Futurity - Stallion Progeny Eligibility

Also the stallions are continually blamed for not producing the offspring, but how many of them get good quality mares?

Just one point the offspring also need to be produced correctly so if they dont perform it may not actually be down to how it was bred but how it has been bought up. There are plenty of owners who do not aspire to much more then RC. Horses dont have ambition & not all owners/riders have enough talent to realise a horses/ponies full potential.
 
There will never be a full agreement on this subject from everyone.

Owners of stallions who are graded will want the regulations being put forward for 2010 to go ahead.

Owners of ungraded stallions will want the system to stay as it it.

On this one the BEF will always be seen to be wrong, no matter what they do.
 
I agree wholeheartedly with Julia's post; it is the all embracing aspect of the Futurity, the fact that it spans studbooks and takes in horses that are outwith studbooks that is its greatest strength.

As to gradings, I think the real problem is the nature of gradings themselves. Were they available just as a way of collecting data on breeding stock, they would be very usesful; but presently they come across all too often as arbitrary, dictatorial and expensive; you can have the result of a lifetime's breeding programme turned down not because of any serious shortcoming, but because the graders just don't happen to favour that type at present, or just don't feel it has the WOW factor. And it IS true that some quite abysmal horses have passed gradings and some very good ones have been turned down. Is it any wonder that some owners fight shy of them?

Of course, some will see them as irrelevant anyway; the owners of minor racing stallions, who cover non-TBs as well as racemares, are not going to see grading as a priority, yet we can't afford to lose these bloodlines. I know the Futurity has made some provision for this, but it is a bit woolly; a sort of- "we'll accept it if we like it"- which gives plenty of scope for discontent.

Given that the animal is vetted on the day and judged as it stands on its own potential, I think the grading requirement is inappropriate in this case; a bit too much stick and not enough carrot, especially as the Futurity has been so well supported in its beginnings by ordinary owners who may have very little idea about grading. It doesn't seem at all fair to just jettison them. What about just giving grading advice and recommendations, based on type and breeding? Pointing out the benefits of grading, of course- assuming there are some?
 
What a shame that both, JuliaFSH and Alleycat aren't at the helm of the Futurity as they seem to have the future of British breeding as a priority for all breeders at heart and not for just the select few.
That is not to deride the present officers, of course not, but it does seem to be getting too big for its boots and moving from the original concept to an elitist element with the result that it will be pushing out some of the breeders it should be informing and encouraging.
 
[ QUOTE ]
That is not to deride the present officers, of course not, but it does seem to be getting too big for its boots and moving from the original concept to an elitist element.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, but the purpose of the Futurity is exactly to identify where the potential for Elite performance lies in British breeding and to link that with World Class Potential programmes. Whatever discipline you breed from, if you use a top graded stallion and a top graded mare that are compatible with each other and with the needs of the discipline concern then you stand far more chance of producing an Elite performer than using any other combination. This has ALWAYS been the philosophy of successful young horse identifier programmes throughout the world (and especially in our main competitors in mainland Europe) and has been ever since the Futuirty started in its original ridden 4 year old form and whilst we are still arguing about first principles (such as how we can tighten up on the approved breeding status of the sires and dams of the animals taking part) our competitor neighbours are taking major steps to tighten their qualification rules all the time. Like it or not, this is the way that breeding programmes progess and improve their products for sport and in fact the requirement for it is even built into the EU regulations for equine studbooks -- so the more we resist moving postively forward the more we drop behind :-(.

As any one aware of breeding industries abroad will tell you, the broad base of breeders is what keeps the Elites being produced,and they do this by their constant drive to improve their own animals and produce an Elite performer of their own -- and of course be acknowledged as such. These breeders recognise that competition (both in sport itself and in the market to produce successful horses/ponies for all disciplines and all levels (from local riding club to top international performer) is getting more demanding year by year and the only way to succeeed is to constantly raise their game and the demands for quality in their breeding stock.

To deny this is to limit not only the growth and success of the breeding industry but also to severly limit the opportunities of breeders at all levels to learn how to advance their skills so that they too can produce the animals that are fit for purpose for whatever discipline and level they aim for.

