately stamps his stock with good looks and refinement. However, for me, even despite this, the fact that he has been graded three times and got the same remarks (with different judges) puts me off (unlike the list of stallions above that only got missed the once). Like I say we may be speaking about two different stallions entirely.
For me personally I only use graded stallions, that is the preference of my own and clients wishes. I like to know that a stallion has been assessed for breeding, whether any slip through the net or not. There are always back doors for stallions who are kept entire and who do well in sport, but at the end of the day breeders will always vote by their feet anyway.
Going back to the Futurity I have to say that I am in favour of it only being open to offspring by graded stallions, and only see this as a positive step forwards (whether that is a popular choice or not sadly).
The Futurity (as any grading world wide) is only looking at a horse for a matter of minutes and can therefore only be guided on what it sees for a small snapshot of that horses life. Hence why some of the stallions above slipped through the net via different breeding associations. However as has been mentioned the above stallions are only around 0.2% of all the stallions that have likely gone forward in that year. Yes there are licensing winners who disappear, but that will always happen, because people still need to assess the foals, youngsters and ridden stock.
The Futurity certainly DOES NOT help breeders sell their stock. I have only been asked by about 3 people over the years whether I take my stock to the Futurity. All my foals have been sold on their own merit and that of their bloodlines.
Personally I give far more credibility to breed gradings by the KWPN, Hanoverians and Oldenburgs than I would to the Futurity, mainly because of the wealth of knowledge these judges have. Plus they are judging you on a system that is used worldwide and against the same quality of horses from abroad.
I would also love to see the correlation of the Futurity results and those horses that have gone onto do well in competition, and whether a 2nd or 3rd Premium foal or young horse has actually gone on to do well in competition, because at the end of the day, the horse is as only as good as the rider producing it! You can breed a long list of Elite horses, but if those horses do not realise their potential under saddle then what worth does the Futurity have? Breeding a good horse is only one part of an equation.
I personally think the descriptions for each Premium should be changed. For instance the KWPN give 1st Premiums over a certain score but they by no means state that this foal will go on to be the next Olympic gold medallist, and I think the Futurity needs to look at this because they cannot guarantee, especially on their limited knowledge, what horses will actually go on to do this.
If this is the stallion I am thinking of then the first time he failed his grading was not down to immaturity. The judges clearly stated to the audience that they did not like his hind leg conformation, and that he would be a super competition horse but not a stallion. They never mentioned once about him being immature or for him to be re-presented (which can be recommended if a young stallion coming forward needs more time to mature).
The stallion I am speaking about was put forward for general grading as a 2 year old and received a score of 5 out of 10 for conformation and 7 out of 10 for movement and a 3rd Premium overall. In 2009 as a 4 year old he went forward for grading and failed due to the same points on his hind legs, and then he failed stallion grading again in 2010. I have to say that I think this stallion is a stunning horse (although I dislike his hindleg conformation greatly) and he is doing very well in dressage and of course his stock have received good premiums and he definately stamps his stock with good looks and refinement. However, for me, even despite this, the fact that he has been graded three times and got the same remarks (with different judges) puts me off (unlike the list of stallions above that only got missed the once). Like I say we may be speaking about two different stallions entirely.
For me personally I only use graded stallions, that is the preference of my own and clients wishes. I like to know that a stallion has been assessed for breeding, whether any slip through the net or not. There are always back doors for stallions who are kept entire and who do well in sport, but at the end of the day breeders will always vote by their feet anyway.
Going back to the Futurity I have to say that I am in favour of it only being open to offspring by graded stallions, and only see this as a positive step forwards (whether that is a popular choice or not sadly).
Last edited:
angrovestud
Well-Known Member
he's a story of how bad grading and evaluations are the British Hanovarian society failed the three year old colt Sarahs pride, He sired one foal and was gelded and then went on to win the Cavan high jump, the royal highland became a grade A show jumper winning the hoys puissance then beating Randi, he then got sold to the the USA.
No one can look into the future unless of course they have crystal balls.
