Making Lemonade!

Help Support CattleToday:

Herefords.US

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
4
Location
North Central Texas
He was Grand Champion Bull at Reno, Denver, and Fort Worth in the '07-'08 Show Season! He is a bull that was/is on my short list to possibly use because of his phenotype and his pedigree, which fits perfectly into my breeding program.

I found this ad on the AHA website this morning!

horizon_490x90_20090306.gif


http://www.herfnet.com/online/cgi-b...56&5=2B3C2B3C3A&6=5A5D5C24592627222D&9=5C515B

Now, with a dozen calves reported, he's being promoted as an "implied" calving ease bull! I noticed nothing is posted about those calves that gave him a current BW EPD of 1.0 also having a average Weaning Weight Index of 93.9%!

EPDs, you just gotta love 'em and the hype they afford!

This one will be interesting to watch as more data comes in.

George
 

Brandonm22

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2008
Messages
1,848
Reaction score
0
His sire (Channing) is a +5.3 and his dam is a +2.4. He may become a calving ease sire but I would wait for him to put at least 40 calves on the ground (preferably 100) before I put any faith in that +1.0 number. I don't see what there is in this to dog EPDs with though.
 
OP
Herefords.US

Herefords.US

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
4
Location
North Central Texas
HerefordSire":39zo3mcm said:
George...is your argument that the BW EPD of 1.0 is in error?

Perhaps we could promote his flush brother, Banker, as a "power/growth" bull!

http://www.herfnet.com/online/cgi-b...56&5=2B3C2B3C3A&6=5A5D5C245926272124&9=5C5E5C

And we could promote another flush brother, Top Hat, as a "curvebender"!

http://www.herfnet.com/online/cgi-b...56&5=2B3C2B3C3A&6=5A5D5C245926272220&9=5C5E5C

Because these are all ET calves, a year ago their EPDs for BW, WW, and YW were exactly the same.

Those were:

BW +3.9
WW +47
YW +84

Today, after one crop of calves from each, the EPDs in these 3 bulls varies from:

BW - From +1.0 to +6.3
WW - From +35 to +53
YW - From +65 to +94

Dog EPDs? If three full flush brothers can vary this much after one small crop of calves each, and also see that much variance from their initial EPDs, how can anyone justify putting much faith in the EPDs of unproven Hereford bulls? And even more, attempt to use them as a comparison across different herds, like comparing the Holden 8203 bull with the bull that SRBeef purchased from Jerry Huth?

HS, to answer your question, YES, I think there will be changes in these EPDs once the bulls become more proven and widely used!

George
 

rocket2222

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2006
Messages
1,119
Reaction score
0
Brandonm22":1qz7ucgr said:
His sire (Channing) is a +5.3 and his dam is a +2.4. He may become a calving ease sire but I would wait for him to put at least 40 calves on the ground (preferably 100) before I put any faith in that +1.0 number. I don't see what there is in this to dog EPDs with though.

Everybody seems to be putting a lot of pressure on bulls for the lack of accurate epds, when the real problem is the cow herd, you will not trust a bulls epd unless he's got a hundred or so calves on the ground, yet it's a great cow if she had two or three good calves, or one good calf, then shes flushed. No wonder epds aren't accurate, it seems like all the so called top breeders cow herds have a revolving gate. They are "upgraded" on a regular basis simply to improve their epd's on paper, so called "good" heifers are now flushed as 2 year olds, without a clue if they could make it past a 5 year old without a fertility or udder problem. You get a cow who has a couple of calves that get good carcass scans and she a breed leader, a bull gets 40 calves scanned [ on cows who have no true performance data, 2 or 3 calves ] then complain the bulls data as being unreliable. The mature cow herd is now a group of 4 or 5 year olds, the probability that their real performance actually matches their on paper epd's is even less likely than that of their brothers.
 

OLF

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
153
Reaction score
0
Location
Peterborough, NH
I think this shows that the EPD's are working. The AHA adjusts them as real perfomance numbers come in from the bulls offspring. Their are limited results right now, so the numbers will continue to change. That is the reason for the accuracy score. Many cattlemen won't consider EPDs until the accuracy reaches .80 or .60 or whatever criteria you set for your herd. At this point, the reliability of the EPDs is low, but I would be willing bet if you use Easy Deal and Banker in your herd, you will get smaller calves from Easy Deal. That could be wrong, because I don't know what herds they've been used in, and what other bulls they are being compared to in the ratios. But, if I was considering using these bulls, I could do some research and find out that information. If your uncomfortable with the reliability of their EPDs, give them a few years and you will better be able to predict what they will produce.
 

HerefordSire

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
5,212
Reaction score
0
Location
Arkansas
George....before I prepare a devil's advocate rebuttal to your argument, provided there is one available, what do you propose as a solution to accurately adjust the issue you see?
 
