Interesting article about what 4* riders want.

Thanks, interesting article.
I always go for short cannon bones, good feet and a trainable temperament with decent movement. Of course the horse has to have a good jump but often if the parents are talented the offspring follow suit.
Something none of them mentioned is how they are reared, I always feel our horses have an advantage because of the undulating terrain with many natural obstacles such as streams/rocks/holes/overhanging branches etc they grow up with. They have to learn to think for themselves which a young horse in a flat field really doesn't.
I recently sold a yearling to a professional event rider but he should have had long enough here to be agile, I'll beinterested to hear what she says once she eventually competes him.
 
An interresting article, although none of the findings actually surprise me much... except the age at which professional riders buy their horses.

What I mean is considering how much of the eventual success of a potentially great young horse is down to early training & production, I am really surprised to hear that none of the riders interviewed would buy a weanling and very few a horse younger than 4 years old.
 
Very interesting article!Especially about temperment being the most important thing. But that kind of contradicts what most of the top event sires produce- Primative Rising, Criminal Law, Java Tiger, Rock King, Catherston horses, Fleetwater Opposition- all known producers of tricky/difficult offspring.

I think the article needs to convey exactly what they mean by good temperment? Maybe the survey was only done on Irish event riders not british & they wouldnt put up with this kind of temperment that the brits put up with? Who knows, thats probably just a gross generalisation.

I also wonder wether british 4 star riders would cite movement higher up on the priority list since Ireland have never really been competitive in dressage phases. I think that british eventers really want that 'wow so flash' horse with super movement, and spend a very long time looking for them.

Would love to know exactly what this test is that they do on the 3 year olds, I want to do it with mine.

I think HenryHorn has a really valid point about youngster upbringing, I totally believe that its the way that they should all be raised for long term toughness, soundness and athleticsm.

Think there should be another study- on how the top four star event horses were brought up from foals.
 
henryhorn said:
Something none of them mentioned is how they are reared, I always feel our horses have an advantage because of the undulating terrain with many natural obstacles such as streams/rocks/holes/overhanging branches etc they grow up with. They have to learn to think for themselves which a young horse in a flat field really doesn't.
Click to expand...

I think this is a HUGE - and oft ignored - part of the equation, not only for eventing but for sound, strong horses in general. Way back when, before AI, it was much more common for horses to be raised in age appropriate groups in large areas. Now so many spend their whole lives in flat, manicured paddocks with only an older horse or two for company. In my personal experience it's just doesn't produce the same general result.

I'm most interested in knowing what, specifically, the temperament tests were. I do know that temperament marks in studbook approvals don't necessarily follow what the average rider would consider a "nice horse" and would be curious to know how they evaluated in this case.

Also, the comment on pedigree is interesting but, in my experience, doesn't mean much. Lots of top comp riders profess to not care at all about a horse's breeding but they obviously care very much about the result. I think saying it's not important says more about what they know about the subject and why not? No one is going to know everything - they know how to ride 4* horses, not necessarily how to make one in the first place. Especially if their main criteria is "cheap". ;)
 
Last edited:
I went to a William Fox-Pitt demo a while ago and he for one VERY MUCH cared about how his horses are bred... He showed 3 of his horses at various points of training and recited their full pedigree. He also said at least twice during the demo that his favourite sire was Primitive Rising...
 
TarrSteps said:
I think this is a HUGE - and oft ignored - part of the equation, not only for eventing but for sound, strong horses in general. Way back when, before AI, it was much more common for horses to be raised in age appropriate groups in large areas. Now so many spend their whole lives in flat, manicured paddocks with only an older horse or two for company. In my personal experience it's just doesn't produce the same general result.

I'm most interested in knowing what, specifically, the temperament tests were. I do know that temperament marks in studbook approvals don't necessarily follow what the average rider would consider a "nice horse" and would be curious to know how they evaluated in this case.

Also, the comment on pedigree is interesting but, in my experience, doesn't mean much. Lots of top comp riders profess to not care at all about a horse's breeding but they obviously care very much about the result. I think saying it's not important says more about what they know about the subject and why not? No one is going to know everything - they know how to ride 4* horses, not necessarily how to make one in the first place. Especially if their main criteria is "cheap". ;)
Click to expand...

In total agreement. Elevage is as important as pedigree. I speak having bought a horse who it transpired had broken his neck, this had healed badly and he now has arthritis at 4 years old. Injury most likely (according to vet school) in first year. But for this he would have been a superb competition horse - passed sound, by two British and three French vets!!! Only investigated because of stroppy owner -me!

I know some breeders believe that running horses free with little handling is good for them, but lack of handling can mean that small injuries are missed. I am also confused regarding feeding of youngstock I mean hard feed versus au natural? which is best?
 
