Artificial Insemination (AI) in the performance animal

THE PROBLEM WITH SEX (Federico Tesio)

ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION

On a spring afternoon about 20 years ago, i was relaxing in a garden surrounded by buzzing insects.I watched them skip from flower to flower,feeding on nectar and unconciously transporting pollen to the plants ova,thus fertilizing them and giving life to a new plant.

A telegram arrived from England suggesting that i attempt artificial insemination with a mare of mine in England that was having difficulty getting pregnant.

The image immediately came together in my mind.Instead of insects sucking nectar and transporting pollen,i imagined an English specialist who,for a lavish sum,would carry the fertilizing element from the stallion to its destination in my mare.

Artificial insemination was nothing new but simply the mimmicking of the fertilization of plants adapted to animals.I became convinced of this truth:

Artificial insemination is not a discovery similair to the cure for rabies.Rather it simply is a reproductive technique invented by nature for inferior beings such as plants, and adpated for use by superior beings such as mammals.

From that momment on i began to observe and experiment,naturally adopting my observations to Thoroughbreds,animals much easier for me to control.

In twenty years of study on this subject,i have discovered only two truths:

1)Thoroughbreds produced by artificial insemination are
no different to the eye than those resulting from natural insemination.They naturally inherit Mendelian characteristics
and are attractive and well developed animals.

2)During the past twenty years,not one Thoroughbred born
as a result of artificial insemination has ever succeeded
in winning a classic,or even a semi classic race in any
country of the world(even though they are almost always
the offspring of famous parents).

If even one horse had won a race,the supporters of artificial insemination would have spread the word throught the world.Instead, their is only silence.

These two findings, reliably checked and at first glance with no logical connection,were the starting point in my assessment of the practical difference between natural and artifical insemination,as well as the scientific explanation.

If you follow my thinking, you will agree that it is both common knowledge and a fact that race horses run with their legs,gallop with their lungs,endure with their heart,but win with their brain.To put it another way,the the win comes from the energy supplied by the cerebral-spinal system.

To be a great race horse, a horse must have a quick start so the jockey an place himself at a favourite position witihin the group.Lets analyze a start where the horses are well aligned.When the gate opens, there is always one horse that gets the jump on the group.The fast moving horse is the one that transmits the order to move from his brain to his muscles in the least amount of time.Lagrange defines the interval between the order being formulated in the brain and its actual execution in the muscles as the "latent moment". If this energy is rapidly dissipated, the horse can not maintain its distance and vice versa.

Editors note:Joseph Louis Lagrange(1736-1813) was a noted mathematician in France, Germany and Italy who, among other things, transformed mechanics into a branch of mathematical analysis.

At the finish line, some horses are still filled with energy while others are drained of vigor.This means that,considering the weight it is carrying as well as the distance,the winning horse has the superior nervous system.

It is also possible that two horses of the same age and weight are neck and neck as they approach the finish line, desperately fighting over the last 50 meters.The winner will be the horse with the greatest desire to win.The pedigree of a classic horse is filled with horses that are quick at the start line and strong at the finish line and that possess a strong will and great nervous energy.

It is difficult to predict the race career of a young unraced colt just by looking at it and without actual measurements.Be that as it may,a fine skin-the actual surface- and the depth of its look-the mirror of the Soul-are most important.The most handsome and most aesthetically proportion colt will never be a famous race horse nor a prestigious stallion if its skin is thick and its look dull.

Galvani's experiment illustrates this point masterfully.If we place a ded frog in contact with an X-charge electric current, the muscles of the frog will twitch.If the current is kept at the same level of intensity, after a while the muscles will twitch less and less and then stop moving altogether.

Editors note: Luigi Galvani (1737-1798) was an Italian anatomist and Physician who discovered that the nerves are electrical conductors.He was able to demonstrate the existence of bioelectric forces in animal tissue.

In live animals, the electric current is the equivalent to willpower. The animal with the strongest willpower is the one that wins the battle.This occurs between animals with both equal and unequal conformation.

If we acknowledge this truth, and at the same time note that Thoroughbred born from artificial insemination are never first class race horses(although perfectly fit and products of famous parents),we must logically conclude that artificial does not convey the same degree of energy as does natural fertilization.

In an environment where every Thoroughbred was produced by artificial insemination, one would always prevail over the other.However, it will never match the best specimen produced by natural fertilization.

"What is the reason for this" I ask.Is it because all traits appear normal with the exception of the nervous force,more precisely "willpower."

The truth is that artificial insemination, with the technician carrying the fertilizing semen, is the same as vegetal insemination where the wind insects gratuitously carry the pollen to its destination.

Vegital insemination is inferior with no biological interest in the reproduction of the nervous system, for it does not exist in plants, Artificial insemination is completely void of desire,which is the driving force behind willpower.Intercourse is nothing but satisfied desire, the quick dissipation of accumulated nervous power.This atmosphere loaded with vital electromagnetic waves can surely-in some cases-create an animal richer than all its peers in strength of will.Because of all its potential, it will be an animal that will win all battles and become the great progenitor.

As a practical illustration of this, i will recount a story, somewhat romantic, but nevertheless true.

Around 1880, a gentleman from Naples, Mr.Ginistelli,a unique man with new and revolutionary ideas, moved his Thoroughbred breeding stock from Portici to Newmarket, England, in an effort to beat the English on their own turf.He immediately had a resounding success,a beautiful mare named Signorina(Missy),who became a star of the first order.In 1892, at the age 5 years, she was sent for breeding.

In the meantime, the gentleman from Naples built a cottage in Newmarket.The master bedroom was adjacent to the box of his beloved Signorina, with a window close to his pillow so he could watch over his mistress at all hours of the night.

Despite all this attention, the beautiful Signorina had begun to age without yet producing a foal of great class, even after mating her with the most famous studs of her time.

In the spring of 1904, Mr.Ginistrelli arranged for Signorina to wed the highly regarded English stallion, Isinglass.The stud fee of 300 guineas was paid in advance at the time of the betrothal.The couple lived at opposite ends of Newmarket's very long main road, High Street.

During the racing season it was customary for third-class stallions without other work, to be led by hand down this road on the way to their morning workout. The names of the stallions were embroiled in large letters on their blankets in hopes of attracting a mating.

One April morning the beautiful Signorina walked down this road on her way to wed the famous Inglass.Closely behind was Mr. Ginistelli who always accompanied his mare on these occasions.On the way they met one of the modest Thoroughbred stallions proudly bearing the name "Charleureux" embroidered on his blanket.The stallion, showing signs of great admiration,stopped to take in the scent of Signorina and refused to continue on his way. And Signorina, looking languidly at her new admirer, showed no intention of continuing on either. Appeals and even force had no effect on either and passers-by stopped to witness the comic scene.

