Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Pedigree Percentages
StraightEgyptians.com Forum > Overview - ‹bersicht > Discussion - Diskussion
Erna Kornelis
Hello! A lady named Eva Dano made this "Pedigree percentages" for my gelding:

Percentages for KHALID AL KIDIR:
29.2725% Crabbet/Blunt
26.7944% GSB (incl. Crabbet)
100% Egyptian
29.2725% CMK
35.1784% Abbas Pasha Source
59.9945% Abbas Pasha/Ali Pasha Sherif Source
99.5911% BAHC Source (Blue List or BLUE STAR)
93.6157% BLUE STAR Source
6.25% American Foundation (thru vol X)
25% American (thru vol XV)
4.47998% Mesaoud
2.69775% Ghazala
.390625% (El Nasser) Ancestral Element *
6.31103% Blunt AK Ancestral Element *
84.6558% Egypt I AK Ancestral Element *
8.64258% Inshass AK Ancestral Element *
99.6094% Total AK Ancestral Elements *

Saklawi I sire line
Ghazieh (Abbas Pasha) dam line ~
A Saqlawi Jidran of Ibn Sudan
Straight Egyptian
Asil

Percentages and research © by Eva Dano
Glossary and FAQs: http://www.meranch.com/books/pctgs.htm


Unfortunately, except Crabbet/Blunt, Abbas Pasha Sources, Blue List and Blue Star I don't know what the definitions are of the other "groups" Khalid seems to belong to via his pedigree. blink.gif
Then I would like to know which horse in his pedigree 'prevents' him from being 100% BAHC source (whatever that means.. blink.gif )?
He is by Al Kidir out of Rashaqa.

Thank you very much,
Erna.
HLM
Wow, Erna, what a nice post with all those percentages.

Rashaqa (1989) Se- carries Basilisk and El Nasser bloodline. Al Khamsa is voting again this year on acceptance of El Nasser. dont worry, they are all "Asil".

Have a nice evening
Hansi
Erna Kornelis
Thank you Hansi for the info! So BAHC means Al Khamsa?
Could you or maybe someone else please explain the other different 'groups' and their definitions/origins to me? I am totally confused with all this, but very eager to learn!
I would be most grateful!
Guest
Hello Erna,

Actually, BAHC means "Blue Arabian Horse Catalog", and refers to Blue List/BLUE STAR. If I'm remembering this right, he isn't Blue/BLUE because of the line going to Basilisk. Mrs. Ott sub-listed her (kind of like an Honorable Mention). Hansi will be able to correct me on this if I have my facts mixed up. The last listing in the percentages is Al Khamsa ancestral elements. As Hansi said, the final vote regarding El Nasser's eligibility for Al Khamsa is this year, so that last number may be changing. Also, like Hansi already said, they are considered Asil, regardless. Good luck with him! He comes from great stock!

Traci biggrin.gif
HLM
Good morning Traci

Thank you for replying to the other posts. you are correct.

I have stopped paying too much attention to various menmade label groups, because they simply in my opinion did not follow their own rules. Knowing pedigrees well can tell each person what indeed it contains and can trace it back to its origin. I rather like to think of "Asils" and "Non-Asils". to me the "genetic Power" is more important, than a label.

For a hypercetical example, if someone wants to preserve a horse carying a pedigree which only contains breeders: Miller, Meyer, Hanson and Collins, and those are the rules, then to me if suddenly breeder: "Wales" is accepted for whatever motive, the entire genetic system is off.
That does not mean, that horses which now have the aditional breeder "Wales" are bad horses, not at all.
I guess I am too much a stickler on "Principals".