We sold a foal to a Proff eventer and the criteria was movement and this person liked something that bit different and was a 7/8th TB must make the right height for the rider and do the job for which he was bred for.
I agree a lot of riders dont know about pedigrees and from my own experience being a step mum of one, dont really care they ride theses horses they do not breed them.
 
GinnieRedwings said:
I went to a William Fox-Pitt demo a while ago and he for one VERY MUCH cared about how his horses are bred... He showed 3 of his horses at various points of training and recited their full pedigree. He also said at least twice during the demo that his favourite sire was Primitive Rising...
Click to expand...

And he has a rep for paying for horses (or at least having people who can pay for them) which probably makes him less inclined to want to think breeding doesn't matter. ;)

It's also interesting how many successful eventers have, at some point in their careers, been associated with particular breeders and/or gone back to buy horses from the same source as their most successful mounts. So they may "not care" about breeding but they seem happy enough when someone else does. ;)

On the subject of horses living out not being checked regularly, I don't think the two need to be mutually exclusive although I do see the point. I just feel so many people want to wrap their young horses in cotton wool now in case they get hurt that they actually increase the chances the horse won't perform and are more open to injury later down the road. I also know a number of horses that have been injured young BECAUSE they've been in very man made situations (stuck in gates, jumping out of boxes etc) so you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. ;) I do think it's like the whole business of people not letting their kids out to play now, because of fears for their safety - the costs are much greater than anyone originally thought.
 
I think the reason riders often become associated with a line or a stud is it starts off with one, and then snowballs. Better the devil you know and all that! Seriously though, look at the Opposition horses, they have often ended up in clusters at riders' yards. They are also easily identified by their names! And of course as a rider if you have a good experience buying from one breeder/stud, you will likely go back there. Maybe I will be lucky enough to combine two of my good horses' backgrounds if I take up my first refusal on a yearling colt out of an advanced event mare I gave to the breeder of a good two star horse I had!

I think the reason riders often won't buy a horse before it's four is simply due to space. Many riders run yards without unlimited acreage, they simply haven't got the room to run youngsters out. I wonder if barn-keeping them, as is popular here on the continent and increasingly in the UK would be a viable way of raising eventers.

I have bred my current best horse, and I have a 3yo I bred too, but it doesn't make financial sense whilst we don't own our own land. I could go out and buy an uber 5yo for what the 3yo has cost me so far, and she hasn't even jumped a fence yet.
 
Quick reply! Just about the 24 people interviewed: they were all international riders who have competed at 4* level and were interviewed while competing at the 2008 Tattersalls World Cup qualifier. Therefore, not 24 random 'people' selected for a vox pop piece. :)

The full report - I'll dig it out later - makes very interesting reading and is essentially in two parts; first part deals with the 4* rider interviews (they were the group who cited temperament and reported on prices paid for varying ages) and second part is based on findings from the Irish young event league so there are certain similarities between the two groups.

What would be most interesting is to see how many from young horse classes held in Ireland/U.K, Europe or American make the jump to 4* level.

Later. :)
 
Really interesting article and it's raised to many questions in my mind that I'd love to sit and have a really good chat with the article writer.

I found it interesting about clusters of horses ending up with particular riders. Over the last few years, we've bought in a few ponies/horses from various places and only when we've got the passports have we realised that they were all bred by the same two studs. We didn't go to them specifically, but there must be something about their horses that appeal to us. Now we've recognised what's happening, we've gone directly to the studs.

I only hope and dream that one day, someone loves the horses I breed in the same way - that I'm managing to consistently produce what a rider is looking for. That must be so rewarding as a breeder :)
 
seabsicuit2 said:
Very interesting article!Especially about temperment being the most important thing. But that kind of contradicts what most of the top event sires produce- Primative Rising, Criminal Law, Java Tiger, Rock King, Catherston horses, Fleetwater Opposition- all known producers of tricky/difficult offspring.

I think the article needs to convey exactly what they mean by good temperment? Maybe the survey was only done on Irish event riders not british & they wouldnt put up with this kind of temperment that the brits put up with? Who knows, thats probably just a gross generalisation.

Temperament and quirks seem to go hand in hand with the top performers but when you look at the 4* cross-country tracks these horses jump, maybe the odd quirk can be forgiven in these brave athletes.

Perhaps two reasons why temperament is cited as so important:

1. Saleability. When so few horses make the top international grade, most are sold on. A sane horse is always more saleable than a similarly talented but more temperamental character.

2. Time. Any athlete has a certain shelf life and naturally, eventers wont want to battle tempermental young horses at the risk of a broken limb, or worse. Injuries = time and money particularly when riders are making a living from their sport. So older, 'ready to go' horses are a more commerical option which could also explain why unbroken/more high-risk youngstock are down the list.