As cruiseline has said, whatever rules the Futurity makes about this and when it encforces them someone will find fault becuase it does not suit their particular breeding philiosphy. But whatever you think, I can completely assure everyone that such rules are applied as part of the practical implementation of the general philosphy -- and requirement -- of the BEF breeding programme to produce more riders, more horses and more medals and the need to raise the goal posts at certain points is a key strategy in this.

In fact, I personally believe that it is the only way to ensure that we improve -- and hopefully even catch up with other sporty horse breeding countries. For my own part I have only every used graded stallions since 1978 (including a couple we took abroad to grade when no-one else did) and I have only ever owned graded mares since 1980 (but never more than 3 at a time and I have none now), which is perhaps why I am so mystified as to why people go to such great lengths not to have their stallions and mares graded. Yes, it is expensive, yes there are risks (and it is one of the most stress-inducing, gut wrenching roller-coaster rides I know) but if you produce the animals correctly and present them to the correct studbook (admittedly a bit of a minefield in the UK but there is plenty of advice to be had and some foreign studbooks to be considered as possibilities too) then they will grade provided they are good enough. And once graded (and used in breeding animals for whatever discipline is their strength) their progeny will then help them onto the lists of the WBFSH top sires for each discipline and thus enhance the standing of British breeding and through them the whole of the British sports horse / warmblood breeding industry.

So why not take a step back and look at the wider picture rather than trying to personalise the issues and in so doing ignoring the fact that only a series driven by a need to identify elite performers is going to help everyone improve their breeding results? Not to do so could well positively prevent a breeder aiming to produce an Elite horse in the future from doing so, and can you really say that that would be of benefit to British breeding? I think not.
 
Like it or not, the Futurity now has a feel of only people breeding elite horses are wanted to participate.
Like MFH-09, I must have misunderstood it's concept, I thought it was to improve the quality of the overall stock in the UK, not just to bring forward possible World Class performers.
Many years ago I started with the aim of breeding another world class stallion, but soon discovered how difficult that was (and yes, I paid mega bucks to use the best imported stallions availbale in the UK at the time. ), but we realised the majority of people in this country didn't want or need such horses. Yes the professionals do, but they are the minority.
So we changed our breeding aims, refined the stock by eliminating any traits we found undesirable and after 28 years now have horses that people want. I can give several phone numbers of previous buyers who have returned for not just one horse but two they were so pleased with them.
One of the good things is it's surpprising just what the average horses like mine can achieve for their owners, we've had them competing at national PC Champs, County WH, BSJA and other affilliated disciplines with success.
So why am I made to feel as though my stock aren't good enough for your Futurity scheme? Whether you intended that or not, that's what is implied , and had we all done this grading lark years ago half the best horses in the Uk wouldn't have been eligable to be evaluated, are you saying the likes of Toytown should never have been bred?!
For reasons I have explained many times, it's pointless grading an 18 year old stallion, but if he's producing nice horses why will they get penalised because of that, surely you should be encouraging breeders like me not telling us to get graded or bog off!
I have made a start by getting our mares graded, but feel like MFH we are being dismissed as not good enough to take part. I won't stop breeding because as long as people contact me for horses there is a market out there for them, but please think long and hard about this feeling pervading the entire breeding world that only the very best horses should be bred from, some of the pretty-damn-good ones also can have their place in the equine world.
I do feel that the organisers of the Futurity are the ones who need to take a wider view, you are going to miss an enormous opportunity to improve ALL British breeding not just the elite few. (talking of which how many horses participate in the Futurity, yet how many are actually bred every year? I rest my case.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, but the purpose of the Futurity is exactly to identify where the potential for Elite performance lies in British breeding and to link that with World Class Potential programmes.

[/ QUOTE ]
So you're agreeing with me then? The Futurity is there to identify the best British Bred animals who could be potential medal winning horses, regardless of their origins. Data from the results of these evaluations can then be used to identify where the elite horses have originated from, not the other way around. Your argument so far puts the cart before the horse - attempt to identify elite lines from a restricted pool of horses for which little data exists, rather than gather as much data as possible from ALL sources which then identifies the origins of the best horses in order to inform and educate breeders. You are currently proposing to make uneducated decisions about which horses should be eligible based purely on an arbitrary grading status of parents rather than gathering as much data as possible to allow breeders to make educated decisions for themselves based on the information produced by the Futurity. We all know how the standards for grading vary between studbooks so even grading status doesn't provide a standard benchmark...

