Colored TBs in Europe

[angrovestud]

Dear Jorge
I have just had a chat with Weatherbys and they have confirmed that their on line database contains all horses that are registered with Weatherbys in the GSB and the NTR and the records are RIGHT!
I have also checked Black spot, Proudridge, Benveuto, Bairgen Briac, they have no record of any of these horses in the GSB or the NTR, as this was on my time, I did not explore the full list, but seems very strange that this database has this information and weatherbys does not, so where did it come from? horses that are with Weatherbys that I have checked are confirmed V11 and are of unregistered stock. V11 which means of unknown breeding or of known breeding but NOT REGISTERED with Weatherbys, so they would be the same as my own horses known breeding that has to go 8 generations before being allowed to cross over in to the GSB.
its all very interesting but we do need the horses that are V11 to be shown as such and if they are allowed to be entiled to be on your database so should subsequently bred horses including mine which are registered in the same way as these.

[angrovestud]

According to Weatherbys there is always reference to the sire and dam in the printed version of the GSB but online if a horse is a V11 it will appear unknown-unknown even if the sire and dam are pure TB but unregistered.

[Lucy]

Dear Jorge
I have just had a chat with Weatherbys and they have confirmed that their on line database contains all horses that are registered with Weatherbys in the GSB and the NTR and the records are RIGHT!

I'm sorry, but whoever told you that could not have been more mistaken. You need only attempt to look up Derby winners Azor, Blucher, Prince Leopold, Tagalie, and Volodyovsky (just a handful I grabbed at random) - who clearly were purebred & registered, else they would not have run - too see for yourself.

It's hardly the fault of those working at Weatherbys today - they have a massive project on their hands, and do an outstanding job. The problem appears to be that when they created their online database, they started with currently registered horses and worked backwards.....and as a result, many horses from the pre-war years who did not breed on slipped through the cracks. The US Jockey Club's online database at Equineline has the exact same issue. They exist as breed registries, not historians.

[Jorge]

It's hardly the fault of those working at Weatherbys today - they have a massive project on their hands, and do an outstanding job. The problem appears to be that when they created their online database, they started with currently registered horses and worked backwards.....and as a result, many horses from the pre-war years who did not breed on slipped through the cracks. The US Jockey Club's online database at Equineline has the exact same issue. They exist as breed registries, not historians.

Yes, that's the reality and the reason that explains these lapses in recorded information.

[angrovestud]

I'm sorry, but whoever told you that could not have been more mistaken. You need only attempt to look up Derby winners Azor, Blucher, Prince Leopold, Tagalie, and Volodyovsky (just a handful I grabbed at random) - who clearly were purebred & registered, else they would not have run - too see for yourself.

Thanks Lucy I did go and see for myself you are right all these horses did win the derby, but out of the mentioned horse Azor is pure and registered with weatherbys as is Volodyovsky he is pure TB.
Tagalie is in the database and registered with Weatherbys but is eligable to race, but he comes up with Unknown-Unknown , as I was told by Weatherbys Stud book department this is because one or both his parents are not pure or if they were pure may not have been registered as foals with weatherbys they will be named in the Volumes within the GSB but they will be missing from the database.They come under a V11.
as for prince Leopold he is missing from the database himself but his sire who is registered and pure called Hedley, but his dam who is not registered and may or maynot be pure is not recorded in the database. for the reasons i have given above.
and because you can gain acceptance with unregistered horses and there progeny can race this is how its done, it is still being done today.

[Lucy]

Tagalie is in the database and registered with Weatherbys but is eligable to race, but he comes up with Unknown-Unknown , as I was told by Weatherbys Stud book department this is because one or both his parents are not pure or if they were pure may not have been registered as foals with weatherbys they will be named in the Volumes within the GSB but they will be missing from the database.They come under a V11.

Her sire, Cyllene, is Phalaris' grandsire....if he's not pure, you'd need to V11 most of the TBs alive today. Her third dam is the taproot mare of Fam.20-D, descending from a Royal mare. Tagalie was regsitered with Weatherbys as of when they published the paper copy of the book in 1913 [GSBv.XXII,p. 858]. There is no notation in her dam's entry to indicate she is anything other than a regsitered purebred - and considering that was the year they passed the Jersey Act, they'd have been a lot more touchy about it then than now!

However, Tagalie's line of descent did not survive in England past the 1940s, and that seems to have been the cut-off point for horses to appear in Weatherbys online. But her line survived in the USA, so she does show up in Equineline's database (albiet under the wrong country code; they say she was bred in Ireland).

It is, of course, your decision whether or not to take my word for it. But it's been well established among pedigree researchers that, when one is looking for pre-WWII records, online databases are worth....well, the paper they're printed on. (and yes, that includes this one....though there have been a lot of folks with extensive libraries putting in years of work to trying to set it straight, it's always wise to have a backup resource)