I also wonder wether british 4 star riders would cite movement higher up on the priority list since Ireland have never really been competitive in dressage phases. I think that british eventers really want that 'wow so flash' horse with super movement, and spend a very long time looking for them.

That is not to say that Irish-bred horses cant move. :) Look at Ringwood Cockatoo's dressage scores! Employing the likes of Bettina Hoy and her dressage trainers might work wonders quicker than breeding that 'problem' out by producing flashy movers but at the risk of losing the gallop and fifth leg.

The obvious temptation is there, particularly for young event horse class specialists, to produce big-moving horses but should dressage be what eventing is all about? A producer of one of the best event horses in the world this year - Irish-bred :D - said she would not have entered him for any of the young event horse series as a youngster because his movement wasn't spectacular enough at that stage - horses for courses.

So it's a similar analogy to the choice facing TB NH breeders; to breed a precocious hurdler/two-mile chaser or the much longer road to aim for breeding a Gold Cup winner. Two totally different types, two viable markets and the same for the event scene; commercial young event horse types or potential 4* stores.

Riders are another factor as the riders of yore learned stickability by the seat of their jodphurs in rough-and-tumble pony days or the hunting field. Tommy Brennan's swift response to one earnest breeders question as to how to breed another Murphy Himself was 'Breed another Ian Stark!'. For some 'X Factor generation' riders who may not have the time, skill or experience of producing young horses, a flashy mover may seem almost like a short cut to good dressage scores. How many of the flashy movers and young event horse class/championship winners progress to and then remain at 4* level is another debate entirely.

Would love to know exactly what this test is that they do on the 3 year olds, I want to do it with mine.

According to the references in this 38-page report, this refers to the study by Visser, E.K Van Reenen, C.G, Engel, B, Schilder M.B.H, Barneveld, A & Blokhuis, H.J. (2003). The association between performance in showjumping and personality traits earlier in life. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 82, 279 - 295. Good luck with that. :)

I think HenryHorn has a really valid point about youngster upbringing, I totally believe that its the way that they should all be raised for long term toughness, soundness and athleticsm.

This ties in with what Vere Philips said in H&H recently about Irish horses although maybe a tad of a sweeping statement to say all Irish-bred youngsters are reared 'knee-deep in mud'. Sure, there's still some scruffy yards around with scruffier inmates and their 'whatever you'd like them to be by, Sir' owners but deal with them at your own risk. :D

Irish horses are definitely not mollycoddled though and that independence as youngsters helps them develop into the quick-thinking, fifth-legged free spirits. Youngsters here are well-handled until weaned, then spend their winters in a 25-acre 'equine playground' beside a mainline railway. If they don't turn into cross-country machines after their youth has been spent playing as a herd over ditches, tree trunks and banks in all kinds of ground conditions, at least they will be champion trainspotters. ;)

Think there should be another study- on how the top four star event horses were brought up from foals.
Click to expand...

Know that many of the current top Irish-bred eventers led au-naturel lives as youngstock. Very au-naturel. :D It would also be interesting to do a study on eventing owners who more than likely bankroll those event riders purchases and compared to other equestrian sports such as racing or even showjumping, surely support eventing for the love of it rather than financial rewards from prizemoney or massive stud fees.
 
It does beg the question though, how many small breeders/single foal owners here go out of their way to give their foals an active upbringing, in a large "imperfect" area, with age appropriate companions? Not just potential 4* prospects but any horse that is supposed to grow up to be an athlete?

Don't get me wrong, I completely agree. As I said before, my own experience with horses that have grown up in varied situations and my observations over the past couple of decades have made me more and more certain a bit of "rough and tumble", or at the very least a good social situation and not too much coddling, be it with food or care, makes all the difference. But it's almost impossible to convince people that the risks have rewards and most single foal owners seem more concerned that the young horse looks good and behaves perfectly at an early age.

Perhaps this is why we're now seeing horses from "non-traditional" sport horse producing countries, like Portugal or Spain, purposefully brought up "rough" if only because land is cheaper and the culture is different.

There are people now developing programs to seek to redress these imbalances with specific exercises etc to improve proprioception and optimise physical development. I'd still like to see young horses out being horses but maybe this "early start" training will become the wave of the future . . .
 
seabiscuit2 brings up many good points.

About a month ago the RDS sent me the report and a week later I had a long telephone conversation with a top official in which I explained the more serious reservations I had with the methodology and conclusions. The report has many problems and care should be taken before assigning credence to its conclusions and recommendations.

