Re: RC: What kind of stallion?

[CMKSAGEHIL@aol.com]

In a message dated 4/19/99 7:18:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
EISENHART@aol.com writes:

<< I'd go with the stallion with the endurance record.  Pedigrees don't 
 perform.... >>

I hear this a lot, and when I ask those who say it to define a "good" 
pedigree, I am not surprised that they make this statement, as they usually 
mention pedigrees that are chosen for attributes other than endurance.  There 
are several families that crop up again and again in top endurance horses, 
and it is not a fluke that when one buys or breeds to individuals from those 
families, one tends to get good endurance horses.  The Thoroughbred people 
can certainly tell you this about race horses, too.  I'd like to relate a 
story from the Thoroughbred world that made a real impression on me as a 
youngster.  I grew up riding horses that were a product of breeding ranch 
mares to Thoroughbred remount stallions.  (We in turn bred those to Arabs, 
but that's another subject...)  One of the remount stallions that had been in 
our area prior to my own advent and who had left offspring on several ranches 
(including ours) was a horse named Cheyenne Chief.  His sire was a horse 
named Pillory, who had actually won the Belmont and the Preakness (I believe 
in 1922) and run 2nd in the Kentucky Derby.  Imagine that--a horse that was 
one place away from being a Triple Crown winner--how could he go wrong, if 
one bred based on performance?  Well, old Pillory had come from nowhere in 
terms of pedigree, and where did he go in the breeding shed??  Nowhere.  His 
son in the remount was a beautiful animal and could certainly win the county 
fair races against the local range horses, but he was raced for three seasons 
and never had so much as a show.  Likewise several of his other paternal 
half-siblings.  I am no great expert on Thoroughbred pedigrees, but to tell 
you the truth, I have never heard the name Pillory mentioned in a breeding 
context in Thoroughbred circles.  He simply didn't cut it as a sire.

I have seen that scenario over and over in different disciplines, and I have 
never forgotten the lesson of Pillory.  Remember, folks, Abu Farwa, *Witez 
II, Razifa, and many other great progenitors of endurance horses never ran a 
ride.  Yet their descendants continue to go out and perform.  Here in the 
northwest, one horse who is unfortunately already deceased is proving himself 
to be a great endurance sire--he never ran a race either, but he is a 
half-brother to an AERC Hall of Fame horse that is still running in his early 
20's and several of his get are really making an impression, including last 
year's PNER champion and several other notables.  Go with the pedigree if the 
horse has proper traits to go with it.  But first STUDY pedigrees, so that 
you know if it is really a good ENDURANCE pedigree, and not just what the 
Arabian fad breeders think is a "good" pedigree.  There is a huge difference.

Heidi


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.    
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp   
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=