Due to this happening I have no faith in opinion, its resuts that count and frankly some horses have faults, like humans they excell at other things.
if grading was so good why do racehorse not get graded? would they also have to be graded on looks and comfo and type? why dont sports horse people learn from the likes of weatherbys and let the market sort the wheat from the chaff, you pretty soon learn who not to use, bad legs bad temp, no darn good at jumping! its run by vested intested and people who want to set themselves up as all knowing!
The graders did the one thing they should be looking for the did not spot talent! rare jumping bloodlines in the TB as well
No one can look into the future unless of course they have crystal balls.
Due to this happening I have no faith in opinion, its resuts that count and frankly some horses have faults, like humans they excell at other things.
if grading was so good why do racehorse not get graded? would they also have to be graded on looks and comfo and type? why dont sports horse people learn from the likes of weatherbys and let the market sort the wheat from the chaff, you pretty soon learn who not to use, bad legs bad temp, no darn good at jumping! its run by vested intested and people who want to set themselves up as all knowing!
The graders did the one thing they should be looking for the did not spot talent! rare jumping bloodlines in the TB as well
Anastasia
Well-Known Member
Just because the horse above did well in sport does not necessitate that he would of been a good sire. You could say the same about several geldings that have gone on to win World Cups and Olympic games.
I personally do not think you can compare the sport horse industry (what I am talking about above) with racehorses, although several thoroughbreds have been graded over the decades with good results.
angrovestud
Well-Known Member
I think that the graders missed talent! or are sports horses being graded to be pretty like showing class he sired an advanced endurance mare his only daughter what I am trying to point out is you can not possibly in the 30 mins if your lucky, be able to say what a horse is capable of as a foal 1/2 or 3 year old on how are they able to judge talent, how is that judged? by movement as that is not talent ? unless its just dressage but the other two Olympic disciplins are talent for jumping speed and staminer how is that being judges at 2 and three in a ring! also maybe the gelding should have been stallion there might be less wastage the Tb is the foundation on which most stud book are built re packaged as warmbloods and sold back to us the famous Didi was a classic example of blood in bloodlines being anglo arab x
sywell
Well-Known Member
What year was that I cannot remember a horse called Sarahs Pride or was it called something else then. I cannot see a grading report for that horse.
ihatework
Well-Known Member
I've skim read the entire thread, am quite confused, not quite sure if I have got the gist of the argument from either side LOL!!!
I've been to a couple of the futurities, and my understanding is they are not a grading in any way shape or form. Just an opinion on the day of a group of experts on your youngster.
From my experience the vetting opinion has been very good, but as for the rest, well I won't repeat my thoughts (but mostly around what I consider bog standard animals obtaining decent marks). I would also say there is a bit of bias in the overall results, some stallions come out high, but then usually the stud is trying to use the futurity as a marketing device.
TBH I don't know any buyers that actually hold much value in the futurity score at all.
The benefits I see to futurity are more for the slightly smaller scale breeders who want an evaluation of their stock, the vet feedback usually being the most useful IMO. To this end I don't understand the exclusion of ungraded stallions, I think the Futurity should be open to all but also MUCH more critically marked. I mean why have a 1-10 scale when the bulk fall into a 7.5-8.5 bracket?
I've been to a couple of the futurities, and my understanding is they are not a grading in any way shape or form. Just an opinion on the day of a group of experts on your youngster.
From my experience the vetting opinion has been very good, but as for the rest, well I won't repeat my thoughts (but mostly around what I consider bog standard animals obtaining decent marks). I would also say there is a bit of bias in the overall results, some stallions come out high, but then usually the stud is trying to use the futurity as a marketing device.
TBH I don't know any buyers that actually hold much value in the futurity score at all.
The benefits I see to futurity are more for the slightly smaller scale breeders who want an evaluation of their stock, the vet feedback usually being the most useful IMO. To this end I don't understand the exclusion of ungraded stallions, I think the Futurity should be open to all but also MUCH more critically marked. I mean why have a 1-10 scale when the bulk fall into a 7.5-8.5 bracket?
Alec Swan
...
