Re: RC: re: endurance bloodlines

[CMKSAGEHIL@aol.com]

In a message dated 12/24/99 8:40:54 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
greymare@jps.net writes:

<< I honestly have to wonder how much emphasis you can put on =
 bloodlines.....I bet you could pick just about any prominent stallion, =
 or mare lines and find
 successful endurance lines.  Perhaps certain bloodlines are "popular" =
 because those horses are the ones that happen to be compaigned by people =
 that have the time and money to compete seriously. >>

Any line will have some good endurance horses.  But what we look at when 
assessing a general line is how commonly we see that line doing well, how 
commonly we see it fail, and how common it is in the overall gene pool.  One 
has to look at the pedigrees of failures as well as successes.  I really 
don't think any particular line has been "popular" in this sport simply 
because looking at bloodlines at all for endurance has not been common until 
recently.  I can't speak for numbers in the gene pool of other lines, but 
horses that qualify as CMK horses are only about 10% of the American gene 
pool.  They tend to succeed at the sport more often than they fail, and they 
comprise a percentage of successful horses disproportionate to their 
percentage in the gene pool.  Within any larger group, one can find 
individual lines that are more or less successful than others, too--and one 
can often see distinct family traits for either conformational strengths or 
flaws or metabolic strengths or flaws that tend to make particular family 
lines more successful.

Pedigree is certainly not the ONLY prognosticating tool--but it is becoming 
more and more evident that it is at least ONE prognosticating tool for 
evaluating a prospect.

Keep in mind, too, that ANY bloodline is only as good as the people who 
continue to breed it--a pedigree is not an exact recipe for a horse, but 
rather a set of possibilities.  Over time, any line begins to reflect which 
of those possibilities that breeders have chosen to represent that line by 
reproducing.  That's why you can have a perfectly "lovely" pedigree on paper 
5 generations back, but can have lost the qualities those ancestors were 
known for in the present day horse.  An educated breeder will be cognizant of 
what those historical horses represented and what about them is worth 
carrying forward--and will make breeding choices accordingly.

All too often I hear people denigrate pedigrees because they see a poor horse 
with a pedigree full of famous parents.  Keep in mind that fame and quality 
are not always one and the same, and also that fame may have been earned by 
doing something not at all related to what it is you are trying to do with 
the offspring.  Also remember that even good horses can have poor genes, and 
that there is always a certain amount of "luck of the draw."  Even in a deck 
comprised of 50 aces and 2 deuces, you can still draw a deuce!  But your odds 
of an ace are a lot higher if there are more aces in the deck.  So--make sure 
that most of the ancestors in a pedigree have at least a fair amount of the 
traits you want.

Heidi


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