Blog on the BBC on inbreeding in racehorses

Yeah, the article is quite interesting, but towards the end they do state that there isn't currently any links being made between inbreeding and fatal injuries (eg leg breaks).

However, the way the information is initially presented suggests that there is a link- which to me makes it a piece of bad journalism. It starts with a roll-call of equine fatalities at races due to fractures, and then goes on to discuss the inbreeding side of things- although there are no explicit links between the two, the way it is written would make you think there is a connection.
 
The article isn't making any links between inbreeding and leg fractures, I think it's more using the inbreeding study as a further example of how the thoroughbreds are being exploited for our enjoyment/profit with the increase of stallion coverings and also the greed to produce yearlings for sales rather than 'good' racehorses.
I think, however, they are far too intensively bred/reared and this will ultimately lead to the horses' demise.
 
I think it is a worthwhile article, and maybe should make people take a look at the wider picture. It is a good thing that TB breeding insists on live covering, otherwise there would be half the TB mares in foal to Northern Dancer stallions if AI was allowed.

I am a big fan of racing, but it is troubling that a young horse can break its leg just from galloping on a flat racecourse and these high profile accidents are giving racing really bad publicity and a bad name without the pain and distress and wastage of lovely horses.
 
It isn't a very well written article IMHO, I understand the implications of inbreeding and I guess bone could become more brittle but that is one of the many issues that could arise from inbreeding.

It is a problem, and not just in horses, it is just more public really isn't it.
 
I think it is a worthwhile article, and maybe should make people take a look at the wider picture. It is a good thing that TB breeding insists on live covering, otherwise there would be half the TB mares in foal to Northern Dancer stallions if AI was allowed.

I am a big fan of racing, but it is troubling that a young horse can break its leg just from galloping on a flat racecourse and these high profile accidents are giving racing really bad publicity and a bad name without the pain and distress and wastage of lovely horses.
Its not only racing:
Out hunting with the Bedale[1970], we had three fatalities in one day one broke a leg in a cattle grid, one broke a fetlock jumping a fence, and one fell in to a ditch, it was pushed by a crush of horses waiting to cross a bridge.
I am sure people can recall horses killed in freak field accidents, but they are not high profile.
I scanned this article quickly, [scientific detail seemed pretty scanty] but most stallions have had a few years in training, and if people choose to breed from those retired with a heritable weakness / injury , then they are pretty stupid. To be honest most TB stallions have to have a strong constitution to cover three mares per day, and few breeders will send a mare to one which has progeny breaking down on the racecourse.
Trainers do not buy stock with matchstick legs if one with good bone is available.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't class those hunting accidents the same as a young racehorse galloping on a flat, well prepared surface and just breaking its leg for no apparent reason.
 
Yeah, the article is quite interesting, but towards the end they do state that there isn't currently any links being made between inbreeding and fatal injuries (eg leg breaks).

However, the way the information is initially presented suggests that there is a link- which to me makes it a piece of bad journalism. It starts with a roll-call of equine fatalities at races due to fractures, and then goes on to discuss the inbreeding side of things- although there are no explicit links between the two, the way it is written would make you think there is a connection.
This.
If attempting to identify the cause of fatal fractures in racing, the author of the article has missed a very salient point, which is that TBs are backed and start their training as not-quite 2 year-olds and very immature.
 
Its not only racing: Out hunting with the Bedale[1970], we had three fatalities in one day one broke a leg in a cattle grid, one broke a fetlock jumping a fence, and one fell in to a ditch, it was pushed by a crush of horses waiting to cross a bridge.

How does this bear any relation to the article:confused: They are totally unrelated incidents.........
 
It's an interesting blog, but like others I think the young age at which some racehorses start work must also be a factor. The horse in the picture that had the breakdown looked pretty young and immature to my inexpert eyes, in any case.

I do think inbreeding is something to be considered and looked at more closely, in conjunction with overbreeding, but I don't think it's the only factor at work.
 
Its not only racing:
To be honest most TB stallions have to have a strong constitution to cover three mares per day, and few breeders will send a mare to one which has progeny breaking down on the racecourse.
Trainers do not buy stock with matchstick legs if one with good bone is available.

But if the industry is looking for a fast turnaround - win a classic and retire to stud then horses with underlying weaknesses will be bred from. Some of the flat horses which retire to stud so young, their toughness isn't challenged to any degree.
If the filly mentioned Eight Belles had held up for that last race then she might then have been used for breeding, if she'd been a colt then breeders would have sent dozens of mares.

If a horse wins the Derby and goes to stud no one asks whether it would have stayed sound into its 4th year.

Even my horse's dad who is a french hurdler, whose web page proudly proclaims that he retired sound, retired after his 4th year after running a grand total of 5 times.

And if the progeny don't stand up to hard work, two years of breeding will be out there.
 
Top