Mr.Ginistrelli, a psychologist as well as a biologist, quickly assessed the situation.

"They are in love! Let the ceremony begin!"

And so the famous Inglass pocketed 300 pounds sterling but was left standing at the alter by the beautiful Signorina.Eleven months later a beautiful foal was born, a filly that was given the name Signorinetta(Little Miss).

The experts believed Ginistrelli a fool and Signorinetta unworthy of any consideration.But as a three-year-old, Signorinetta was one of the most famous heroines of all times, winning the Derby and the Oaks,a feat accomplished by only four mares between1780 and 1942.

This is a true story. I personally have met the five protagonists:Ginistelli. Isinglass, Charleureux, Signorina, and Signorinetta.A sceptic would say that this phenomenon would have come true just the same without romance if Mr. Ginistrelli, for economic reasons, had arranged for Signorina to mate with the more economic Charlereux instead of the more expensive Isinglass.But this is not so.The two were again mated in 1906.In 1907 a filly was born, a sister to Signorinetta, and was given the name of Star of Naples.At the age of 18 months she was beautiful-indeed far outshining her sister.

Ginistrelli sold the stable and returned to Italy, and Star of Naples sent to auction.The buyers and their advisors liked her,and she eventually sold for 5000 guineas.But by the endof her fifth year of racing, she had not won even one grand prize.

Mendel's Law explains how two siblings can be different from each other, with one a good runner and the other just passable.This does not exclude the fact, however, that the act of sexual intercourse can influence the vital force of nervous energy.

This accidental encounter between male and female may also have had its effect on Signorinetta.The arrow of the equine Cupid carried sensual desire to its maximum apex.The release of sexual intercourse-natural impregnation-produced an individual of exceptional energy.

A phenomenon never verified by experience nor revealed in statistics on artificial insemination is how the individual is defrauded of the spasmodic delight:that is, the nervous discharge.

Alligators struggle to the death to conquer their female.Those law of nature gives the animals the nervous tension necessary to complete the reproduction ritual.

Natural insemination is to artificial insemination what Michelangelo's Moses is to the clay model.The nervous force of Michelangelo was transmitted through his chisel to the molecules of marble of todays Moses.The marble still vibrates as it did when Michelangelo struck Moses' knee with his hammer and it said ..."speak." However, the cly model of Moses does not feel the direct emanations of the artist's brain waves. The work is beautiful but not a work of art because it has no flow of energy.It is like a reflection in a mirror.

Artificial insemination results in a perfect reproduction of all the Mendelian characteristics but without transmitting the extra "nervous energy" that gives birth to the superior animal that is Natures masterpiece.

To confirm this law, i will cite three observation made while reading the Thoroughbred stud books which contain over 12,000,000 controlled and quickly verifiable entries.

1)Mares that have achieved fame as racehorses and that have raced often, most frequently have been only modest tap-root mares.This because all of their nervous energy has been consumed in racing.The strength needed by them to transmit that energy has been depleted,particularly with early foals.

2)Stallions with harsh training and raced until they are six years of age,very rarely sire superior foals, particularly in their first attempts.

This occurs because too much of their nervous potential has been consumed in racing and it must be regenerated with time and rest.

3)Many of the horses conventionally characterized by great energy and speed are offspring of females that have never raced, raced very little or for only short distances.

The reason behind it is that these females have saved their energy, storing, storing a great accumulation of their nervous potential.

What should we understand about the flow of nervous energy and the influence on it by artificial insemination delivered by a messenger without any sexual intercourse?

All life on ur planet represents different degrees on a scale reaching towards unattainable perfection.Each organism occupying each level on the scale has its own special technique for reproduction.The lowest level is composed of single-celled organisms that reproduce by simple dividing.Moving forward several steps, we find plants that reproduce by spores.Higher yet are those whose female ovum are fertilized by the male pollen transported by insects or in the wind.Beyond the plants we have the animals.The female sea urchin produces over 20,000,000 eggs, abandoning them to the currents and the tides.The Male does the same with his fertilizing cells.Of the millions of eggs, perhaps four or five will meet the male element.And so perhaps four or five sea urchins are born.

Up to this point, we are still at the level of fertilization techniques used by plants. As we continue to climb the scale, we find the Pacific salmon that leaves the depths of the ocean every spring to emigrate to the sweet waters of Alaska.Here the female digs a hole and deposits her eggs in the presence of the male, who immediately fertilizers them in the presence of the female.At that moment the emanations of vital energy of the two sexes touch and mix in space.We are approaching intercourse.Climbing higher we find first the birds and then mammals, with the primate in between them.The further we climb the more refined and crebral the reproduction technique becomes.

Sexual intercourse is more than the clash between the fertilizing and the fertilizable molecules.There is a discharge and fusion of two neuro-electromagnetic forces, the only source capable of giving origin to the superior animal.

At the very summit of the scale, far from all the other beings, is man.Human relations have energy from another world, a cosmic energy that our brain captures from the stars and that we express with the word...love.It is a manifestation so potent that it continues beyond sexual intercourse as well as death.

Love for beauty produces art.Love for Truth leads to the search for what is true, or to discoveries and progress that directly gives man his dominion over the earth,Suppressing love, however briefly, from the technique of human reproduction can only lead is to become confused with beasts.

I know very well that hybrid characteristics(the Thoroughbred's) are imposed by Mendel's Law as well as other new laws, by either natural or artificial insemination.Two full siblings not only can but indeed must be different,since the possible combinations of atavistic characteristics are as inumerable as the designs of a kaleidoscope.I am also aware of the role played by nervous energy: that is, that the animal's desire to compete, its combative quality, is determined by its genetic enthusiasm.

Editors not: Atavistic characteristics are defined as the appearance in an individual of some characteristic found in a remote ancestor but not in nearer ancestors.

Observe the sexual morality that is characteristics of the superior race, the humans.Chastity in a young, beautiful, healthy being is often simply the accumulation of large amounts of rampaging nervous energy.When unleashed at the correct psychological moment,it will imprint its superiority upon ones offspring.

Biologist Pincus announced in 1940 that he had achieved, after many experiments the birth of a female rabbit without the intervention of male sperm.This experiment, if true, relegates artificial insemination into oblivion.Birth appears to be possible not only without the male presence and intercourse, but more significantly without the artificial transfer of the fertilizing element.Mammals can now be born simply by parthenogenesis.The egg from the female was placed in motion by Mr.Pincus to reproduce- not just without the presence of the male-but also without the contact of the male element transferred by the hand of male.