I have to say that I would agree with you. I started a thread, a while back asking if anyone could tell me of any of the leading foals of their years, who had gone on, and proved the judges right. The replies were a little disappointing, in that apart from a bit of coughing and spluttering, there were only a couple, if that, and they hadn't set the world alight. It would be interesting, to now conversely look at the better 6-8 year olds, and see if they were presented, and if they were, what the judges thought of them.
There is an undoubted use for the Futurities. Just as I take my lambs to a market so that I can have them stand beside other lambs, so I can either be proud, or disappointed! For breeders to have their foals rub shoulders with others, gives them the chance, hopefully with an un-jaundiced eye(!), to be their own critics, or admirers.
I know nothing of the Futurities, but when a foal is offered up, presumably there's a listing of some sort, so would the foal's breeding be listed, and known to the judges?
Alec.
stolensilver
Well-Known Member
I own two horses who were graded Elite at the Futurity. The oldest is 6. She was the highest scoring 3yo dressage horse in the country. I bought her as a 2yo. And she is fantastic. We haven't been out competing yet but she's got her half passes, her flying changes, she's just started tempis (did her first ever set of 3 changes across the diagonal in a 20x40 school today) and she's got passage, started pirouettes and started piaffe.
And she has not been pushed. She gets ridden 3 times a week by an amateur and had 5 months off work due to sinus surgery as a 5 year old.
She's got the makings of a future Grand Prix horse and she's an angel to ride. She finds absolutely everything easy. So watch this space. She won't be the next Uthopia but she may get to GP with a very happy amateur owner/rider.
And she has not been pushed. She gets ridden 3 times a week by an amateur and had 5 months off work due to sinus surgery as a 5 year old.
She's got the makings of a future Grand Prix horse and she's an angel to ride. She finds absolutely everything easy. So watch this space. She won't be the next Uthopia but she may get to GP with a very happy amateur owner/rider.
elijahasgal
Well-Known Member
The long and the short of it as goes is this
On one side, they say that graded stallions are the only way forward if we want to produce our own top level competition horses. That that is the only way of improving our horses.
The other side says (In regards to the Futurity) that Stock by ALL stallions should be encouraged forwards. That the results will show. That there are certain stallions that should be graded that havent been for one reason or other....like injury or or or.... Does that stop them passing on the goods, and do the assessors ALWAYS get it right.
To me the true value of a stallion is in what it produces. The futurity doesnt accept ungraded stallions ANY MORE. What to me that means is that they potentially are missing some fantastic stallions.
The fact that some of the greatest stallions have had trouble grading doesnt bother the "must be graded" side, and the other side will say that well its proof the system isnt perfect.
Anastasia
Well-Known Member
For me there is a big difference to stallions not having gone forward for grading until later in life OR those that have not been accepted by one book but have by another, OR even those that have scraped through a performance test. By your own quote above several had actually gone on to do performance tests. However, there is a BIG difference to a horse that has essentially failed on THREE occasions in front of three different group of judges.
As a "must be graded side" that is my choice to make, I want to use mares and stallions that have been evaluated by qualified and experienced judges (where on occasion they can miss something......they are human after all). If people use an ungraded stallion, that is also their choice, however there no point then crying when the offspring is not eligible for something, as YOU made that choice when you selected that stallion for your mare.
At the end of the day mare owners can choose whether they go with an ungraded or graded stallion, that is their freedom of choice, and then they can let the performance of the horses they breed speak for themselves in sport, as essentially that is what people are breeding for.
The fact is that they have to accept that the Futurity have rules for entry, just as you have with some shows. If you choose to use an ungraded stallion then you have to realise that the stock are not eligible for entry to the Futurity. This has been in the offing for years, it clearly stated in the Futurity fact sheets that this rule was going to come into place this year.
As it stands the Futurity is only looking at a very very small proportion of the whole of the UKs horse population, so its never going to give a true reading anyway. It would have to cover a much wider area of the UK and assess a lot more horses to get a true feeling for what stallions are producing in the UK.