[ QUOTE ]
Whatever discipline you breed from, if you use a top graded stallion and a top graded mare that are compatible with each other and with the needs of the discipline concern then you stand far more chance of producing an Elite performer than using any other combination.

[/ QUOTE ]
That is completely true if you're working on a probability basis i.e. that probably works 80% of the time. But what about the other 20% of fabulous horses that weren't sired by a top graded sire or dam - and there are many, many more of them in the top levels of eventing for example than ones that cam from breeding programmes that only used graded sires and dams. Your philosophy would mean these 20% of horses would be excluded and it would be much harder for them to get noticed and get the right coaching to get on the Equine Pathways. Exclusion in the main is never a forward step.

[ QUOTE ]
our competitor neighbours are taking major steps to tighten their qualification rules all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]
So they're probably missing out on identifying good horses that they excluded and at the same time narrowing the gene pool to a few 'top' stallions - how is either of these things a positive step forward?

[ QUOTE ]
so the more we resist moving postively forward the more we drop behind :-(.

[/ QUOTE ]
UK and Irish Event horse breeders lead the world, so how are we dropping behind?? Zara Phillips World and European Champion Horse is of unknown breeding - wouldn't it have been a positive step forward if he'd not been 'allowed' to be bred??
confused.gif


[ QUOTE ]
As any one aware of breeding industries abroad will tell you, the broad base of breeders is what keeps the Elites being produced,and they do this by their constant drive to improve their own animals and produce an Elite performer of their own -- and of course be acknowledged as such. These breeders recognise that competition (both in sport itself and in the market to produce successful horses/ponies for all disciplines and all levels (from local riding club to top international performer) is getting more demanding year by year and the only way to succeeed is to constantly raise their game and the demands for quality in their breeding stock.

To deny this is to limit not only the growth and success of the breeding industry but also to severly limit the opportunities of breeders at all levels to learn how to advance their skills so that they too can produce the animals that are fit for purpose for whatever discipline and level they aim for.

[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely right - and what you're proposing actually limits the growth and success of the breeding industry by reducing the opportunities to gather maxiumum data on young hroses and their bloodlines by excluding a large number of horses and by excluding people who could potentially benefit from the 'education' available via the Futurity because their horse is no longer eligible.

[ QUOTE ]
As cruiseline has said, whatever rules the Futurity makes about this and when it encforces them someone will find fault becuase it does not suit their particular breeding philiosphy.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think a level playing field is generally accepted as fair by most people, on an 'all comers' basis... It's when people create rules based on their own philosophies and enforce them on others that the friction starts...

[ QUOTE ]
But whatever you think, I can completely assure everyone that such rules are applied as part of the practical implementation of the general philosphy -- and requirement -- of the BEF breeding programme to produce more riders, more horses and more medals and the need to raise the goal posts at certain points is a key strategy in this.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please quote exactly where this is published by the BEF because I've never seen that interpretation printed anywhere? The general goal of the BEF, not the Futurity specifically, is to produce more riders, more horses and more medals. The Futurity is way to try to help the British Breeding industry by having those riders sat on British not Foreign bred horses. At the moment our Team selectors, coaches and riders don't really care where the horsepower comes from, or what bloodlines it has, as long as they've got it. We have a way to go to convince them that British is best. The Futurity is a way of doing this but NOT if we start excluding top class horses based on their pedigrees. Last year British Chef d'Equipe and Team Manager Yogi Breisner absolutely loved our foal by our (as yet to be presented for grading) stallion. Wouldn't it have been a shame if he'd never seen it because it was now ineligible because of someone's breeding philosophy that's been foisted on the whole of British Breeding? Wouldn't it be a shame that his owner and his breeder would not now be benefiting from the opportunity to attend the Equine Pathway training sessions?? Both of these 2 things are the very reason the Futurity exists, but both of these objectives would have failed to have been achieved. If the objectives fail to be achieved, the scheme fails...

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, I personally believe that it is the only way to ensure that we improve -- and hopefully even catch up with other sporty horse breeding countries

[/ QUOTE ]
Correct - that is your belief. Does that make it more right than any one else's belief?

[ QUOTE ]
And once graded (and used in breeding animals for whatever discipline is their strength) their progeny will then help them onto the lists of the WBFSH top sires for each discipline and thus enhance the standing of British breeding and through them the whole of the British sports horse / warmblood breeding industry.