Editors Note: Dr Gregory Pincus (1902-1967), an American biologist of Clark University conducted his experiments at Harvard University ,Cambridge, MA. In 1939 Dr Pincus exposed a rabbit ovum to high temperature,hormone treatments and salt solution in vitro.The result was the first live mammalian birth via parthenogenesis.

Artificial factors were sufficient to move the latent energy of the egg and force it to generate a new being.Wil this individual only maternal characteristics? Will it have a normal life? Will it be fecund or sterile? And if fecund,what will its offspring be like?

Only further experimentation will give an exact answer.After all the observations are done, we can logically deduct and assert the following:

1)Artificial insemination of animals is nothing more than an exact copy of the technique of plant fertilization.

2)On the scale of living organisms,plants are a step below animals.

3)The reproductive technique of plants, when applied to animals,actually forces them to move down a step to perform an act against nature.

4)The only variation observed up to now s a consequence of artificial insemination is a decrease in nervous energy of the animal.

5)This has been observed and demonstrated in experiments performed with Thoroughbreds.

Although seeming of little importance, these facts are extremely significant.The weakness of artificial insemination is that it fails to transmit nervous energy.Plants do not have nerves.This is the substance of the issue.And it is a this point that we see the beginning of decline in the race.

What then are the advantages of this new reproductive technique? The economic advantages are manifest.Let us use the example of a prize purebred bull selected to cover an average of 100 heifers a year.If the price of each service is 200 lire,then at the end of the year, the owner has collected 20,000 lire.However, of we adopt artificial insemination,the bull can cover another 500 at a price of 100 lire,thus making more money for the owner of the stud,as well as allowing the owner of the cows to spend less,while enriching the zoological patrimony in the country. It is a good financial arrangement for all concerned.

It is difficult to predict what surprises may result from such a breeding practice.And if these surprises, as is possible, are unpleasant, an d we have not taken some defensive measures, then in a short period of time we will find that all the races are polluted, with no way to trace the original bearers of the problem. As such it will be necessary to sterilize all until the infection has been eradicated.

CONTINUED

 

CONTINUED

Prudence would dictate that to protect the race, the Universities should propose and the interested Ministries impose rules that products resulting from artificial insemination and their descendants be so branded, o that they can be traced.Study-experiment-discover: this is our duty when confronted by great problems.And among these is the supremely important concept of artificial insemination.

ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION WITH SEXUAL INTERCOURSE

At the end of 1943, in America, Raymond Umbough invented a new technique of artificial insemination.Instead of transferring the sperm, he transferred the egg.Experiments were carried out with cows. The cow produces eggs about every three weeks, or 18 times a year. The egg is taken from the most beautiful cow,the best milk producer, an introduced into the uterine cavity of another cow of no specific value. The operation is not difficult,especially when using a tube-like fistula. The bull inseminates the egg in its new site.

The product will have all the characteristics of its selected progenitors because the common cow, the one holding the egg, simply takes on a role of an incubator and therefore cannot transmit any of her own characteristics.The great advantage of this form of breeding is that while the gestation period in the cow selected is close to 200 days, during that same time she can produce none fertile eggs.Transferred and implanted in a common cow, the superior cow can give life to nine beautiful, selected calves.Although the number of animals does not increase, the number of selected animals does.

In this case there is sexual intercourse. There is a possibility that there is no difference whatsoever between those produced artificially and those produced naturally.However, i believe that it is absolutely necessary that any Thoroughbred horses born as a result of this process should be allowed to compete for prizes but neither they nor their descendants should be enrolled in the Golden Book without having passed at least a half a century during which they have not show any special traits or signs of weakness.

This denial of inscription in the Stud Book is not a diminutio capitis(loss of rights),inasmuch as the horses will be able to run in all races under the same conditions, even though not enrolled.It is simply an act of prudence, for the sake of scientific proof.

This new technique of artificial insemination with intercourse resembles the grafting of plants.Just as a large fruit, a prize fruit, is born from a graft with a forest tree, so can a Thoroughbred horse be born from the graft of a Thoroughbred egg with a common mare.

Everyone knows that the milk of a wet nurse cannot modify the genetic characteristics of the nursling.A blond nanny will never casue a brunette child to become blond. However, in that case, the milk operates on an individual that is already born. In the vegetable graft, either the animal lymph or the blood does have an effect on the formation of the unborn child.

We must also note that plants hold only vital energy-there is no nervous influence which is a special characteristic of animals.Therefore, the reproductive system invented by Prof. Umbough cannot be exactly compared with either a graft or an incubator.

It is true that an egg from one mare introduced into the womb of another and fertilized by the actions of a stallion will reproduce the atavistic characteristics of the egg and the sperm.However, it is not improbable that the female carrying the egg has some effect on the future nervous energy of the product that shares its presence continuously for eleven months. In any case, to resolve this problem its is necessary and of great interest, to experiment and make accurate observations on the many thousand cases with Thorougbreds.

THE PROBLEMS WITH SEX

Scientists and charlatans from the beginning of time have searched for the answers to these questions:

1)Can one be sure of the status of a pregnancy before the first visable signs to the naked eye?

2)Is it possible to predict the sex of the unborn child?

3)Is it possible to choose the sex of your child?

ANSWERS
Yes, it is possible to verify the status of the pregnancy and predict the sex but it is not possible to choose the gender(at least not yet).

THE EGYPTIAN PAPYRUS

This papyrus dating to 1350 B.C. and preserved in the Berlin Library contains the following directions:

Gather together the seeds of wheat and barley plants.Place them in two separate bags.

Water them every morning with urine of the supposedly pregnant women.

If the wheat germinates, then the child will be a boy.

If the barley germinates,then a girl will be born

If neither seed germinates, then the women is not pregnant.

Editors note: A number of ancient Egyptian "papyri" were discovered in the 19th and 20th centuries. The documents discussed diseases, structure of the boy and remedies employed in ancient Egyptian society.The Berlin Papyrus dates back to the 19th Dynasty and was acquired in 1827 for the Berlin Museum.

Dr. Naguita Riad (Egyptian) and Professor Rochat from the Lausanne Maternity Hospital, both professors of laboratory science, and botanists Hoffman, have verified the accuracy of the information written in the Egyptian Papyrus.They have proved that the ancient Egyptians were the first to realize the existence of hormones and the glands that issue different internal secretions and vitamins according to the sex of the unborn child.