I have supported the Futurity for several years, then for last year and this year my stock have/wont go forward. Will this stop them being excellent sport horses in the future, unlikely, because its all going to be down to the person producing them. Are my buyers bothered about my foals not going forward for the Futurity.......not at all, because my foals speak for themselves.
Alec - the evaluators at the Futurity used to have a catalogue that listed the horses name, age, owner, breeder and bloodlines for each entry.
ribbons
Well-Known Member
Whilst I maintain the graded sire only rule is a bad move, I totally agree with anastasia. The rule is there, the choice is ours.
Interestingly, I understand there are still quite a few dates and venues available this year. Places filling more slowly than previous years. I know official word is that entries are unaffected by the ruling but only time will tell.
Sadly I think in the event of it being decided this was a mistake and ruling being reversed in future years (unlikely) the damage may already have been done. I find it so sad that one or two people with huge ego's think that they know best and everyone will accept that, and do as they're told.
Interestingly, I understand there are still quite a few dates and venues available this year. Places filling more slowly than previous years. I know official word is that entries are unaffected by the ruling but only time will tell.
Sadly I think in the event of it being decided this was a mistake and ruling being reversed in future years (unlikely) the damage may already have been done. I find it so sad that one or two people with huge ego's think that they know best and everyone will accept that, and do as they're told.
Anastasia
Well-Known Member
Ribbons I dont necessarily agree with this. I dont think that this change in the ruling is down to ego's and people trying to tell others what to do. The BEF have a clear plan of what they want to achieve on horse performance in the UK, and to try and make improvements in the breeding of horses, and if this is trying to "encourage" people to use graded stallions then surely this cannot be seen as a bad thing.
They are not dictating what stallions people have to choose on their mares, what they are saying is that for them and their process of selection for the future they want to encourage people to bring forward stock by graded stallions. You cannot shoot them down for trying to encourage people to be more responsible breeders surely?
The UK has a diverse mixed market place and about 95% of horse owners will likely never enter the futurity, so is this such a huge deal?
On the positive fronts it gives horse owners a "tool" to see how their own breeding programmes are going. It allows people to compare their youngstock to others of a similar age across the UK. You get good publicity if your youngstock do well. Its a good education for breeders and horses.
On the negative fronts - it really does not make a difference on selling, its too early to see whether it will make an impact on the future of the UK top level sport horses, its expensive (lol), it doesnt cover all areas of the UK, there has always been a bit of "cloak and dagger" about the "experience" of some of the evaluators.
So it really has to be up to each individual what direction they wish to go and take.
Cherrygarden
Well-Known Member
It is not the suggestion that horses should be graded that upsets me, if I keep breeding then I am certainly working towards having stallions graded but what keeps coming to my attention is the amount of holes in the system and the implication that this is being done to improve things when in fact the powers that be simply look the other way when issues are pointed out. Like the difference in standards that lets some through with one piece of paper and not others with actually a better standard piece of paper or no paper, the fact that since DNA we can say that horses from then forwards can be considered to have un verified even if recorded breeding due to lack of DNA when there are still older horses with breeding we accept as verified and we all know it could be anything it liked because no one would have checked or cared and then this information can be the make or break. Or that actually if you look through the lists and rules, Stallions that have failed proper performance gradings can still send stock forward if they are previously licensed part bred or racing tb/arab whatever that fit other parts of the rules. This can and will happen despite the fact that the various partbred licenses available from Native books are really only looking for stallions to produce for the show ring not sporting potential at all. Surely under these rules if a stallion has failed a sport related grading he should too be excluded regardless of his license? I am sure that will happen too in years to come but all I see is that one half of a system is moving too fast away from another and that problems will occur because of this. Until at the very least no foal can be given an ID only passport without at the very least its Dam recorded on it and until there is one, universally available license scheme available for any stallion and accepted as a minimum standard by all competions, evaluations and at some level by all studbooks then excluding people and hoping they will learn is just going to drive them further away.
Anastasia
Well-Known Member
Cherrygarden I get what you are saying, but I dont know how there can be a "one size fits all" system, especially with the amount of different breed types in the UK.