[/ QUOTE ]
As long as the horse has a UELN (which every horse does have now) it will automatically be linked to its studbook or origin and therefore its results will correctly attributed to the appropriate studbook.

[ QUOTE ]
So why not take a step back and look at the wider picture rather than trying to personalise the issues and in so doing ignoring the fact that only a series driven by a need to identify elite performers is going to help everyone improve their breeding results?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not seeing anyone personalising issues here. In fact most people are talking in generalisations but using real facts and examples to back up their points... The series as it stands does identify elite performers, so why change it and actually reduce its ability to improve British Breeding?

[ QUOTE ]
Not to do so could well positively prevent a breeder aiming to produce an Elite horse in the future from doing so, and can you really say that that would be of benefit to British breeding? I think not.

[/ QUOTE ]
How so? Sorry not followed your argument here at all...


All I'm interested in is breeding World Class event horses. To do this I study DATA. Actual FACTS about what is making it at the top levels and then I try to work out why. If I can work out WHAT and WHY I can then work out HOW I apply that to my breeding decisions. The proposal to begin excluding horses means the DATA I need to begin this process is an incomplete picture. This will lead to me drawing perhaps incorrect conclusions on the best bloodlines and nicks and will ultimately lead to me breeding a suboptimal horse. That is NOT good for my Breeding Programme and it's NOT good for British Breeding as a whole.

Grading is just one tool to assist with making breeding decisions, let's not make the mistake of assuming it's the ONLY tool and use it as a blunt weapon. Grading has its place but it is not a panacea, especially given it's immature state in the UK. Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water with regard to the Futurity (literally).
 
Just a couple of points of clarification in answer to all that and then I'll leave this thread alone as there are obviously a number of things on which we will never agree but which are long-term Futurity policy that will not be changed becuase they are based on good practice and proven results:

[ QUOTE ]

UK and Irish Event horse breeders lead the world, so how are we dropping behind?? Zara Phillips World and European Champion Horse is of unknown breeding - wouldn't it have been a positive step forward if he'd not been 'allowed' to be bred??
confused.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry British-born supremacy is definietly not apparent if you look at the number of animals that competed at the last Olympics. Yes there were a number of Irish ones (and scores over the year enabled them to win the WBFSH prize for the top winning studbook in eventing) but only one British-bred horse actually took part in the Games and even though he did very well in no way could Miners Frolic alone claim to have kept / made UK event horse breeders top of the tree. Also with only 5 British-bred horses in the top 50 rankings in the world (compared to 11 ISH and a further 11 from studbooks that employ the grading methods you have such doubts about that doesn't seem to be much of a statistical / data-driven argument to me. I would also add that one of the ironies of your example of Zara's horses is that one of her young ones is actually proven to be by Medoc but becuase he was taken to Ireland and had his passport changed his breeding has been deliberately lost and he is now marketed as Irish. If British-bred event horses held superb international reputation that you say they have this strikes me as an odd sales ploy to sya the least ... but then there are some Uk event owners that will only buy Irish becuase they doubt the quality of the current British product, so I would have thought that any process by which we could demonstrate that the stallion assessent process was being improved from even before a stallion stands at stud would have been an improvement.

It is also surely not insignifcant that the UELn-driven data based rankings for stallions competing in eventing at FEI level for 2008 contains no animals of proven British-bred origin although Jigilo II is there (in22nd place out of 48) as a stallion of unknown breeding. Yet another own goal there I feel <sigh>

[ QUOTE ]
Please quote exactly where this is published by the BEF because I've never seen that interpretation printed anywhere?

[/ QUOTE ]

Has no-one ever shown you the Implementation Plan for the BEF Breeding programme (presented to the BEF Board in I believe 2001 and accepted by them immediately as the foundation of its breeding policy)? How strange. Ask for a copy as I know there must be one around. Oh yes, and the reason I know what is in there is becuase the authors were myself, Tessa Clarke and Edith Rutherford so its hardly a Johnny come lately concept :-)
 
Being sanctimonious and sarcastic are not nice faults to have.................. - Your interpretation & those that choose to think along those lines. All I read at the moment from some quarters is a lot of moaning & little digs (again someones interpretation, mine). That is how I see it, just like you see Ciss as being sanctimonious & sarcastic in replying to a post that was directed at her comments. For the record, I dont have strong feelings either way on gradings or using graded mares/stallions. I do though see the purpose of them, which is why I did put forward a mare of unknown breeding, who graded. Apart from her I have never used a graded mare because it would not make any difference to the people wanting the offspring. As for this post all I see is someone answering the questions bought up by another poster, who bought up in their turn a post. Just like you will probably reply to this, so you can put your point across to what I have put. We are all capable of putting our own interpretation on things & depending on our moad can make a mountain out of a mole hill.
 