Laboratories today use the same chemical examination from urine to diagnose pregnancy. The results are not always correct,possibly due to human error.In any event the tests still cannot predict the sex.

The surest way of diagnosing pregnancy in mares is by the rectal heartbeat but this does not predict gender. The pendulum is also a good diagnostic tool, bit it can suffer from errors that can be blamed on cerebral influence.The directions of the Egyptian Papyrus of 1350 B.C. are still the best.

THE SEX YOU WANT
"Greetings! May you bear male children!"

This is an old greeting.

There have always been breeders and scientists who claim to have uncovered an infallible means of generating male children.

At the end of 1800, Paolo Mantegazza in his book, The Hygiene of Love, taught that the spouse with the greatest vigor at the time of sexual contact was the one who imposed the gender. He would later ass:

"I have also advised families yearning for male children of the art of building up the father, making him more robust, with an optimum regimen and ferocious chastity,(while) weakening the female with fasts and hard work...although this at times produced females"

Umberto Vignola of Bologna published a book in 1932 teaching the procreation of either male or female children at will...using a system that was ust the opposite of that advised by Paolo Mantegazza.That is, that gender is imposed by he weaker spouse, and not by the strongest one.

The book is filled with a plethora of documents, certificates of marital status, photographs...and even a thousand dollar wager from an American.

In short, he cites the case(observed by Count Lehndorff, a great student of the Thoroughbred) of the Thoroughbred stallion Sir Hercules, born in 1826. At an advanced age he covered 23 mares in three and a half months, from which 24 male foals were born, two of them twins.

This reference does not prove that the weaker individual imposes its sex. Actually it proves just the opposite because Sir Hercules holds the record of male vigor against individuals of any age, favoring the argument of Paolo Mantegazza.

The introduction of Sir Hurcules into the discussion brings to mind the sue of the Thoroughbreds as experimental animals. Here are the results of my observations and the statistics on the distribution of gender in the thoroughbred. I list here only 200 of the cases observed over two years: there are other similar cases.

In 1928, of the Thoroughbred foals born in England, 1819 were male 1792 were female, that is, 27 more males.

In 1935, of the Thoroughbred foals born in England, 1428 were male 1389 were female, that is, 39 more males.

In Dormello the following Thoroughbred foals were born from 1900 to 1945

271 males

260 females

or 11 more males

and so on. Every year, more male than female Thoroughbred foals were born.

OLD STALLIONS

Captivation at 22 years produced 2 males 3 females,

John of Guant at 23 years 2 males 3 females

Chaucer at 24 years 5 males 4 females

Levanger at 22 years 0 males 6 females

YOUNG STALLIONS

Legatee at 6 years produced 8 males 9 females

Alan Breack at 8 years produced 11 males 10 females


This demonstrates that the age of the parents has no influence on the birth rate of one sex or the other.

This phenomena of which i have shown only a fe cases, have been repeated consistently from 1700 until today, on millions of individuals in all the countries of the world.

We can affirm that in many million cases:

1) In the case of the Thoroughbreds, there are always more males born than females.

2)The state of health and the strength of the male or female have no influence on the sex of the unborn child, as some scientists, who developed statistics on a very limited number of cases, have claimed.

No system has been discovered that will influence the sex of an unborn being.

The reason why the number of colt foals born every year is always superior to the number of fillies remains unexpected.

At first glance it would seem illogical that nature allows more males, given the male is able to satisfy many females, thus leaving many more males without a purpose. However this is logical, for Nature wants to provide a better selection. If males were few, even the most undesirable would find a place in the wild herds, and therefore spoil the race. Being in excess number, they fight among themselves to conquer the harem, The strongest triumphs,while the weakest...waits.

I have observed that the males are attracted to females by their scent.This scent must be an element of tremendous importance in the selection of the mares. Although not deemed aesthetic from our point of view, or better said, from the point of view of our human sensuality, it is obviously tremendously important to them.

In breeding Thoroughbreds we do artificially what Nature does naturally in the wild. The battle on th race course replaces the bloody battle.Only the best have the right to reproduce.

OTHER PROBLEMS

How does fertilization occur?

Fertilization is joining of two different genders that will transmit their atavistic characteristics to their unborn offspring according to Mendael's Law.

"Is gender a Mendelian characteristic," we ask?

The answer is "no". For a characteristic to be a Mendelian,it must be either pure or hybrid. The gender of the horse is neither pure nor hybrid, but always...hermaphrodite...incomplete.The horse, like man, is neither pure male nor pure female, as it retains, in atrophied but still visable form, signs of the opposite sex. For example, the male has rudimentary nipples. an organ that characterizes the female.The hermaphroditism of the horse and of all superior animals including humans, is a hermaphroditism by atrophy.

How can we explain its origin? Perhaps we can find it in Hebraic tradition. First the male was created and pieces of his body was separated from him to create the female. Thus was born the fatal desire for these two separate parts to rejoin to continue life beyond death, The female, being part of the male, shows an atrophied hermaphroditism capable of producing male and female,with one sex normal and the other atrophied.And here we are confronted with a problem.

As soon as they are joined so begins the formation of what it will be and what it cannot be. The equine male and female cannot comprehend the consequences of their union. This same phenomenon occurs with men and women, when, without realizing how, this sustenance is transformed into brown or blonde hair according to the immutable law of atavism.

From the sexual aspect, the horse, both male and female, is neither pure nor bastard...but rather hermaphrodite with one sex dominating and it will always produce yet more hermaphrodite.

The gender of the horse, as with man, is not a Mendelian characteristic. It cannot follow Mendel's Law.Then what law does it obey?

We only know that over two centuries and in many millions of individuals, the number of male Thorougbreds born every year though the world is always numerically superior to the number of females born, W e also know that just the opposite is true in the human race. Generally speaking, the percentage of females born is superior to that of males,This complicates the problem.I confess that i have not been able to find a satisfactory answer.And so i leave that to my readers.

Scientists speak at length of chromosomes that are infinitely small,little walking sticks that can be observed and studied only under the microscope.I therefore say that chromosomes are the capital left "in trust" by our ancestors that we cannot do away with, but which can be arranged in tens of millions of combinations.They speak about zygotes and genes. Tomorrow, advancing in their studies and perfecting the microscope, scientists will speak about which parts serve to form genes x, y ans z,christening them with new names and thus a succession.

However, the starting point=the determining cause-will always be conception, an explosion that unleashes colossal forces of attraction and equilibrium.They are fractions of an atom, divided into millions of imponderable particles that gravitate like stars, and which following well-defined laws. gather in individual bodies. No one can interrupt them on their course...except death.

