am I nuts???!?!

[angus9259]

You don't need to ever see the animal if you have seen 20++ progeny in different herds and have EPD data from 70+++ head out of 7++ herds. Progeny performance trumps individual performance. In another string, a poster was complaining because an AI sire had what he felt was a mediocre weaning weight. I looked up the sire and he had over 1000 weaning weights turned in to the association. That those 1000 calves out ratioed their contemporaries tells more about that sire's growth genetics than what he weaned back in 1999 did. Folks that don't use a bull until he has 80% EPD accuracy and they have seen adult daughters in shows, sales, and the neighbors' pastures don't really need to obsess over one photo in the Angus Journal. They are judging him by the phenotype that he stamps his progeny with NOT the phenotype he hints at by eyeballing him. Doc's point is that if you are going to use young bulls with no progeny on the ground you might want to go see the bull and ideally the bull's mom before incorporating his genetics into your herd.

You either have to see progeny or see the animal. EPDs don't tell you if his arse is a foot above his head or his feet are all pointing in the same direction. Doc's point too, I think, even if you see his progeny and they DON'T possess the undesireable phenotype of the parent, the parent STILL should NOT be used as seedstock as there is simply no need to continue to mix that up in the genetic pool.

 

[Avalon]

I am a show guy and an angus breeder. based on the pictures I do not think I would have ever bought semen on him.
When I do consider a bull and have not seen him or progeny, I always seek out the folk who have seen them and ask a lot of questions.

 

[RD-Sam]

Doc has some good points, but not always practical. Say I wanted to buy ten straws on a bull the other end of the country, it would cost more to go visit the bull than it would cost to buy fourty straws. So you look at the pictures and the EPD's and make a judgement call. :tiphat:

You say Doc aint always practical, But you say you want 10 straws from a bull you've seen one picture of. Don't get me wrong, I don't mean to argue with you, just trying to clarify, what your'e saying.

Are you telling me, that you would buy 10 from this bull, judging on the one pic we have and his epd's?

I wouldn't buy any straws on that bull judging by the picture. But if there was a bull that was suppose to be good and the picture looked good along with the EPD's I would buy straws and try a couple of breedings and see what happens. You never know for sure what a new breeding will get you, but you try and stack the deck in your favor. All I'm saying is it's not practical to go see every bull in person that you want to use.

 

[RD-Sam]

You don't need to ever see the animal if you have seen 20++ progeny in different herds and have EPD data from 70+++ head out of 7++ herds. Progeny performance trumps individual performance. In another string, a poster was complaining because an AI sire had what he felt was a mediocre weaning weight. I looked up the sire and he had over 1000 weaning weights turned in to the association. That those 1000 calves out ratioed their contemporaries tells more about that sire's growth genetics than what he weaned back in 1999 did. Folks that don't use a bull until he has 80% EPD accuracy and they have seen adult daughters in shows, sales, and the neighbors' pastures don't really need to obsess over one photo in the Angus Journal. They are judging him by the phenotype that he stamps his progeny with NOT the phenotype he hints at by eyeballing him. Doc's point is that if you are going to use young bulls with no progeny on the ground you might want to go see the bull and ideally the bull's mom before incorporating his genetics into your herd.

You either have to see progeny or see the animal. EPDs don't tell you if his arse is a foot above his head or his feet are all pointing in the same direction. Doc's point too, I think, even if you see his progeny and they DON'T possess the undesireable phenotype of the parent, the parent STILL should NOT be used as seedstock as there is simply no need to continue to mix that up in the genetic pool.

Yup, the arse is about a foot higher. :lol2:

 

[Brandonm22]

<You>"You either have to see progeny or see the animal."

I believe that IS what I said:

<Me>"You don't need to ever see the animal if you have seen 20++ progeny in different herds and..."

I don't think that I ever actually saw 878 or EXT (that I can actually recall anyway) but I have seen more than enough progeny to grasp the strengths and the weaknesses in both bulls. If a bull sires good cows and stoudt steers/bulls and he does that all over the place, I honestly don't care one rip if 20 cattlemen thought he was weak topped based on one pic in the Angus Journal. Likewise he can be the most idealized most structurally correct meat wagon in the history of the show ring; if his calves are routinely more post legged than their dams then he throws post legged calves I don't care what his own leg set was like.

 

[Aero]

why does anyone care? the chances of anyone having a show winner and a cow that knows how to work is nearly zero.

do you think this bull's topline is going to make him any worse or better for the use he will see? if he is lucky, he will make it to be a 6 yr old, he will sell a few straws and nobody will remember him in 1 year.

 

[angus9259]

why does anyone care? the chances of anyone having a show winner and a cow that knows how to work is nearly zero.

do you think this bull's topline is going to make him any worse or better for the use he will see? if he is lucky, he will make it to be a 6 yr old, he will sell a few straws and nobody will remember him in 1 year.

I care because I was questioning my own ability to judge cattle. As I mentioned at the beginning of the thread, I have a heifer with a topline just like that I plan to cull. Then I asked the question in the headline . . .

 

[Aero]

only teachers are supposed to ask questions they know the answer to.