Have a ncie day
hansi

smile.gif


.
Erna Kornelis
Hello everybody!
Hansi, you are right, one shoulnd't pay too much attention to "labels", no matter of which kind. But I find it interesting to "gig a bit in history" and to find out everything about the ancestors of Khalid. Quite simple if you have only 1 horse like I do! biggrin.gif

Well, I think everything is clear to me now, I just have a few more questions:

I found this on Eva Dano's page:
1) "Egyptian:
Any horse that was bred and/or foaled in Egypt. Includes horses that are not considered 'Straight Egyptian' by the Pyramid Society, such as the descendants of Registan for instance, and some of the old European horses that originated in Egypt.
Note: This percentage does NOT include the Blunt Desertbreds unless they are present in the pedigree thrugh their Egyptian connections. For instance Gulastra, who is considered 'Straight Egyptian' by the Pyramid Society, is actually only 62.5% Egyptian, the remainder being the Blunt Desertbred horses Hadban, Rodania, and Queen of Sheba."

Question: How can a horse be 100% egyptian but not SE? I do not understand! (Maybe it's my English, you all can also respond in german or dutch... doesn't matter)

2) "BAHC Source (Blue List or BLUE STAR):
Horses that are mentioned in the Blue Arabian Horse Catalog (BAHC) as being either Blue List or BLUE STAR, in the main section or in the Foreign section of that work, which was last updated in 1969. Today's horses that trace in all lines to such animals, i.e. are 100% in this category, are commonly referred to as "Blue List eligible".
BLUE STAR Source:
Horses that are mentioned in the Blue Arabian Horse Catalog (BAHC) as being BLUE STAR, in the main section or in the Foreign section of that work, which was last updated in 1969. Today's horses that trace in all lines to such animals, i.e. are 100% in this category, are commonly referred to as "BLUE STAR eligible". "

Question: Who "invented" the BAHC and why? Furthermore I don't understand the difference between Blue List and Blue Star!

3) "Al Khamsa Ancestral Elements:
The Al Khamsa Ancestral Elements categories are as defined in the Al Khamsa books. Where Blue List/BLUE STAR horses are not mentioned in the Al Khamsa books, I have put them into what I considered the appropriate categories. The ones that didn't fit were entered as BAHC AK Ancestral Element . The Rogers imports are entered as Rogers AK Ancestral Element . Other elements I added was: 1) Inshass (Badr) AK Ancestral Element , which is the Inshass Al Khamsa Elements of Besheir El Ashkar and Badria, , accepted to the AK roster in 1995. 2) (Sunical) AK Ancestral Element , which are the Hearst/Sunical horses accepted by Al Khamsa. The only horse currently in this category is *Layya, accepted to the AK roster in 2002. 3) (Bistany) AK Ancestral Element , which are the Bistany imports accepted by Al Khamsa. The only horse currently in this category is *Al-Mashoor, accepted to the AK roster in 2002
I kept these categories separate because they were accepted into Al Khamsa after the Al Khamsa II book was released.
One category that does not quite belong here is the (El Nasser) Ancestral Element . El Nasser was a horse imported to Egypt and acquired by the EAO in 1947. He is not, as of yet, included in the AK roster, but is up for a vote at the 2003 convention, so it seems reasonable to report him here as a separate category. A large segment of Straight Egyptian horses are AK+El Nasser.
Note: I have recently moved the AK percentages from the certain circumstances only category (below) to the always category, because I think they are quite informative for all horses; not only for the AK ones. "

sad.gif Could someone translate/explain this please?? wacko.gif

Thank you for your help! wub.gif
Gretta
Huh? Excuse me Hansi, but you say this horses is Asil? Since when are CKM (Crabbet, Kellogg, Maynesboro) and American Foundation horses accepted by Al Khamsa and the Asil Club?
Gretta
Guest
many horses used in those programs way back when, qualified under the rules of the Pyramid society. CMK only means the horses were used at crabbet, maynsboro stud and kelloggs.
Gretta
I see the percentages say 100% Egyptian so that would make me think this is an Asil horse. On the other hand the CKM and Foundation American lines include non Asil blood. I don't think a horse can be CKM and Asil, right?
Is this just to show how these groups overlap each other? Gretta
HLM
Sorry Greta, you lost me or I lost you.