When we slay a "dumb animal," we repeat the phrase: use it for food, or fur, or hunting.When we legally kill a man, we use the word "justice," which often becomes vendetta. But truly from abortion to legal hanging, they are all still forms of murder.

 

Interesting read. Anybody notice a differnce in their apbt gamebred pups that were conceived through artificial insemenation?

 

No.........

 

"There is a possibility that there is no difference whatsoever between those produced artificially and those produced naturally.However, i believe that it is absolutely necessary that any Thoroughbred horses born as a result of this process should be allowed to compete for prizes but neither they nor their descendants should be enrolled in the Golden Book without having passed at least a half a century during which they have not show any special traits or signs of weakness."

1) The man admits this is hypothesis...... 2) He hasn't once mentioned dogs, let alone the apbt. 3) he sights differences in humans so it's not out of line to attach doubt to the idea that he meant this to apply to dogs.

I will say it was a great read but hardly a scientific study.

 

Seems like a bunch of hogwash to me. On a side note, plants a weaker being? If not for plants us mammals would have cease to exist long ago. Even if this was truth and not a theory it still has nothing to do with dogs, only racehorses

Sincerely Yours, Cajun

 

It is..... The fact that AI is banned in thoroughbred racing has more to do with politics than performance. Tigerlines is just a little emotional over the topic. No big deal.

 

I would think that in a sport like that it would be politics involved. Also I looked at it as maybe its illegal because it would give an unfair advantage to someone. If you have a good producer you could save semen and he could sire foals 20 years after his death. If it was proven to be inferior they wouldn't have to ban it because no one breeds looking for the quality to be inferior

Sincerely Yours, Cajun

 

Tesio was undoubtedly great at breeding horses..... maybe even the best. But we aren't breeding horses... and opposition to genetic engineering in the thoroughbred industry is all about the money or animal welfare issues.

 

even if its true about the cns energy helping, wouldnt having legs,mouth etc coming out similar to a winner/good dog be a plus too. even if theres less energy coming from 1 if its legs are built better it would take less energy to go fast.? cool read except finding out im a hermafrodite

 

If you can list them, we can all see their performance and production record relative to their ancestry.

 

Your quote is missing its start ..." In this case their is sexual intercourse" .....and its context,...(Transfer of a female egg and live cover).....it isnt a refernce to AI or an admission of any hypothesis.

Hes referring to ALL MAMMALS.

Its proof in practice:

NEARCO,

14 Starts: 14 wins UNDEFEATED

RIBOT

16 Starts: 16 wins UNDEFEATED

BRAQUE

12 Starts: 12 wins UNDEFEATED

CAVALIERE D'ARPINO.

6 starts,6 wins UNDEFEATED

 

So emotional, i come online, offer no evidence, and deliberately cut copy and paste a quote to make a strawman argument, oh wait, thats you.

 

Its banned not illegal,and it wouldnt give a unfair advantage, it would have precisely the opposite effect for the reasons mention by Tesio.

The fact its proven inferior and the thoroughbred industry is looking for the superior is precisely the reason for the ban.

 

Tesio was a geneticist,trainer and breeder,he put his money where his mouth was point out his "hogwash".

Plants do NOT have a nervous system,so do not have nervous energy or will comparable to a mammal.

Its research on AI effects on the SPIRIT of a MAMMAL, dogs included.

 

Ummm its banned, not illegal. Enlighten me on the difference. I'm not talking go to jail illegal, but banning something is no different than it being illegal

Sincerely Yours, Cajun

 

THE SEARCH FOR A SUPERHORSE

Ribot, a horse of Nietzschean proportions, was the crowning achievement of the late Federico Tesio, the great but unorthodox Italian breeder.

(Luigi Barzini Jr.)

After almost 60 years of obsessive work, after having bred thousands of horses his own hardheaded way, Federico Tesio, the great Italian breeder, finally got what he had been groping for. "I don't want just a good race horse," he always explained to his aides or his partner, Marchese Mario Incisa della Rocchetta. "What I want is a superhorse." His ideal belonged to his age. He was trying to create a Nietzschean prototype, a Wagnerian divine animal, a Carlylean hero of the turf. He always smiled politely when other owners told him happily they had a colt who someday would win some Italian purse. Those were provincial ideals, not worth wasting one's life on. The only goals were the big races in France and England, where the best in Europe (and sometimes in America) met. He wanted to win them not in a dramatic photofinish, by a nose, a head or two, a short length, but easily and comfortably, with a horse that would run ahead like a whippet in front of a pack of terriers.

The great irony of Tesio's life was that when he died at 85 years of age, May 1, 1954, he had a 2-year-old dark bay colt in his stables that would do just that—but he never knew. Propped against his shooting stick, Tesio had seen Ribot galloped, to be sure, on the training track at San Siro and at the Barbaricina winter quarters near Pisa. He had nodded silent approval. Of course he realized he had something good there. But how good, he had no time to find out. He never knew the colt was the best he ever bred, the best of his time in Europe, perhaps the best in the world, one of the greatest ever born. In fact, many believe Ribot is as close to the ideal superhorse as any horse could ever be. Tesio not only never suspected it; he never even entered him for the Italian Derby. Only once, during the last few months of his life, the old man was heard to say: "There is something about his gallop...I don't know."

There certainly is something about Ribot's gallop. British experts said that he runs "like a dog," not a horse. His motion is so smooth and continuous that he gives the impression of being pulled by a wire, while other horses behind him plod on in their old-fashioned, un-Nietzschean way, one stride at a time. The exercise boys who first rode him in training were amazed. "I didn't feel him galloping under me," one of them said.

Before he retired to stud after the Arc de Triomphe this fall, Ribot won 16 races in three years, 1954-56, all the races he started in, and he won them all by several lengths—with one exception, the Gran Criterium at the age of 2. His jockey was new to him and made a mistake. Instead of letting him go at a steady pace, he held him back and then whipped him. Ribot won by a short head. (He has not been whipped since.)

His reputation, however, was made by his victories in France and England. He came in first in the Prix de l' Arc de Triomphe, at Longchamp in 1955 by three lengths, defeating 23 competitors. Among them were the winner of the 1955 "French Derby" (the Prix du Jockey Club), the Conte de Ganay's Rapace, Sir Victor Sassoon's Elpenor (who had come in third at Ascot the same year) and the three champions of Marcel Boussac's stables, Kurun, Macip and Cordova.

