mare size

mightyhijames · Postby **mightyhijames** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 6:03 pm

i'm curious about breeding smaller mares (15H). is there a size that is considered too small to breed to race?

Maven · Postby **Maven** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 6:12 pm

15h is fine to breed, if she's breeding sound. I wouldn't breed her to an exceptionally large stallion, but I would certainly look for something that is going to throw some size her way.

mightyhijames · Postby **mightyhijames** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 6:02 am

great, thanks. is there usually a price difference if a mare is on the small side, all other considerations being equal?

Maven · Postby **Maven** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 6:05 am

Size usually sells... and if all the variables were equal between a mare with size and one without, the larger mare will sell better each time.

LB · Postby LB » Sat Nov 03, 2007 6:30 am

I agree with what Maven said, but I'd probably carry it a little further. I think the current commercial market truly demands size. You'll take a hit with a small mare and a small yearling. For some reason yearling buyers think big means early (when it's usually the opposite) and that a larger stride equals a faster horse--which Northern Dancer, Megahertz, and Rahy, to name just a few, would be surprised to hear.

As far as breeding to race though, small size is no deterrent at all. Plus, very generally speaking, it's usually easier to keep a small horse sound than a big one.

Jenny · Postby **Jenny** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 6:31 am

The mare Jenny Bug we were talking about on another thread, is only 15h and throws huge foals. All her offspring, except for her first foal, are at least 16 hands. and she was bred to stallions who were 15.3. So I don't think it makes a difference if the mare throws big. The funny thing is she never even looks in foal till like the last 2 weeks, then spits out these massive foals. I don't know where she hides them.

madelyn · Postby **madelyn** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 8:47 am

If you do not plan to sell the mare, the size of the mare is not necessarily a factor. I have a wonderfully bred little tank of a mare in my herd, Ground Queen. She has nearly perfect conformation, but stops the stick at 15.1h. However she is the very last foal out of a 20 year old mare from a family of large horses. Her first yearling left the farm two weeks ago to be broke and head to the track. This filly was nearly the size of her dam as a coming two year old. Her filly this year is already half the size of her dam and not yet six months old. The proof of a broodmare is in what she throws. Queenie throws an incredible body, with all the parts, but let's the stallion throw in size and refinement.

This is her first foal, the one who just went to the breaking farm, taken a few months ago, who was 15 hands tall at the time:

Having now had two foals from my fireplug mare whose legs are longer than the dam's AT BIRTH, I think I can say the mare throws size.

casallc · Postby **casallc** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 8:47 am

LB wrote:I agree with what Maven said, but I'd probably carry it a little further. I think the current commercial market truly demands size. You'll take a hit with a small mare and a small yearling. For some reason yearling buyers think big means early (when it's usually the opposite) and that a larger stride equals a faster horse--which Northern Dancer, Megahertz, and Rahy, to name just a few, would be surprised to hear.

As far as breeding to race though, small size is no deterrent at all. Plus, very generally speaking, it's usually easier to keep a small horse sound than a big one.

All things being equal a big horse will always outrun a small horse. It’s a physiological fact.

halo · Postby **halo** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 9:21 am

casallc wrote:
LB wrote:I agree with what Maven said, but I'd probably carry it a little further. I think the current commercial market truly demands size. You'll take a hit with a small mare and a small yearling. For some reason yearling buyers think big means early (when it's usually the opposite) and that a larger stride equals a faster horse--which Northern Dancer, Megahertz, and Rahy, to name just a few, would be surprised to hear.

As far as breeding to race though, small size is no deterrent at all. Plus, very generally speaking, it's usually easier to keep a small horse sound than a big one.

All things being equal a big horse will always outrun a small horse. It’s a physiological fact.

All things are not equal, and a big horse will not always outrun a small horse. If that were the case, all you'd have to do is go to the races, pick out the biggest horse in each race, and make money. Obviously, it isnt so. Length and efficiency of stride has nothing whatsoever to do with height of a horse.

casallc · Postby **casallc** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 9:39 am

halo wrote:
casallc wrote:
LB wrote:I agree with what Maven said, but I'd probably carry it a little further. I think the current commercial market truly demands size. You'll take a hit with a small mare and a small yearling. For some reason yearling buyers think big means early (when it's usually the opposite) and that a larger stride equals a faster horse--which Northern Dancer, Megahertz, and Rahy, to name just a few, would be surprised to hear.

As far as breeding to race though, small size is no deterrent at all. Plus, very generally speaking, it's usually easier to keep a small horse sound than a big one.

All things being equal a big horse will always outrun a small horse. It’s a physiological fact.

All things are not equal, and a big horse will not always outrun a small horse. If that were the case, all you'd have to do is go to the races, pick out the biggest horse in each race, and make money. Obviously, it isnt so. Length and efficiency of stride has nothing whatsoever to do with height of a horse.

You're an idiot! What I said is a true statement. I know all things are never always equal but if they were - a big horse will always outrun a small horse.

Jenny · Postby **Jenny** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 9:40 am

I agree with Halo.

casallc · Postby **casallc** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 9:41 am

Jenny wrote:I agree with Halo.

You're an idiot also then.

LB · Postby LB » Sat Nov 03, 2007 12:56 pm

casallc, your premise is amazingly flawed.

I also agree with Halo.

mightyhijames · Postby **mightyhijames** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:52 pm

thanks so much for all the response.

madelyn, that's an awfully pretty 'baby' you've got there.

and i also agree w/halo.

casallc · Postby **casallc** » Sun Nov 04, 2007 11:14 am

LB wrote:casallc, your premise is amazingly flawed.

I also agree with Halo.

Well, I won't say it then (but you know, anway).
What is so hard to comprehend about my statement? It, again, is a true statement. I know that there can never be such as "equal" every day and every horse. BUT, if you have two horses both with exactly the same conformation, the same desire, the same trip, and the same health and the only difference is one is 15 hands and the other is 16.2 hands the 16.2 will win every time simply because it will cover more ground per stride. I'm not saying that little horses can't run because I've had a lot of them that were "giant killers". You people need to read what I post. I said "ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL" (that doesn't mean they are, it means IF they are). To say it is not true is absurd. It is like saying the earth is flat. Geez!