I was referring to factual accepted Al Khamsa horses.
I guess we are talking about other horses?

Hve a nice day
Hansi .
Louise
"I see the percentages say 100% Egyptian so that would make me think this is an Asil horse."

Ahh... the infinite realm of labels! 100% Egyptian in this context is a label which Eva Dano has created. She considers: Any horse that was bred and/or foaled in Egypt. Includes horses that are not considered 'Straight Egyptian' by the Pyramid Society, such as the descendants of Registan for instance, and some of the old European horses that originated in Egypt. That means that a horse can be labeled by Eva Dano as 100% Egyptian but yet not be Asil, which is a label created by the Asil Club. The Asil Club does accept any horse as Asil which is labeled by the Pyramid Society as Straight Egyptian or by Al Khamsa, Inc. as Al Khamsa eligible.

"On the other hand the CKM and Foundation American lines include non Asil blood. I don't think a horse can be CKM and Asil, right?"

Eva Dano is only stating in this pedigree that 29.2725% of this horse's ancestors trace back to the Crabbet, Kellogg or Maynesboro studs. For example, Al Khamsa accepts the Crabbet horses Azrek, Basilisk, Dajania, Ferida, Hadban, Jerboa, Kars, Pharaoah, Queen of Sheba, Rodania and Saadun. Any horse which traces in lines to those Al Khamsa eligible Crabbet horses and other Al Khamsa foundation horses is accepted as Al Khamsa eligible thus being accepted by the Asil Club as Asil.

"Is this just to show how these groups overlap each other?"

I guess only Eva Dano can answer that since she was the one who constructed this pedigree's percentages.
Fran
yes Gretta. the percentages show exactly that. where all the groups overlap. it's really very interesting don't you think?

Fran (guest)
ELAcrisi
It's not interesting, it just shows how ridicoulos the whole label-circus is, obviouslely mady by humans they don't have a pretentious work or life exercise or someone needs to want to be an important person. This really have noting to do with serious horse breeding.

Christina
Guest
Christina, I totally agree!!! This splitting the horses up into xx,xxxxx% into God knows how many groups is absolutely ridiculous. This whole labelling business is just plain silly, and has nothing at all to do with intelligent horse breeding. How many more labels do breeders want???
Gretta
I guess the overlapping point is interesting because it shows how these groups are related, but it can be taken way too far. I know of some breeders who plan breedings by sitting down and calculating percentages and don't consider the horses themselves as very important. Now that is silly. As far as the horse in this thread goes, with all of this breakdown I still don't know if it is a SE or an Asil. I think there is a difference between the labels created by bonifed organizations and by individual people who just come up with a new little group to name every other day. But whatever, so long as people enjoy what they are doing and don't try to hurt anyone its okay by me. No complaints, just trying to understand. Thanks for the explanations.
Gretta
Guest
But that's just it. The difference between asil/SE and non-SE/asil is, as demonstrated here, is often so miniscule or hard to define that it is defined in 0,0001% or such. Yet such a big fuss is made, as if it would make such a huge difference. And I can well believe that some people plan their breedings by these percentages alone, for some people paper means eveything, what kind of horse comes out at the end is secondary, as long as the papers are impressive and the horse is eligible for a lot of labels!!! rolleyes.gif I don't consider this has anything to do with serious preservation, either.
Gretta
QUOTE (HLM @ Mar 18 2003, 11:37 PM)
"dont worry, they are all "Asil.

Have a nice evening
Hansi"

Hansi, I was talking about the horse Erna was asking about, KHALID AL KIDIR. Is he Asil or not?
Gretta
jennie
A couple years ago, when I first met Arabian horses; (other than just looking at pictures) I started searching on the internet to get all t he information I could find, whatever it happened to be. Anyway, one of the groups I found was Eva's with the percentages.

