Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Cattle Boards
Breeds Board
3070; 8020; 4011
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Herefords.US" data-source="post: 620203" data-attributes="member: 3972"><p><strong>Theory?</strong> The THEORY is in those unproven EPDs that you (and far too many others) seem to put a lot of stock in!</p><p></p><p><strong>Suspicion?</strong> I'd say that a bull whose daughters' initial production are weaning at a ratio significantly sub-average (96.5 avg WWR) is WORTHY of some suspicion. As I stated before, if I didn't see an improvement in that number, I certainly wouldn't use the 3027 bull at all- IF I was planning on retaining his daughters in my herd. That wonderful milk EPD of +27 doesn't mean diddly when you consider that it started out IN THEORY at +34. If his daughters continue producing at their current pace , the 3027 bull is destined to end up with a milk EPD that's significantly below breed average. Yes, I DO tend to place a higher value on the FACTS, those subaverage production numbers of his daughters, than the THEORY, those unproven EPDs.</p><p></p><p>So let's talk some FACTS about 5212. He's a 2005 model bull. That means he wouldn't have had daughters born before 2007 - AND they wouldn't be calving for the first time until this year. I believe that'd make it impossible for his daughters to have ANY production numbers at this point.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps, instead of a conspiracy theory, the REAL problem lies in your inability to understand what the numbers are in a performance pedigree, where they are derived, and how eventually they'll turn those theoretical EPDs into something a person might be able to trust.</p><p></p><p>George</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Herefords.US, post: 620203, member: 3972"] [b]Theory?[/b] The THEORY is in those unproven EPDs that you (and far too many others) seem to put a lot of stock in! [b]Suspicion?[/b] I'd say that a bull whose daughters' initial production are weaning at a ratio significantly sub-average (96.5 avg WWR) is WORTHY of some suspicion. As I stated before, if I didn't see an improvement in that number, I certainly wouldn't use the 3027 bull at all- IF I was planning on retaining his daughters in my herd. That wonderful milk EPD of +27 doesn't mean diddly when you consider that it started out IN THEORY at +34. If his daughters continue producing at their current pace , the 3027 bull is destined to end up with a milk EPD that's significantly below breed average. Yes, I DO tend to place a higher value on the FACTS, those subaverage production numbers of his daughters, than the THEORY, those unproven EPDs. So let's talk some FACTS about 5212. He's a 2005 model bull. That means he wouldn't have had daughters born before 2007 - AND they wouldn't be calving for the first time until this year. I believe that'd make it impossible for his daughters to have ANY production numbers at this point. Perhaps, instead of a conspiracy theory, the REAL problem lies in your inability to understand what the numbers are in a performance pedigree, where they are derived, and how eventually they'll turn those theoretical EPDs into something a person might be able to trust. George [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
Breeds Board
3070; 8020; 4011
Top