Do you like it with the lights on or lights off?

[mango]

Hi thesushitrain

Your number 2 advantage to domestically stallion's, i don't think it will make any difference as Peppertree stallion's are already here so i'd say others from America are as well.

[thesushitrain]

depends how early the season is brought forward i suppose...

i was looking at some breedings the other day from 5-10 years back and i couldnt help but notice how many foals were foaled 1st september, purely a fluke that the majority of these were stallions that weren't travelling back from america.... so it seems that some studs have already done what i've suggested under the table with empty mares or they were simply writing septemeber 1st on 40% of foals that are born

[Flashing Red]

why dont we just officially bring the season forward?

solves a few problems brought up in the breeders panel paper
1, mares can be served an extra time for the end of the season = more foals on the ground out of quality mares that would otherwise miss
2, give an advantage to domestically based stallions who dont have to come back from america
3, the foals born are probably going to be dropped pretty close to the same dates (if the study cited by pepper tree is factual)

Agreed.

[triplev123]

depends how early the season is brought forward i suppose...

i was looking at some breedings the other day from 5-10 years back and i couldnt help but notice how many foals were foaled 1st september, purely a fluke that the majority of these were stallions that weren't travelling back from america.... so it seems that some studs have already done what i've suggested under the table with empty mares or they were simply writing septemeber 1st on 40% of foals that are born

[VVV] That's a bit misleading TST. It's a man made anomaly in the stats.
What actually happened there was that during the changeover period from the individual State to the now National data base, a whole swag of horses were allotted September 1st foaling dates, this as opposed to their actual foaling dates.
There were reasons given as to why this happened/was done but I think it was simply for sake of expediency as much as anthing else.

[triplev123]

why dont we just officially bring the season forward?

[vvv] g'day tst. When it was moved to september 1st it was definitely done for reasons of fertility/increased conception rates.
The study that was done on getting mares in foal, the one which supports that move, still exists somewhere or other and is just as relevant today as it was when it was first done. A vet did it (her name escapes me) and she was as sharp as a tack as i recall.
The fact is that the majority of mares don't start to cycle until around now anyway & even then many of those are not up & rolling in any meaningful way to the point that they can be successfully served.
I pg'd a couple of dry mares on monday to put them through their paces so our vet could pre-breeding check them tomorrow morning, make sure that they were clean & healthy and ready to go and then we'll serve them when they come around naturally in the last week of september. Barring illness, accident or injury we'll get both of them ptif in one or two shots. Come the end of october/1st week of november they'll be done & dusted.

Solves a few problems brought up in the breeders panel paper
1, mares can be served an extra time for the end of the season = more foals on the ground out of quality mares that would otherwise miss

[vvv] perhaps but if you start up at the end of september and you're still swining at the old bat come the end of january there's something drastically wrong.

2, give an advantage to domestically based stallions who dont have to come back from america
[vvv] pay that one....big-time, certainly at least as far as locally bred sires go anyway. Very good idea. That being said, the problem we have at this point in time is that the majority of the best sires are still shuttle duty conveyances. In the years to come however, when we have set about the task of locally producing more of our own sires, for sure.

3, the foals born are probably going to be dropped pretty close to the same dates (if the study cited by pepper tree is factual)
[vvv] i can't see how that would ever happen. They'll get sprayed out across as much time as they're given to foal down. Some will go early, some will go late, some will go on time. Last season i remember eliteblood had a mare go a full 12 months ++++, we had one go 10 months & 3 weeks & a couple of days.

vvv

[thesushitrain]

that would explain it, i thought it did look peculiar how many had that date

i still stick by an idea of bring the breeding season forward, by say a month

but would everybody that already has a mare in a foaling cycle be upset that empty mares could get a head start on them

[Love Of Courage]

why dont we just officially bring the season forward?

solves a few problems brought up in the breeders panel paper
1, mares can be served an extra time for the end of the season = more foals on the ground out of quality mares that would otherwise miss
2, give an advantage to domestically based stallions who dont have to come back from america
3, the foals born are probably going to be dropped pretty close to the same dates (if the study cited by pepper tree is factual)

Why are the standardbreds 1 month behind with the thoroughbreds. Is it not that the kiwi standarbreds are 1 month earlier also.

Regards,

LOC

[eliteblood]

Harness racing changed its season from August 1 to Sept 1 in the early 80's based upon some research by a veterinarian named Virginia Osborne that suggested that the later start was more aligned to the mares period of maximum fertility. I believe the thoroughbred industry and the NZ harness racing industry were invited to do the same but declined.
A proposal to revert to Aug 1 was considered by the Australian Standardbred Breeders Association in 2009 and the decision was made to stay with Sept 1.
A fairly stinging editorial by John Peck in the Sept/Oct 09 Harness Racing International magazine was critical of a move from within NSW to have the starting date reviewed.
While November and December are the optimum months for getting mares in foal and while there is no evidence that early season foals have any advantage over later born foals on the racetrack, I don't see what all the fuss is about. If someone wants to try and get there mares in foal in September instead of waiting until October, who does it impact upon ?

[triplev123]

Nobody Eliteblood, it impacts on absolutely nobody. Good point.
Pecky's article was a bell-ringer btw.

[thesushitrain]

looks pretty clear cut to me gallopers and kiwi's are faster than us must be due to the extra month