Something she encourages (you will find this in the list rules) is the discussion of all the different breeding/bloodline groups, and no FLAMING of those various groups. Anyway, the percentage thing got me wondering about the history of a couple horses I was actually helping out with at the time (Polish/CMK crosses). Then, later on, when I got my own, I had her run my girls, out of curiosity. This led me to search for more information, this time on Polish horses, and particularly on ANY horse related to either of my mares. This is what led me to ask here, about the Egyptian elements of their pedigrees, starting with Aswan. There are more, but I've not yet posted asking for information and the like of them.

Having said that, I just find it fascinating to find all the different things that come into play, to make each individual horse who he or she is. All those ancestors contributed somewhere, to give me, and anyone else who has an Arabian, the horses that we have now. I suppose the point I'm trying to make here, is that while the percentages don't make a horse SE, or Asil; they do have a bearing on CMK and American Foundation, and on Blue List/BLUE STAR/AK horses (they can be Blue List/BLUE STAR without being SE, and in the case of the Davenport group, CMK, but it is all or nothing, the horse must be 100% BAHC elements to be AK). Also, they are a handy tool for those like me, who want to know EVERY little detail about their horses.
Louise
"...I was talking about the horse Erna was asking about, KHALID AL KIDIR. Is he Asil or not?"

Yes, Gretta, he is Asil (as defined and accepted by the Asil Club) as he is Straight Egyptian (as defined and accepted by the Pyramid Society). He is not Al Khamsa eligible at this time due to his line to El Nasser through his dam. To add as a footnote El Nasser has passed his first step inorder to be added to the Al Khamsa Roster (see http://www.alkhamsa.org/currentevents/boar...ws2002conv.html under Roster Proposals).
Erna Kornelis
Hello jennie! I think you said it all! I am NOT a breeder, Khalid Al Kidir is a GELDING!! Who said that I want to know about this because I want to breed a foal???!!! I am just INTERESTED in EVERYTHING, so please, Christina and the guest beneath, don't say it's silly! mad.gif I wouldn't just rely on percentages if I would be thinking of breeding horses!

This just makes me sad and angry: You start a topic and have some questions. Those who have manners answer the questions in a polite way, which is wonderful. Then someone starts to provocate and the topic goes on and on, reaches 6 pages and the questions you had are totally forgotten. If that happens, you can't even start a new topic, because the story will begin again...... sad.gif

My apologies for being interested in silly things, I will try to learn about serious things in future! blink.gif
Guest
Don't worry Erna, no-one meant you personally! It's quite o.k. if someone is just interested in their own horse, and just wants to find out everything about it. So do I.
But the fact remains that a lot of breeders actually do rely on these percentages or labels when they make breeding decisions!!! That is why some people are allergic to this topic...
Fact is, there are so many man-made labels within the arab horse world that you lose count. How is a newcomer supposed to understand what it's all about? Especially if there is a constant battle between the groups, each saying that theirs is the best, purest etc. etc.
I like doing pedigree research for myself too, just looking at photos of my horses ancestors, just out of interest, because it's interesting to see a photo from 1900 ant think that that horse is a part of mine, and such.
But this label business is not just personal interest, or preservation, it is mainly plain marketing, to push up a horse in value!! The more labels it carries, the more it is worth (the sellers will have you believe, anyway!!)
ELAcrisi
Thank you guest you brought it to the important point. And also a gelding is out of a breeding programm - so every horse has something to do with breeding.

Ancestor research or label circus is a different thing. You can learn a lot about the ancestors without this % of labels, what's about research of exterieur, sportresults, offspring etc. I think this infos would bring you more knowlege about your horse than label %.

Erna, sad that you get so quickly angry - this is not the right place for I think - each subject can be observed from more than one side without beeing offending someone.

