Buyers similarly became enamored of endoscopic examinations of a horse's upper respiratory tract to look for abnormalities of the pharynx and larynx that can hamper airflow. Anything less than a top scope rating scares buyers away, Cauthen says. Then Scott Pierce, a veterinarian at Rood and Riddle Equine Hospital in Lexington, studied the correlation between endoscopy scores and subsequent racing performance in more than 800 horses. In a paper published in the 2001 American Association of Equine Practitioners's Proceedings, Pierce showed that only the lowest endoscopy scores hurt performance, and horses with mid-range scores were no more likely to perform poorly than horses with top scores.
Proprietary data
For Cauthen, evaluating any testing, including genetics, comes down to data. He'd like to see some. "Show me your results. Show me you were able to prospectively select winners based on your data," he says.
Most of the companies make no bones about keeping the performance data Cauthen looks for to themselves. The Genetic Edge, owned by Equine Analysis Systems (EAS), adds genetic testing to a series of other performance measures including motion analysis, metabolic profile testing, breathing tests and heart testing. Taken together, veterinarian David Lambert, EAS's managing owner, says these tests led his clients to breed or buy 27 Kentucky Derby runners, including two Derby winners, two Horse of the Year winners, two Dubai World Cup winners, plus more than 60 graded stakes winners.
But it's impossible to test the claims of champion horses selected by EquineAnalysis System Inc.. His clients are unidentified. And no one talks about the horses that didn't win.
Doug Cauthen, a thoroughbred manager who helps people make decisions about their horses, has used genetic testing since his days as farm president and CEO at WinStar. Cauthen is brother of consignor Kerry Cauthen and of Steve Cauthen, who in 1978 rode Affirmed to win the Triple Crown.
For Doug Cauthen, employing genetic testing is simply a matter of keeping on top of emerging technology. "I think there's something to it," Cauthen says. "It's a tool that will get a lot better over time. You should be open to it. It can't by any stretch of the imagination be the primary decision, because these are animals, and the primary decision has to be how they look and act. But it could help, and it's evolving."
Rights & Permissions
See what we're tweeting about
5 Comments
Add CommentGenetics make sense on paper, but all the science goes out the window when the horses leave the starting gate.My pick is “I’ll Have Another” – both in the race and when it comes to the Mint Juleps. But Is the Mint Julep the “Peeps” of cocktails? “Think about it. They’re booth sickeningly-sweet, consumed on only one day of the year and then actively avoided for the remaining 364. You be the judge. Here are my four favorite vintage Mint Julep recipes: http://thevodkaparty.com/the-mint-julep-is-it-the-peeps-of-cocktails/
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBeing at the races, watching these magnificent animals do what they are born to do is a wonderful experience.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBut:
If you have ever taken a close, behind the scenes look at horse racing you will undoubtedly conclude that it is cruelty to animals.
These horses are so terribly inbred for the ultimate in speed and endurance that they are fragile and temperamental. They break down far too often and must be put down. They do not make good saddle horses and I don't want to mention what happens to those who are slow or old.
I'm not against exploitation of animals per se but having seen what frequently happens behind the scenes I stopped going to the races.
This genetic testing is just one more example of the way that these animals are used, abused, and cast aside if they do not measure up.
1) Horse Racing is a closed system. To race at the Kentucky Derby (Triple Crown race number one) the horse must be a registerd thorougbred. A thorougbred traces its ancestry back to 3 Arabian/Turkoman/Barb stallions and English mares in the 17th and 18th centuries. Imagine the 1,500 meters at the Olympics and the only people who could race are 18 year olds of British ancestry. No others may apply.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this2) Only one world record at any distance on turf or dirt was set by a 3 year old (see below). All others are 4 to 7 years old. Why 3 year olds? Because they can breed longer. Very simple. Everything I have read or heard first hand suggest that 3 year olds are too young and injuries are higher at that age.
http://www.horsehats.com/horse-racing-records.html
3) I have asked many horse folks why they race. Answer: to improve the breed. Who cares.
4) Want to have faster horses and more variety. Try modern genetics, modern training methods with cross breeding every horse imaginable and limit racing to 4 to 8 year olds. There will be less money in the sport, but I personally would love to watch an Apaloosa/QuarterHorse/Arabian hybrid, for example clobber the thoroughbreds.
5) I am not a horse expert. Having said that I don't believe there is much that I have written above that is too far off base. I would love to have an unbiased horse expert comment to see if my suggestions make any sense. Maybe they don't, but in a few hours I'll be glued to the television to watch the Kentucky Derby anyway, hoping for the new Secretariat, no injuries and a fun race.
Seems they are late to the party. Genetics have been
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisemployed for quite some time on all kinds of creatures.
It is the future of all living things we consume. Perhaps
genetics will help to rid the world of inherited diseases and conditions in both humans and animals. That would
represent real progress in the evolution we have out
grown through technology and medicine.
I think research in genetics could only make horse racing better for the horses. If it was utilized more often, maybe breeders wouldn't have to produce so many horses. They could focus on producing a few genetically superior foals instead of playing more of a guessing game. One of the biggest problems in the industry is the overpopulation of horses. The ones who aren't worth as much end up in slaughter houses because thoroughbreds aren't good for much but racing. If there were fewer horses, fewer horses would meet a fate in the processing plant. Maybe by making the breed better, there would be fewer casualties. I don't know, I'm trying to see the positive side of this. There are definitely some things about the racing industry that need to change. I'm not disputing that at all, but progress being made and I think this genetic research could potentially help. I really hope it does.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this