Re: here we go again

["Duncan Fletcher" <dfletche@gte.net>]

I can't help but emphasize the ALL. How often have you seen a horse
advertised as descended from (insert your favorite long dead horse here). Of
course the horse in question is a great grand offspring with just 1/8 the
genetic material from that horse and 7/8 from who knows what and even that
1/8 may be the faults of that great horse and not its positive attributes.

Duncan Fletcher
dfletche@gte.net


----- Original Message -----
From: <CMKSAGEHIL@aol.com>
>
> Everything that a horse is genetically capable of doing comes from his
> ancestors.  No, a pedigree is not a precise blueprint of what a horse will
> be--what it is is a set of possibilities.  You can't make him something
that
> he doesn't have the genetic capability of being.
>
> That said--the biggest problem with pedigree study is that folks expect
> quality from fame, without taking the time and trouble to learn what those
> horses back there--and I mean ALL of those horses back there--are really
> like.  Fame and quality are not synonymous--they may sometimes be related,
> but not always.  You have to look farther than the sire or dam--you have
to
> look at the whole genetic picture.  And even then, it is a matter of
> probabilities--since no one family has a black-and-white lock on quality
for
> a given discipline.  By the luck of the draw, you can round up enough good
> genes in a "poor" pedigree to have a great horse, or enough poor genes in
a
> "good" pedigree to have a poor horse.  But your chances are a lot better
if
> you start with families that have more good genetic material to offer than
> bad.
>
> Heidi
>
>