This is the statement on a producers site & it sums up what a lot of professional riders think, rightly or wrongly this is how it is;

We buy all our unbroken youngsters from the continent for several reasons. Most of the continental countries have had a breeding system in place for many years, they have worked out exactly what is needed to breed top quality sports horses. So we go either to Belgium, Germany or Holland purely for the fact that they have a better pool of well breed sport horses to choose from. Our policy when looking to purchase youngsters is that they are breed from not only international competeing stallions but from Elite or Sate Premiun mares which themseleves either have a competition history or a list of proven progeny. This is a system that does not exist in the UK - unfortunately. We go direct to the breeders, and look for unbroken youngsters that have been aloud to have had a proper youth. Not ones that have been pumped with protein or who are preforming well upbove their age. Our policy is that they must have clean limbs, great character, athletic loose movement and a great free jump.

This is the same attitude that riders had 20yrs ago, so why has it not changed?
 
Thats exactly why my youngstock are out in the field now and I tend not to get involved with the futurity, although am under mental pressure to do so. We have only just broken a 4year by my stallion out of an advanced mare and she has only gone on a lorry once. For me the first three years are for play and growth, horses are a long time grown up and hopefully a long time in work.
 
QUOTE: Taking last year as an example -
If the rule about graded stallions had been introduced last year BOTH the Highest Graded Eventer in the Country (by Primitive Proposal) AND the Champion Eventer at the Elite Show (by Future Illusion) would have been ineligible. Both were graded Elite, yet under the proposed rules, the BEF would have just missed out on identifying and bringing into the fold potentially 2 of the best young event prospects in the Country... which runs completely contrary to the explicit aim of the Futurity

DO THINK THAT THIS COMMENTS IS A LITTLE PRESUMPTUOUS. They may have been judged to be the best put forward to the evaluations in 2008 but taking the number of horses actually bred in this country the percentage brought forward at the evaluations is SMALL.

However I do agree that the BEF seem to be taking it a little far if they are to insist on progeny from Graded stallions only from 2012. If the boys need to be graded so do the girls!

And stallion gradings need to be uniform right across the board so that pony stallions from all breed societies as well as arabs, coloured horses/ponies as well as sport horses and all the other breeds have the same grading criteria.
 
I am with TheFuture on this one... if the stallions need to be graded, then I strongly believe that EVERY stallion should be graded, not just the Warmbloods/Irish Draughts etc etc. It is all very well saying that Arabs and Thoroughbreds do not have a grading system, but prey tell why they should be able to enter the Futurity and yet a youngster from say an ungraded young Warmblood stallion cannot! I think if you are going to introduce this rule, it needs to be an all round rule set in place or not at all.

And I am also in the belief that if the stallion has to be graded, then so should the mare (although, I am not for this at all for reasons I have stated in my previous post). After all, the mare stamps the stock far more strongly than the stallion in my opinion.

And on the subject of grading a mare, could you explain what would happen if the mare was not suitable to put forwards for grading? A very good friend of mine has a stunning mare who fractured her shoulder at 14 and could never be ridden or worked again. She is not sound to trot up, she cannot be flexioned etc etc and yet she has bred two outstanding foals who have been to the Futurity and been successful. There is no way this mare would pass a grading, therefore would this breeder then be cut out of the Futurity, despite the fact she has supported it for many years?
 
There is no way this mare would pass a grading, therefore would this breeder then be cut out of the Futurity, despite the fact she has supported it for many years?
Many studbooks have special considerations where top dams are injured and with vet.cert. do not for example have to do the Riden Performance test
 
And stallion gradings need to be uniform right across the board so that pony stallions from all breed societies as well as arabs, coloured horses/ponies as well as sport horses and all the other breeds have the same grading criteria.
It would not be possible for a body like the PHSP to dictate to the studbooks what the standards are for grading of stallions and mares. What should be done is to have a grid showing what standards are compulsory when studbooks do have stallion and mare gradings,not what standards are optional. As a purist I think than all gradings for stallions and mares should comprise a ridden standard before they are six.
 
