Biomechanics and Broodmares

[Patuxet]

While searching through my papers for the results of the Rasmussen project I mentioned in the "Breeding Race Horses from Cluster Mares" thread, I came across some pages on which I'd compiled notes on John Sparkman's 67 Foundation Mares. At the end of it I appended a list of 21 sires whose percentage of stake-producing daughters was 20% and above. My thinking was that mares by those stallion and descending from Sparkman's "foundation mares" might be worth paying attention to at sales.

Since I compiled that list I've come to know something more about biomechanical applications, partly through Frank Mitchell's Race Horse Breeding Theories and articles by Robert Fierro. I was somewhat surprised to note that only three of the stallions on my broodmare list for which phenotype data was available were not designated "Type I", right in the center of the Phenotype Target. Those three were Secretariat and Alydar (Type S) and Storm Bird (Type E).

The I-Type stallions were Mr.. Prospector, Nijinsky, Roberto, Blushing Groom, Fappiano, Lyphard, The Minstrel, Riverman and Seattle Slew.

Producing stallion evaluations is relatively expensive and the results are proprietary to the companies that own the biomechanical analysis programs; these companies also refrain from releasing type designations on still active sires. The stallions on my list for which I lacked type were: Nureyev, Vice Regent, Danzig, Deputy Minister, Halo, Alysheba, Spectacular Bid, Strawberry Road and Alleged.

I would be interested to know if anyone can provide any of the missing Type designations. I'd also like to hear what people believe could be the reasons that Type I stallions seem to make surperior broodmare sires.

[xfactor fan]

Is this the clasification that Equixbio (I think that's the name of the outfit that advised in breeding Big Brown) uses?

[Patuxet]

xfactor:

These are the ones I'm familiar with:

http://www.biodatatrack.com/

http://www.equixbio.com/

The latter contains a good explanation of phenotypes and the "Phenotype Target": http://www.equixbio.com/pdfs/Biomechanics.pdf

And here's another one: http://www.cecilseaman.com/


Archer

[Bill from WA]

You might find this site interesting.
http://www.jwequine.com

Bill

[Altanbarr]

Does anyone have an idea about how much a biomechanical analysis for a yearling or broodmare costs?

[Patuxet]

After Altanbarr's query languished here I took the liberty of reposting it under "General Discussion" to which Merse eventually answered thusly:

"I haven't done one in several years but as I recall, EQUIXBiomechanics charged $750 for a Broodmare."

I get the impression that biomechanical analysis doesn't have many adherents around this forum. I was hoping some ideas about its uses might be exchanged.

[siegy]

While searching through my papers for the results of the Rasmussen project I mentioned in the "Breeding Race Horses from Cluster Mares" thread, I came across some pages on which I'd compiled notes on John Sparkman's 67 Foundation Mares. At the end of it I appended a list of 21 sires whose percentage of stake-producing daughters was 20% and above. My thinking was that mares by those stallion and descending from Sparkman's "foundation mares" might be worth paying attention to at sales.

Since I compiled that list I've come to know something more about biomechanical applications, partly through Frank Mitchell's Race Horse Breeding Theories and articles by Robert Fierro. I was somewhat surprised to note that only three of the stallions on my broodmare list for which phenotype data was available were not designated "Type I", right in the center of the Phenotype Target. Those three were Secretariat and Alydar (Type S) and Storm Bird (Type E).

The I-Type stallions were Mr.. Prospector, Nijinsky, Roberto, Blushing Groom, Fappiano, Lyphard, The Minstrel, Riverman and Seattle Slew.

Producing stallion evaluations is relatively expensive and the results are proprietary to the companies that own the biomechanical analysis programs; these companies also refrain from releasing type designations on still active sires. The stallions on my list for which I lacked type were: Nureyev, Vice Regent, Danzig, Deputy Minister, Halo, Alysheba, Spectacular Bid, Strawberry Road and Alleged.

I would be interested to know if anyone can provide any of the missing Type designations. I'd also like to hear what people believe could be the reasons that Type I stallions seem to make surperior broodmare sires.

Hi P,

Here some insight that can be of help!

type as related to impact values:
mr prospector = 5.76
nijinsky = 4.88
roberto = 3.93
blushing groom = 4.44
fappiano = 7.42
lyphard = 5.47
the minstrel = 5.52
riverman = 4.38
seattle slew = 3.50

ref: impact values are: from Steven roman Di/CD and siegy 300 year past! nicks: example = Mr. Prospector nick = sickle-sir gallahad-beloved-myrtlewood:

Siegy,

[Patuxet]

What does it take to get someone banished from this forum?

[Shammy Davis]

Banishment? That is an interesting concept. Don't think anyone has touched on that subject yet.

[xfactor fan]

Being very rude to the moderators. And back chatting when they deliver a reprimand.


Back to the original topic of biometrics.

I suspect that it like a number of other things is a useful tool. But, the major flaw is that while several of the companies have good techniques to analyze phenotypes, they don't seem to have a good way to tie phenotypes to genotypes.

In other words, they map what the horse looks like, but not what the genes are likely to pass on.

The equixbio model is interesting, they seem to be mapping characteristics along a X Y access. And looking at their site, they may be looking at concentrations of fast and slow twitch muscles as one of their graph lines.

Power = lots of fast twitch, Stride = slow twitch. The horses in the center of that axis would have a balance of the two types, and be a match for most mares.