Christina
Erna Kornelis
You are perfectly right Christina. But look, now this topic has reached 22 replys, but not because the subject (my questions) are beeing discussed, but because we are discussing if labels are silly r not. This is not what is interesting, because it's no research. Of course I want to learn about exterieur (difficult!! wink.gif ), sportresults and offspring too, but now I asked about labels. I like to know who was the 'editor' of the BAHC, what is the difference between Blue Star and Blue List and how "AK Ancestral Elements" are puzzled together. For me, that's a part of research too. So please, teach me what you know about it! smile.gif
jennie
The BAHC was originally written by the Otts. What differentiates BLUE STAR from Blue List is that BLUE STAR has NO recorded instances of Mu'niqi strain in the pedigree (at least as far as can be verified). Here is a link to what is currently being done, including that it is being updated. Here's another link to Al Khamsa ancestral elements.
Guest
blink.gif smile.gif rolleyes.gif
Erna Kornelis
Thank you very much! smile.gif
HLM
Good morning Gretta.

Sorry I overlooked your message. Yes, Khalid Al Kadir (1993) is "Asil".

Have a nice day
Hansi
reluctant2
It is interesting how manmade labels are accepted by some and not others. For example: Asil, SE and AK is Ok to some ....Spanish, Polish, Russian, Crabbet, Blunt?? But SO, Heirloom is not.....one wonders why. And why is study of such pedigrees bad?? If Exteriour is all you are interested in, you limit yourself to at most three generations, for lifespans of horses and humans are limited. To rely on photos for those Exteriours past those generations is at best limiting, since two dimensions limit and distort the true horse by a principle known as foreshortening and camera angles. That is why some people are photogenic and others not, same in horses.
Secondly, if you do not like labels why call your own horses SE and Asil and condemn others for calling theirs something else. I see that, as talking out of both sides of ones mouth. In other words condemn me but hold yourself holy.
Be tolerant, not judgemental and allow everyone their particular brand of allegiance.
Or is it European to instill your values on everyone else? I sort of doubt that. Since there are many more courteous and understanding Europeans than those who unilaterally condemn those with differing opinions.
I agree that trying to learn something on this forum is challenging since you get more chaff than grain..
Just an opinion.
I meant no offence....
have a nice day
JAL
HLM
Dear Erna

Of course it is important to some what genetic powers pedigree carry. Raswan at some point ran "Muniqis" down, but in some of his writings changed his mind.
He stated his opinion.

I guess this is why Mrs Ott labeled in her Blue List Catalogue those without Muniqi blood "Blue Stars" and those who carried none, "Blue List". The difference between these two can be seen in most.

Straight Egyptian definition was also first created by Mrs Ott and lateron accepted as such by the Pyramid Society.
These straight egyptian's ancestors were either bred or owned by breeders mentioned by name.

As I understand it, the sheikh Obeyd collection covers ONLY Lady A Blunt original horses and some people pride themselves to preserve it. However, in it is also one original bloodline which was not bred or owned by Mrs Blunt, and therefore slipped in somehow, and in some people's opinion produce a lack of creditability to this label.
Exceptions of course are those horses, which do not carry this line. One might think it was a political or monetary decision.

This same bloodline is also in some Straight Egyptians and also must have been misconstrued, or whatever.

This does not mean, that any of these horses are good or bad, it is basically a matter of genetics some people wish to preserve. In the end, one needs to decide what to breed from in order to produce a good horse.

Have a nice day
Hansi
Erna Kornelis
Who was Mrs Ott, then? unsure.gif
HLM
HI Erna.

Actuallly Mrs Ott was a very fine lady and took a grat deal of time and finances to prepare in her Blue List Catalogue
percentages of what in her opinion Asil Horses carried. It is quite accurate.

She was also a very close friend of Carl Raswan and listened or learned a great deal from him. She was also rather blunt at times and some could feel insulted.
But that was her way of expressing herself. She disliked Judi Forbis and Ansata Ibn Halima with a passion, claiming that he had a short thick neck, bad legs etc.etc. which he bred on, and that he was not athletic. But she did like the Marshals and Morafic very much.I dont think she thought much of the Pyramid Society either . I spoke and corresponded with her many times from about 1967 on forward and found her quite interesting and delightful.
She had my respect.