I am a great believer in the grading of stallions and mares.

Julia you make the useful comment about the Futurity being used a tool to see what stallions are producing the goods and those that are not, but for me this should not be down to the Futurity but down to those Studbooks that any stallions are graded with.

With the likes of the Hanoverians and KWPN you get annual statistics on the strengths and weaknesses of their stallions (inc indexes for conformation, jumping or dressage etc) because these societies use all their own grading information to produce very useful information to the breeders, who can then go on to chose the right combination of mares and stallions.

From what I see this is something that none of the UK Studbooks do. The Scottish Sports Horse stallions have to produce youngstock and these have to be graded and stallions are assessed through what they are producing (besides their own competition record). If they are producing substandard horses then they can be downgraded or lose their status (although none of the stallions have because many do not produce the minimum number of offspring needed to get a proper assessment).

In the showjumping and dressage arenas you cannot beat the European Studbooks, and the reason they are tightening up their standards (as Ciss was saying) is because they compete against each other to breed the best. It is a great honour for them to be ranked and come out on top, and this has only been done through strict breeding policies. I cannot comment so much about the eventing side as when you look at the WBFSH horses for eventing there are a few with "unknown" against their breeding, but likewise there are a very large proportion that do have known bloodlines by graded stallions.

I am also in agreement on grading mares. HOWEVER, we have to remember that a stallion can do much more damage over a much shorter time to a breeding pool than a mare ever will. Stallions can cover multiple mares in one season whereby mares can only produce one foal (unless going down the ET route). So that is why so much more importance is put on the grading of stallions.

I do not think that anyone who enters the Futurity can ever think that if they win that they have the best young horse in the Country. Many people do not enter their young horses for one reason or another, so we cannot presume to have the best in the Country, you only have highest marked horse of those entered.
 
Excellent words Anastasia, you crystalized my thoughts completly. The closest we have got to being able to analyse the performance results of our stallions is the British Database which was scuppered just when it was giving good results.
 
[ QUOTE ]
what happens to the Arabs that are being put forward for the endurance section, there is no such thing as Arab grading,

[/ QUOTE ]

The AHS hold performance testing for qualification onto thier premium scheme for both mares and staliions, I know this is not a 'grading' as such but for me it seems fair that if you restrict other sections arabs and partbreds should be restricted too. Otherwise a purebred arab foal by ungraded parents would be eligible in 2012, but an ISH foal by an ungraded stallion would not
confused.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry British-born supremacy is definietly not apparent if you look at the number of animals that competed at the last Olympics.

[/ QUOTE ]
- but if you were aware of the selection process you'd have realised that several Brtish Bred horses who were originally selected for our team in particular later had to be dropped due to injury - Toytown, Shaabrak etc. and Oli Townend's Flint Curtis was removed from potential selection by his owner. Mentioning a competition that occurs once every 4 years does not reflect the wider picture of results across 4* competitions across the globe, and as everyone in eventing knows, the Olympics is only a 3*+ not a 4* anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
Also with only 5 British-bred horses in the top 50 rankings in the world (compared to 11 ISH and a further 11 from studbooks that employ the grading methods you have such doubts about that doesn't seem to be much of a statistical / data-driven argument to me.

[/ QUOTE ]
As you well know that's because the stats for many British Bred horses haven't been included because they were sired by Thoroughbreds whose studbook is not included in the WBFSH.



[ QUOTE ]
I would also add that one of the ironies of your example of Zara's horses is that one of her young ones is actually proven to be by Medoc but becuase he was taken to Ireland and had his passport changed his breeding has been deliberately lost and he is now marketed as Irish.

[/ QUOTE ]
Should this sort of very sensitive information be being posted on a public forum??
Not sure why this has been thrown into this discussion. I talked about Toytown, not any of her other horses.

[ QUOTE ]
It is also surely not insignifcant that the UELn-driven data based rankings for stallions competing in eventing at FEI level for 2008 contains no animals of proven British-bred origin although Jigilo II is there (in22nd place out of 48) as a stallion of unknown breeding.