I can only speak from a sport horse perspective and although there is no perfect grading system out there, there still has to be "some system out there". Breeders who adhere to any of the breed society systems and pay their annual fees are basically acknowledging that they accept the system they are buying in to. Again its a choice a breeder can make, or not.
I am a member of the Scottish Sportshorse, KWPN and Hanoverians I accept their rules and regulations, if I was not happy I would not be a member. I may have mares, foals or stallions graded through them and if they do well then that is great, if not then I have to accept that as part of the system.
For me you would have to be a bit more specific on what you are saying, regarding what Studbooks you are speaking about and what breed.
I can only speak from a sport horse perspective and although there is no perfect grading system out there, there still has to be "some system out there". Breeders who adhere to any of the breed society systems and pay their annual fees are basically acknowledging that they accept the system they are buying in to. Again its a choice a breeder can make, or not.
I am a member of the Scottish Sportshorse, KWPN and Hanoverians I accept their rules and regulations, if I was not happy I would not be a member. I may have mares, foals or stallions graded through them and if they do well then that is great, if not then I have to accept that as part of the system.
For me you would have to be a bit more specific on what you are saying, regarding what Studbooks you are speaking about and what breed.
angrovestud
Well-Known Member
1995 sorry I was not around yesterday but here are the photos as a four year old colt and then later winning the cavan high jump I did ot own him by the way so I do not know why he failed
Cherrygarden
Well-Known Member
Anastasia what I feel is that there should be a minimum standard that is applied to all stallions by one central body first, if every stallion standing can achieve that and as a result as a minimum send stock forward into any competition, evaluation or Grading albeit at entry level then after that stallions and owners can go the route that best suits. Ideally a universal license that is somewhere above a basic license with a decent vetting or mandatory x rays and heritable traits examination with limits put on the amount of foals produced until they can be evaluated and all must be seen initially and for the stallion owner to give some indication of what they think they are standing their stallion to produce even if that is horse agility superstars.
If we started there and everyone was subject to that same entry level before deciding on performance tests or grading on results or being given stars for being an in hand showing progenitor then at least there would be a level playing field to start from, some security for mare owners and a system that was accountable.
I have lost interest in whether the BEF and the Futurity could work that in though so am just following my own thought train here now.
If we started there and everyone was subject to that same entry level before deciding on performance tests or grading on results or being given stars for being an in hand showing progenitor then at least there would be a level playing field to start from, some security for mare owners and a system that was accountable.
I have lost interest in whether the BEF and the Futurity could work that in though so am just following my own thought train here now.
elijahasgal
Well-Known Member
I think Anastasia that you and I must be talking about different stallions, as the stallion that I used did not fail 3times.
I think that the point should be that stallions have to pass a basic health check.....before that there can be a limit of 10 foals a year produced by the owner. The Health check should screen for the things that we do not wish passed on, and should be accross the board for all societies. Performance tests should be left to each individual society, and not play a part in the futurity.
Each society should reassess the stallions first crop of foals. then again after 5 years, and if it is consistently passing on a problem, then license removed.
This would allow horses through that might otherwise be excluded, and allow our potential champion stallions a shop window. It would exclude the problems that we all want removed from our horses. It would also allow the owner to check out their own stallion before going through all the grading.
What about the foals? Well Its happening anyway. It would in theory limit the amount
I think that the point should be that stallions have to pass a basic health check.....before that there can be a limit of 10 foals a year produced by the owner. The Health check should screen for the things that we do not wish passed on, and should be accross the board for all societies. Performance tests should be left to each individual society, and not play a part in the futurity.
Each society should reassess the stallions first crop of foals. then again after 5 years, and if it is consistently passing on a problem, then license removed.
This would allow horses through that might otherwise be excluded, and allow our potential champion stallions a shop window. It would exclude the problems that we all want removed from our horses. It would also allow the owner to check out their own stallion before going through all the grading.
What about the foals? Well Its happening anyway. It would in theory limit the amount
sywell
Well-Known Member
Strange I looked in the 1995 show enteries and cannot see a record must have been a late entry.