Have a nice evening

Hansi
Jen
The Sheyk Obeyd horses are not only decended from Lady Anne's horses. Of the sixty some orginal rootstock only 14 of them are from Lady Anne. The definition is on the website http://www.sofintl.com.
Jen
desertrat73
Dear Erna,

It seems you have started quite the discussion with a few simple questions. Great things are often wrought this way, and you will frequently wind up with a whole lot more information than you were originally seeking. I believe this qulaifies!

I thought some simple definitions might be helpful to you, in your quest for knowledge. I hope I'm not overstepping my bounds, but I'm certain that if I get something wrong, somebody will correct me, so here goes. I am writing this from ground zero, as I don't know how much of this you know already, so please do not be offended. That is definitely NOT my intent. biggrin.gif

The roster of Al Khamsa horses was begun using the Blue Arabian Horse Catalog as a foundation. The BAHC was so named because (as legend has it), Ms. Ott kept her information and research notes, etc, in a notebook with a blue cover. All the horses in that book are Blue List. Some, those without recorded Mun'iqi Strain, are BLUE STAR (with the horses' names capitalized to differentiate them at a glance), and some are "sub-listed", which is a bit like an Honerable Mention. wink.gif

Al Khamsa has added to the original roster as they feel necessary, based on extensive research and a two-part voting process. A horse has to be voted in twice to be added to the roster. These horses are listed in the Al Khamsa Arabians books, which is presently only complete to 1998. Al Khamsa Arabians III is in the works as we speak. I am typing this with AK II in my lap for reference, so it should be right on the money.

In these books AK recognizes a defined set of ancestral elements., and next to each horse's name in the roster there is an abbreviation stating which of these elements a given horse carries. The most common ones are:

Blunt: refers to horses obtained by the Blunts from sources other than Egypt.

Egypt I and II: refers to the foundation stock imported into and used for breeding in Egypt over a period of roughly 90 years. Because of the huge timespan this covers, it is divided into two parts. Egypt I - horses imported before the founding on the Royal Agricultural Society in 1914. Egypt II - horses imported after that date.

Inshass: The former kings of Egypt, Fouad and Farouk, maintained the Inshass stud as their personal enterprise. Their foundation breeding stock was comprised of horses of established Egyptian bloodlines, horses they acquired for racing and breeding, and horses that were gifts from the Sa'ud studs in Saudi Arabia.

In the interest of keeping this message to a manageable lengh, I will simply list the rest, and let you go to the Al Khamsa web site for their definitions. Also, I don't know NEARLY as much about these, so will leave it to those more knowledgable to fill in my gaps.

DAVENPORT, SA'UD, AYERZA, BORDEN, CAVEDO, COBB, CRANE, DWARKA, HAMIDIE, HUNTINGTON, JILUWI, KHALIFA, MIRAGE, NEJDRAN, RICHARDS, TA'AN,
BABOLNA, WEIL

their basic definitions can be found at http://www.alkhamsa.org/ancelements.html

At any rate, you asked what Heirloom and Sheykh Obeyd are. Simply put, horses that trace ONLY to Egypt I and Blunt ancestral elements are Heirloom. Horses that trace ONLY to Egypt I, Egypt II, and Blunt ae's are Sheykh Obeyd. As far as Pyramid Society Straight Egyptian goes, it is possible for a horse to be "Straight Egyptian" and not be Al Khamsa. There are also horses that are Al Khamsa, Blue List, AND Heirloom that are not PS eligible.

What a head-spinning thing this horse-breeding and history stuff can be, eh? Hope I didn't add to the fire. I'll keep my mouth shut now, and let the more experienced people do the talking.

ph34r.gif

Have a wonderful day!

Traci
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.