[/ QUOTE ]
That will be because UELNs are relatively new and many British horses haven't had their passports updated since they were issued and therefore don't have UELNs.

[ QUOTE ]
Please quote exactly where this is published by the BEF because I've never seen that interpretation printed anywhere?

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has no-one ever shown you the Implementation Plan for the BEF Breeding programme (presented to the BEF Board in I believe 2001 and accepted by them immediately as the foundation of its breeding policy)? How strange. Ask for a copy as I know there must be one around. Oh yes, and the reason I know what is in there is becuase the authors were myself, Tessa Clarke and Edith Rutherford so its hardly a Johnny come lately concept :-)

[/ QUOTE ]
A couple of points -
1. Could you answer the question asked and provide the <u>current official BEF wording</u> ?
2. 2001 was 8 years ago. Are you saying we have learnt nothing in the last 8 years which has lead to a modification of the origin position??
3. The original committee that proposed the initial format of the evaluations has been disbanded by the BEF...


Whilst I agree that many dressage and showjumping horses are purchased with a strong emphasis on their pedigrees, this is not the case in event horse breeding. Many top event horse riders still dont give a damn how something is bred as long as they like it. We are trying to change this attitude slowly by producing top British horses and educating them as to how these top horses come from certain lines, but when they can still pick up ex race horses for bobbins and convert them into good event horses, it's a tough change in attitude to achieve. I always emphasise the breeding of my horses when selling them, but that always takes 2nd place to what the horse actually is in the flesh as far as they are concerned.

[ QUOTE ]
QUOTE: Taking last year as an example -
If the rule about graded stallions had been introduced last year BOTH the Highest Graded Eventer in the Country (by Primitive Proposal) AND the Champion Eventer at the Elite Show (by Future Illusion) would have been ineligible. Both were graded Elite, yet under the proposed rules, the BEF would have just missed out on identifying and bringing into the fold potentially 2 of the best young event prospects in the Country... which runs completely contrary to the explicit aim of the Futurity

DO THINK THAT THIS COMMENTS IS A LITTLE PRESUMPTUOUS. They may have been judged to be the best put forward to the evaluations in 2008 but taking the number of horses actually bred in this country the percentage brought forward at the evaluations is SMALL.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you read my comments careful you will see I specifically used the words 'potentially' and 'prospect' because I'm well aware that other people have excellent prospects that stayed at home. I would never be so conceited as to state that I had the best eventers in the country full stop, but surely you also have to concede that if having the highest graded eventer and the champion eventer, both graded elite aren't good indicators that they are excellent prospects (from over 170 event horses evaluated), then what's the point of having the evaluations?

[ QUOTE ]
Julia you make the useful comment about the Futurity being used a tool to see what stallions are producing the goods and those that are not, but for me this should not be down to the Futurity but down to those Studbooks that any stallions are graded with.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree 100% with you, but unfortunately they don't and as far as I know aren't proposing to in the future, which I think is a major failing. This is what we should be focussing our attention on to improve. At the moment it only leaves the Futurity gathering this information.


Stallion grading in the UK is very immature compared to that on the Continent and making an assumption that we can apply their model for the Futurity based on graded stallions offspring here is therefore erroneous until our stallion gradings are of the same maturity. The Continental model for stallion grading has been in existence for decades and therefore a consistent standard has been applied throughout this time. In the UK this is not the case and there is far too great a disparity not only between studbooks, but also within studbooks between stallions graded 10 years ago and ones graded now. To use these current grading statuses is not a level playing field in any way, shape or form.

Once stallion grading in the UK is improved you can then use that as a benchmark. Currently a view that is shared by many people is that the stallion grading system in the UK is too piecemeal, inconsistent and immature to be used a viable measure of quality. Basing our whole Futurity on this, would be like building a castle on foundations of sand...

Forcing people to down the route of having to grade horses or use graded horses for breeding, or face 'exclusion' from the British British system, when the grading process is clearly such an imperfect system in the UK, is a huge mistake and short-sighted in the extreme. Let's learn to walk before we can run and focus on improving the grading process in the UK and increase it's perceived stature before we start telling people that it's the be all and end all when it's clearly not? Once that is fixed then we can use it as the benchmark that it should be and consider ways it could be used for the betterment of British Breeding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top