1995 sorry I was not around yesterday but here are the photos as a four year old colt and then later winning the cavan high jump I did ot own him by the way so I do not know why he failed
Sportznight
Well-Known Member
WRT to OCD surgeries and the 'sites' being visible clinically to the naked eye and on x-rays taken at a later date - well that all depends on the type of OCD, the location, the skill of the surgeon and the level of after care given!!
I know of a TB bought at the Keeneland November sales about 10 years ago for $4,000. He was BEAUTIFULLY bred and a stunning looking foal, but he had OCD in a knee - he left the sales ground and went straight into surgery. Ten months later he was back at Keeneland and the September Yearling Sales, in Book 1 and he made $400,000 and believe me, unless you had prior knowledge of the OCD and the surgery, you would not have had an inkling that it was there!
I also know of 1 TB stallion, standing as a Sportshorse in the UK that had DREADFUL OCD as a foal... He failed his initial SHBGB grading, I don't know why and I see that he doesn't appear to be standing at stud any longer...
I know of a TB bought at the Keeneland November sales about 10 years ago for $4,000. He was BEAUTIFULLY bred and a stunning looking foal, but he had OCD in a knee - he left the sales ground and went straight into surgery. Ten months later he was back at Keeneland and the September Yearling Sales, in Book 1 and he made $400,000 and believe me, unless you had prior knowledge of the OCD and the surgery, you would not have had an inkling that it was there!
I also know of 1 TB stallion, standing as a Sportshorse in the UK that had DREADFUL OCD as a foal... He failed his initial SHBGB grading, I don't know why and I see that he doesn't appear to be standing at stud any longer...
Truly
Well-Known Member
Actually I can't see the point of fully grading stallions until they are 7yo. Maybe they should just have vetting done to get a license as a 3yo and they graded at 7yo to give them time to prove themselves as a sporthorse and a sire.
There just seems so many flaws in the grading system that I don't understand why this country has to conform to European rules if we want to improve our breeding industry.
I really believe grading should be a bonus not a compulsory...the choice should be ours.
There just seems so many flaws in the grading system that I don't understand why this country has to conform to European rules if we want to improve our breeding industry.
I really believe grading should be a bonus not a compulsory...the choice should be ours.
sywell
Well-Known Member
I think there are merits in the KWPN system where stallions are revisited at 7. I do not accept that overall there are many flaws in the grading system. We have failed to improve our breeding at the speed of European countries and to speed the cycle up to asses 3 year olds works and not wait until they are 7 or 10 to show their competition skills. The new Westphalian that Fox Pitt has as his team horse has a pedigree littered with top horses and a number of TBs he is by a Holstein stallion with Ladykiller XX in the pedigree and Sacromento Song XX on the dam side.
elijahasgal
Well-Known Member
The thing is in this country our values are different, and our market is different to the continent.
Huge numbers are happy to have a horse just to hack out on a few times a week, many want to take part in low key local competitions.
plenty compete, and yes grading is essentially for horses of that level and up.
The stallions that have missed the grading, that I typed out before, it wouldnt really bother me, except they were BRILLIANT stallions, like the best. And graders were missing them. The value of a stallion is in what it produces.
And we produce in general what the market desires. Lower level riders dont really want massivly high powered horses.
Huge numbers are happy to have a horse just to hack out on a few times a week, many want to take part in low key local competitions.
plenty compete, and yes grading is essentially for horses of that level and up.
The stallions that have missed the grading, that I typed out before, it wouldnt really bother me, except they were BRILLIANT stallions, like the best. And graders were missing them. The value of a stallion is in what it produces.
And we produce in general what the market desires. Lower level riders dont really want massivly high powered horses.
magic104
Well-Known Member
But not all that have decent pedigress & considered high powered are unsuitable for lower level riders. Just like not all TB's are unsuitable for novices because they are all hot-heads. Or all cobs are suitable for novices.
These discussions have been going on for as long as I can remember & beyond. Nothing is perfect but gradings, the BEF Futurities etc are better then nothing.