One of the most serious problems, in my view, is with the issue of temperament. The "construct" (to use a term for research methods) is not defined and is not measured (i.e., a variable has not been created and measured). To one person temperament is rideability; to another it is trainability; to another it is that the horse is human-oriented. The conclusions on temperament in the report should be discarded, I believe.
 
Along with soundness, (which goes hand in hand with conformation), the right temperament is vital for a top sport horse. I compete and breed (on a small scale) and temperament is of great importance to me. To me, rideability and trainability are the same thing, ie sensitive with a will to go (not to be confused with sensitive with a will to go anywhere and everywhere, regardless of the rider's wants). The temperament I want is ideal if the horse is sound and well made. If it is sore somewhere or finds the work hard due to its conformational weaknesses, the sensitivity can work against you rather than for you.

Some of the top riders have had success with very sharp/difficult/conformationally challenged horses but I suspect that they all look for a beautifully made, athletic, sound horse with a "go" attitude when shopping for a 4* prospect (with their own money). No horse is perfect so compromises are made. It all depends on how good the good points are compared to the bad points. Is anyone willing to take a risk on a super-talented stunner with crap feet? Having had a couple, not me. If I was lucky enough to have rich owners and had no conscience I may not care so much.

24 people is not a big enough survey in my opinion.
 
That was the 'short' response as the original one, which also dealt with conformation etc. got gobbled by the HHO gremlin :o Part of it involved lining some of the top 4* performers - Lenamore, LB Sam, Spring Along and Over To You in a head-to-tail line-up and seeing what conformation traits they had.. if any ;).. in common.

Will re-write it if I get a chance but this caught my eye..


TarrSteps said:
maybe this "early start" training will become the wave of the future . . .
Click to expand...

Anyone else seeing a market opening for Horsey WII games for couch potato, cotton-wool-clad 'eventer babies' :D
 
Or how about Poll-ates for Foal(ates)?

Will be back to ponder and dissect the oh-so-scientific art of event horse breeding at a future, less giddy date. :D
 
TarrSteps said:
It does beg the question though, how many small breeders/single foal owners here go out of their way to give their foals an active upbringing, in a large "imperfect" area, with age appropriate companions? Not just potential 4* prospects but any horse that is supposed to grow up to be an athlete?
Click to expand...

Me.

He's out 24/7 in a stable herd with five other youngsters (aged 1-3) and our 20 & 25yo TBs to keep them in line. I particularly wanted him to have the robust rough and tumble childhood that our others didn't have. It's something I couldn't have given him on my own land so I've been very lucky to find somewhere that can let him be a babypony out with other babyponies.
 
EstherYoung said:
Me.

He's out 24/7 in a stable herd with five other youngsters (aged 1-3) and our 20 & 25yo TBs to keep them in line. I particularly wanted him to have the robust rough and tumble childhood that our others didn't have. It's something I couldn't have given him on my own land so I've been very lucky to find somewhere that can let him be a babypony out with other babyponies.
Click to expand...

Can I ask why you chose that for him relative to what you've done previously? (You can reply privately if you'd prefer. Or not at all, as I'm just being nosy. :) )

I'm not saying horses can't succeed without that start but having seen and worked with a lot of young horses from various backgrounds, I really think it conveys a long term advantage, physically, mentally and socially.
 
I've got a fair old bit of experience with youngsters and I've seen from the various yards I've worked on the difference between those youngsters that get kept in, over-shown and over produced, and those who get to be horses. Wolf is the first that has actually been mine pretty much from the get go so I wanted him to have start I knew was right.

I didn't bring up my others, I bought them when they were adults. In theory a decent upringing is up there on my shopping list when buying but in reality I'm a sucker for a neglected ayrab..... H had a good life for the first two years of his life but then spent the next two was pretty much shut in a tiny pony box 24/7 with minimal hay while his owner ran out of money. He was a skinny little weedy stunted 4yo when we got him. Spud had a good first 6 months with his breeder but then was brought up as an in hand ayrab show colt/stallion for the next 7 years - he barely got to go out (extra 'presence' if they're kept in all the time dontcha know....). That confinement during his formative years has taken its toll on his legs, and he was pretty screwed up mentally when we got him. I love that grey dilert of an arab but he is a lot more fragile than some of his siblings who got a more healthy upbringing. I liken him to a Hollywood child star who grew up doing movies and signing autographs, instead of going to school with his age group, and who then crashed and burned. Not the way to bring up an athlete anyway.

But then I've got the same attitude to getting them fit, too - I find I can get them a heck of a lot fitter living out 24/7 than I can if they're in. You wouldn't get a human athlete fit by locking them in the cupboard under the stairs 23 hours out of 24 so why expect the same from an equine athlete. But that's a whole other debate....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top