The following year at Ascot, Ribot defeated nine competitors for the King George VI and Queen Elizabeth Stakes by six lengths, five of which he gained on the last uphill stretch, an almost unprecedented feat. Carrying approximately 130 pounds (as against 116 for the 3-year-olds), he came in ahead of Queen Elizabeth's own High Veldt, the Belgian Todrai and Kurun.

But Ribot's most spectacular feat was his last, his second Arc de Triomphe, Oct. 7, 1956. It was a risky and unusual thing for his owners to enter a good horse, destined for stud, in a race he had already won. The 1956 Arc de Triomphe, furthermore, was a much more difficult test than the previous one. Among the 20 entries were the winner of the 1956 Grand Prix de Paris, Madame Volterra's Vattel; the winner of the French Oaks, Sicarelle; the winner of the Irish Derby, G. A. Oldham's Talgo; Boussac's new great hope, Apollonia; Aly Khan's Cobetto. But it was the American expeditionary force that made the race a really risky business. Nobody knew what C. V. Whitney's Career Boy and Fisherman could do, with Eddie Arcaro and Sammy Boulmetis in the saddles.

Ribot won by six official lengths, 10 real lengths according to conservative observers. In the European press, Ribot's victory was lauded as few have ever been before. Enrico Camici, his rider, feels this is overdoing it a bit. "American jockeys aren't dangerous very often in Europe," he explains. "They race counterclockwise in America, and they sit with the inside foot slightly lower than the other to get a firmer seat on curves. In Europe it is the other way. The extended leg is on the outside, and all the weight must be supported by the cramped leg. Americans never have time to accustom themselves to a new seat."

Comparisons of great horses are notoriously invidious. Money is no criterion. In the case of Ribot, he made less than many an unimportant American champion, but Italian purses are meager. Ribot's times, too, have been excellent but never record breaking. They show one thing: Ribot is almost equally good at both short and long distances, perhaps a shade better on a longer course.

IF LOOKS COULD KILL



If appearances count for greatness, Ribot will have to concede to mediocrity. He is inconspicuous and not particularly well made. Many horses entered daily in claiming races are more impressive looking. Only his eyes, which seem different even if they aren't, and his thin skin, which some fanciers feel is a sign of aristocracy, reveal anything exceptional in the animal.

What, then, is the secret of Ribot? It is the way of the track and track people to invest successful horses with traits that are perhaps more human than they are equine. So it is that Mario Incisa, half owner of Ribot, ventures one hypothesis: "He has brains. He is a very clever horse." Others in Ribot's entourage agree with Incisa and have cloaked him in a wily and canny personality that is as aware as it is sensitive.

On racing days, for instance, Ribot, according to his handlers, becomes a different horse. His trainer, Ugo Penco, a former groom who rose from the ranks, goes even further. He says Ribot knows the difference between San Siro, Ascot and Longchamp. Just before the Ascot race, Penco told Incisa: "Look how different he is today. He knows he must prove himself." If this is a bit of Latin romanticism, Ribot does seem to distinguish exhibition gallops from the real thing. The first time he appeared in an exhibition he was surprised by the applause. He knew it should come after and not before a race. Now he enjoys exhibitions to the point of showing off. After one last month at the Campanelle track in Rome, Ribot threw Camici when the jockey stood in the stirrups and leaned forward to give him a confidential pat on the neck. His practical joke accomplished, Ribot eschewed, as he always does, running away and bemused himself instead with a few mouthfuls of grass.

Ribot is said to be pleasant and boyish. The basis of this view is his friendship for Magistris, a modest horse he was brought up and trained with. Ribot never moves without his friend and becomes restless if Magistris is taken from his accustomed stall next to Ribot. He is also said to feed his oats to his friend, but more striking than that is his purported admiration for pretty, perfumed women. When a seemly lady visits him, he is said to start breathing deeply, as if to inhale Guerlain's or Dior's latest. This, again, is an Italian interpretation of an Italian horse's penchant.

HEAD TO TOE

Undoubtedly much more to the point is a minute physical examination and measurement done on Ribot by a Milan doctor, Leopoldo Pagliano, a lover of horses who many years before had appointed himself the honorary son of the childless Tesio. Pagliano's conclusion: Ribot has a chest out of all proportion to his body.

The rest of the physical facts are simple: Ribot has a short back, a compact body and a relatively short distance between his ribs and hip bones. Foaled on Feb. 27, 1952, Ribot stands 16.1 hands high and weighs a little over 1,000 pounds. His sire, Tenerani, was a very good but not exceptional horse. He won the Ascot Goodwood Cup in 1948. His dam, Romanella, did not have an important racing career and, until Ribot, was considered only a mediocre brood mare. There is, however, a strain of madness or eccentricity in her blood. Several of her relatives were withdrawn from racing for erratic behavior. (This may account for Ribot's jettisoning of Camici. On another occasion last summer, Ribot unsaddled an exercise boy, who died after the fall.)

It is Pagliano's contention that with his great chest, Ribot has a lung capacity that is outsized for horses of his stature. Consequently, more oxygen is pumped through his heart and, as happens with leading distance runners (human), his heart beat is low, 35 to the minute, 85-90 after a 1?-mile run. Pulse and blood pressure return to normal after two hours. Ribot reaches a fatigue point considerably later than most horses. Jockey Camici, in fact, has said that after a number of hard races he thought Ribot could go 500 more yards at the same clip without wilting.

He probably could have. In this respect only, Ribot is different, but he is no monster. Like all other geniuses, Ribot is that very rare thing, a normal creature, only more so.

Federico Tesio would scoff at such purely materialistic explanations. A good horse, he used to say, walks with his legs, gallops with his lungs, resists with his heart but wins only with his spirit or character. Tesio believed that horses get this spirit from the violence of desire surrounding their conception.

He used the story of the only Italian winner of the English Derby to prove this point. Cavalier Ginestrelli, a Neapolitan, went to England with his string of horses in the '80s to beat the English at their own sport. He bred a very successful mare, Signorina, who was eventually put to stud. In 1902 she was to be bred to Isinglass, one of the great stallions of the day. Cavalier Ginestrelli had advanced 300 guineas for the performance. While Signorina was being walked to her appointment one morning, she passed older and less famous stallions, out for their morning constitutionals. One, the undistinguished Chaleureux, saw her and stopped short. Signorina halted, looking at him with liquid eyes, and refused to budge. It was love at first sight. Ginestrelli then decided to forfeit Isinglass's 300 guineas and gave the mare to the stallion she loved. The result was a mare, Signorinetta, who won the Oaks and the Derby in 1908.

Tesio's admirers say he could feel like a horse if he tried. Once, many years ago, he sold a vigorous young stallion to the Italian army. When he wouldn't perform, Tesio was disturbed. Then he suggested an experiment. Instead of the well-groomed, young and fashionable mares they had previously shown the stallion, they were to offer him an elderly, comfortable mare. This was tried and all difficulties vanished. Tesio explained that the stallion probably had been chastised when he tried to flirt with some beautiful mare on the training track. He then associated desirable female flesh with punishment. Only a disreputable old crone could put his inhibitions to rest.

Tesio was born in 1869 of moderately prosperous bourgeois stock in Turin. When he lost both parents, he was put in a boarding school. There a noted astronomer, Father Francesco Denza, took a liking to the boy's eagerness to learn and reason. From him Tesio acquired a love for science and of unorthodox theories. Tesio went abroad after coming of age and into possession of his own money. He eventually traveled to Great Britain, India, China, Japan, Argentina and the United States—wherever he could—racing as a gentleman jockey and playing polo. Returning to Italy determined to dedicate his life to horses, he had the great good fortune to meet Donna Lydia Flori di Serramezzana, an energetic young lady who loved and knew almost as much about horses as he did. The descendant of a Dalmation ship-owning family, she also had means of her own. The two fell in love, were married in 1898 and bought a small estate at Dormello, on Lake Maggiore, where Tesio had decided the grass was tender and the ground dry enough to breed winners. Donna Lydia, a thin, tall, erect dowager with a regal mien, has survived her husband and, in fact, was a witness at Ribot's last race in Paris.

Originally it was not easy to break into the aristocratic, horse-racing circles of 19th century Italy. The stakes were small and only royal highnesses, princes, dukes and counts with their vast means and grand manners could afford to compete for them. The nobles built up large stables, stocked them liberally every year with imported mares, jockeys and trainers from England or France, and then contented themselves with one or two winners.

The Tesios' beginnings were, as a consequence, inconspicuous. Their first horses raced obscurely in 1903. Their name first appeared among the winning stables in 1908. By 1911 they had their first Italian Derby winner, Guido Reni. There have been 20 more since. Tesio soon became tacitly recognized as the leader of Italian breeders, trainers and stable owners, not only because of his victories in Italy, France and later in England, but especially for the high quality of his horses, which were often snapped up by foreign buyers for their studs, at prices nobody had ever imagined possible in Italy. (Among them were Nearco and Tenerani, now in Great Britain, and Daumier in the United States.)

What the connoisseurs envied and admired in Tesio was his mysterious capacity to choose improbable mates and invent successful blood mixtures. Among his historic stallions were Michelangelo, Scopas, Apelle, Cavaliere d'Arpino, Toulouse-Lautrec and Botticelli, who all sired excellent sons. It is significant that Tesio, an amateur painter of the Winston Churchill genre, named his best horses after the greatest painters and sculptors. It proves that Tesio foresaw, with a certain degree of accuracy, how good a future product of his blood alchemy was going to be. It proves, too, that Tesio erred somewhat in his estimate of Ribot. Theodule Augustin Ribot was a lesser 19th century etcher and painter.

Middle-aged Italians now remember Tesio only as an old man with blue eyes behind steel-rimmed glasses, always carrying an umbrella even on fine days, as an insurance, because his horses never were much good on wet and muddy tracks. He walked alone, sometimes muttering to himself, from his stables to the San Siro track in Milan, always through the same streets, taking the same corners in the same way, afraid that any variation might endanger the luck of the day. He would change his itinerary only if a cat crossed his path.

Watching his horses run, he sat alone, in the same chair, in the same place, year after year. In spite of his English clothes—the top hat and the morning coat of big days, the tweeds of ordinary days, and the rolled umbrella—he looked less like the aristocrat, the man of leisure, the typical Jockey Club member, than a master craftsman, a great silversmith, watchmaker or boatbuilder. He was courteous and amiable when approached, but few dared break the invisible wall which surrounded him. He lived either in Dormello or in his little room at the Milan stables, getting up with the grooms, watching the early-morning canters, visiting each horse in turn after the workout. The last day of his life (he had been living in a clinic, under observation, for a week) he went as usual to his stables, debated the day's schedules with his trainer and died in the afternoon of a stomach hemorrhage.

Always Tesio worked within limitations imposed by a tight budget. Indeed, he often turned them to advantages. He could not acquire many foals each year, so he concentrated on getting what he thought was the best for his money, trying to make as few mistakes as possible. His was the poor man's prudence. Each match was debated with Donna Lydia months or years ahead, each opinion very carefully weighed. "Never take anybody's advice," he used to say, "the man probably won a bet on that particular horse and is grateful to him."

These are, in short, the Tesio rules. They sound obvious. He always chose the best stallions for his best mares. He kept the good colts and sold all others. He raised them as well as he knew how and trained them extremely hard. He wanted no weaklings. He considered races mainly as tests for his breeding experiments. All horse people, breeders, trainers and owners, of course, think they do all these things. But Tesio was his own master (Mario Incisa, whom he did not acquire as a partner until 1930, was an admirer and a friend who never interfered).



Tesio often liked to make the point that he employed Mendel's law of heredity in breeding, but despite his scientific pretensions he was widely known as the "Magician of Dormello." On the practical level where horses are concerned, Mendelian principles are better in retrospect than they are as aids to predicting. They require too many samples to prove a point. Tesio knew this and dared to try unorthodox experiments which no stable manager seriously would have suggested. Where all factors pointed to two horses being mated, Tesio, perhaps shrewdly, perhaps intuitively, would spurn the obvious and breed one of the pair to another horse because it possessed qualities Tesio felt might prove the exact catalyst which could provide strong positive results.

This probably is what Tesio's famous alchemy consisted of. Donna Lydia, Dr. Pagliano and Incisa, if they know more, will not tell. But one can hazard guesses. Take the case of Ribot's genealogy. All along the line one finds the blood of the English stallion St. Simon (five St. Simon offspring on the father's side and two on the mother's). St. Simon was a bay, born in 1881, who never won great prizes. His owner died when St. Simon was three years old and, according to regulations, the horse was withdrawn from all races. Among Ribot's 15 great-great-great grand parents, six are St. Simon's sons and one is St. Simon's grandson. St. Simon was bred by the Hungarian Prince Batthyany and bought at auction by the Duke of Portland for 1,600 guineas. The day he watched St. Simon gallop for the first time, the duke was appalled. He told his trainer: "I'm afraid he runs like a rabbit, not a horse." That was very probably the galloping style which Federico Tesio had been patiently waiting and searching for among St. Simon's progeny. He was certain that, if he lived long enough, by Mendel's laws, it would crop up again. It did.

 

SECRETARIATS ANCESTORS...NASRULLAH,THE IRISH ROGUE

The potent influence of Nearco became personified in America by his talented but tempestuous son, Nasrullah.

Foaled at the Aga Khan*s Sheshoon Stud in Ireland in 1940, Nasrullah earned an impressive reputation as a champion racehorse in Europe. Though he would not duplicate Nearco*s unbeaten record, he won five of ten stakes races and placed in three others. The bay stallion also won a notorious reputation at the track for being unruly, unpredictable and unmotivated.

Bill Nack, in “Secretariat * The Making of a Champion” describes how Nasrullah was “a rogue at the barrier and a rogue sometimes in the morning.” Sometimes to motivate the horse to run, his handlers popped open an umbrella behind him.

This was a horse with an attitude, as this blog post by John Sparkman of “The Pedigree Curmudgeon” colorfully illustrates. He describes Nasrullah*s behavior at his first start as a three-year-old:

“He refused to leave the paddock; he refused to break into a trot; he refused to respond to the blandishments of the friendly hack sent out on the course to kid him; he refused to do anything except behave like a spoiled child. ….Could the catcalls and cries of derision which greeted this un-Thoroughbred-like behavior have been heard by [his sire] Nearco across at Beech House Stud…it might have had a serious effect on his fertility.”

Nasrullah*s jockey, Sir Gordon Richards, described the horse as “very, very difficult to ride.” In a Sports Illustrated article of 1954, Richards attributed some of Nasrullah*s unruliness to wartime restrictions (World War II) “which forced many horses to compete at one track for such a long time that they became bored with the whole business.”

Nasrullah*s difficult behavior convinced the Aga Khan to sell him instead of standing him at stud. Irish trainer Joseph McGrath purchased Nasrullah for a reported $50,000. At McGrath*s Brownstone Stud, Nasrullah soon distinguished himself as a top sire of champions. He caught the attention of Arthur B. “Bull” Hancock, Jr., of Claiborne Farm in Kentucky, who was seeking to infuse new blood from the Nearco line into his horses.

Hancock tried twice to purchase Nasrullah with no success. Finally, in what Bill Nack called “a masterstroke in American breeding,” Hancock put together a syndicate in 1949 which purchased the Irish stallion for $340,000. Its members comprised a “who*s who” of Thoroughbred breeding: Harry F. Guggenheim, Henry Carnegie Phipps of Wheatley Stable, Marion du Pont Scott and several others.

Like a conquering hero, Nasrullah arrived on America*s shores in July 1950.

His star status had soared after his son Noor defeated the great Triple Crown winner Citation in four stakes races. Noor was named champion older male horse, as well as top money winner that year. As Nasrullah settled into his paddock at Claiborne Farm, the stallion in the adjoining paddock was also having a very good year. His name was Princequillo. His son, Hill Prince, out of Chris Chenery*s Meadow Stable mare, Hildene, had won the 1950 Preakness and beaten Noor in the two-mile Jockey Club Gold Cup that year.

Nasrullah excelled in the breeding shed, siring 98 stakes winners. Among his most famous are:U.S. Racing Hall of Fame horses Bold Ruler, Noor and Nashua. His most famous grandson, of course, was Secretariat, who was also the grandson of Princequillo on his dam*s side. Nasrullah topped the American sire list five times. Experts say he invigorated the blood of the American racehorse with new fire and speed.

Nasrullah died at Claiborne on May 26, 1959 at the age of 19. Thirty years later, his grandson Secretariat would die at age 19 at the farm.

In his book on Secretariat, Nack related how the stallion grooms heard Nasrullah nickering in his paddock just before he died. Knowing that the bay stallion never nickered, they realized something was wrong and rushed to him. Just as the vet arrived, Nasrullah toppled over, dead from a burst ventricle in his heart. His son, Bold Ruler, went wild in his adjoining paddock, screaming and racing up and down the fence line.

The “Irish rogue” was dead, but his inextinguishable fire burned brightly in the blood of his son.

And it would spark an American legend.

By Leeanne Meadows Ladin

 

ANCESTORS OF SECRETARIAT: NEARCO, the ITALIAN STALLION

That the stallion merited his own bomb shelter speaks to his enormous importance in the world of Thoroughbred breeding. Nearco (1935-1957) stamped his place in history as one of the most prepotent and influential sires of the 20th century. He was also one of the most successful racehorses of his era, undefeated in 14 races. His victory in the Grand Prix de Paris in 1938 was called his crowning glory.

Nearco was bred and raced by one of the most successful and influential horsemen of his time, the renowned Federico Tesio of Italy. Tesio, a breeder and geneticist, held views that were often contrary to the prevailing wisdom of the day. He would frequently purchase less “fashionable” mares and stallions because of something he discerned in their pedigrees. Many times over, his unorthodox formula produced international champions.

Mussolini and the looming threat of war curtailed Nearco*s time in Italy with Tesio. In 1938, Tesio sold Nearco to Martin Benson of Beech House Stud in England. The stallion went on to produce the winners of some 657 races.

Some of his most famous progeny include Nasrullah (sire of Bold Ruler and grandsire of Secretariat), Nearctic and Royal Charger. Reportedly over 100 of Nearco*s sons have stood at stud around the world. Blood-Horse Magazine*s list of the Top 100 U.S. Racehorses of the 20th Century includes several Nearco descendants: Secretariat, Seattle Slew, Bold Ruler, Nashua, Ruffian, Northern Dancer, Riva Ridge and Fort Marcy.

While Secretariat*s lineage traces back to Nasrullah, Riva*s traces to Royal Charger. Royal Charger sired Turn-To, who sired First Landing of Meadow Stable, a champion handicap horse, who then sired Riva Ridge out of the Meadow mare, Iberia.

Turn-To also sired Sir Gaylord of Meadow Stable, who was out of Somethingroyal. (She, of course. gave the world Secretariat when she was mated with Bold Ruler.) Sir Gaylord, a strong Kentucky Derby favorite in 1962, broke his sesamoid before the race and was retired. However his son, Sir Ivor, won the Epsom Derby and became British Horse of the Year and an important Thoroughbred sire.

Thus, the influence of Nearco was surely felt at Meadow Stable and far beyond. Secretariat, who sired 653 foals, and Riva Ridge, who sired 359 foals, continued to perpetuate his remarkable bloodline.

by Leeanne Meadows Ladin

 

Ones criminal, one isnt.