OP
Herefords.US

Herefords.US

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
4
Location
North Central Texas
OLF":100x3zsc said:
I think this shows that the EPD's are working. The AHA adjusts them as real perfomance numbers come in from the bulls offspring. Their are limited results right now, so the numbers will continue to change. That is the reason for the accuracy score. Many cattlemen won't consider EPDs until the accuracy reaches .80 or .60 or whatever criteria you set for your herd. At this point, the reliability of the EPDs is low, but I would be willing bet if you use Easy Deal and Banker in your herd, you will get smaller calves from Easy Deal. That could be wrong, because I don't know what herds they've been used in, and what other bulls they are being compared to in the ratios. But, if I was considering using these bulls, I could do some research and find out that information. If your uncomfortable with the reliability of their EPDs, give them a few years and you will better be able to predict what they will produce.

I think it is an indication that EPDs will eventually work once there is enough data - from enough varied sources! I also think it shows that the initial EPDs on these bulls wasn't worth much - and I contend that it's the same way with all unproven Hereford bulls! Splitting hairs on an extra pound of BW EPD and twenty pounds of YW EPD and letting THAT be your primary guide for selection of your next herd bull is just plain silly! Notice I haven't "dogged" EPDs in PROVEN Hereford bulls in any of my posts. My problem is breeders using EPDs to try to compare their unproven one and two year old bulls to others. It's virtually total flim-flam and too many buy into it. Then a majority of these bulls go into herds where no additional data is ever collected and recorded - and their owners never really know the truth. They only know whether they like their calves - or don't.

HS, the solution as well as the solution to the problem in cows that rocket points out will come when genetic markers in traits are perfected to the point where they are reliable and they become the standard.

George
 

HerefordSire

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
5,212
Reaction score
0
Location
Arkansas
--------
Step #1
--------

There are three 2006 model horned Hereford ET flushmate bulls with different partial owners having calves raised in different contemporary groups, namely...
-----------------------------------------------------------
H Easy Deal 609 ET..........http://www.herfnet.com/online/cgi-bin/i ... D&9=535A5D
H Banker 613 ET.............http://www.herfnet.com/online/cgi-bin/i ... 4&9=535A5B
H Top Hat 604 ET........... http://www.herfnet.com/online/cgi-bin/i ... 0&9=535B5C
-----------------------------------------------------------
H Easy Deal 609 ET..........12 calves with 094.6% birth weight ratio
H Banker 613 ET.............18 calves with 106.8% birth weight ratio
H Top Hat 604 ET............12 calves with 095.9% birth weight ratio
-----------------------------------------------------------
H Easy Deal 609 ET.........+1.0 BW EPD
H Banker 613 ET............+6.3 BW EPD
H Top Hat 604 ET...........+2.7 BW EPD
-----------------------------------------------------------
H Easy Deal 609 ET.........+.42 BW accuracy
H Banker 613 ET............+.49 BW accuracy
H Top Hat 604 ET...........+.41 BW accuracy
-----------------------------------------------------------
 

OLF

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
153
Reaction score
0
Location
Peterborough, NH
Step 2-

10 of Easy Deal's calve were born in contemporary groups, all in Lee Hutchens herd (LBH in NV).

The other bulls siring calves in these contemporary group(s):
Feltons Legend 242 (BW EPD -0.4)
D&M 53H Kreedence 003K (BW EPD +5.0)
UPH Prospector P152 (BW EPD -1.4)
LBH Legend 602 (BW EPD +2.3)

Three out of the four of these are below breed average for BW. Most of the high ratio BW calves were sired by Kreedence as expected, and he pushes down the ratios for the others. However, for Easy Deal to have an average progeny BW ratio of 94.6% with Legend and Prospector calves in the contemporary group, is a good sign that he is producing calving ease calves. It's possible that Easy Deal is bred to cows known or expected to produce low birth weight calves, while Legend is bred to high BW EPD cows to produce heavier calves. This would make Easy Deal look better in relation to Legend. I'm not sure if they did that. You really have to churn through all of the Performance Pedigrees to make that determination, I only looked at a sampling. I don't know if they would purposely drive down the BW because it also brings down WW and YW EPDs.
 

DOC HARRIS

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 26, 2005
Messages
3,256
Reaction score
0
Location
Ft. Collins, CO
In order to help these 'breeder's' who disbelieve, distrust, and disavow the effectiveness of the ACCURATE uses of EPD's, and to help aleviate their angst in relationship to how worthless EPD's seem to be - in their eyes - I would suggest that they just don't consider them in their accurate analysis of Phenotype and their own incisive interpretations of quality beef cattle. This exercise would allow them to analyze their seedstock selections with alacrity and exactness, and not be confused by Genetic facts and figures, which, admittedly, are sometimes difficult to understand and confusing to the uninformed mind. This would certainly make their lives less complicated and convoluted. :clap: :tiphat:

DOC HARRIS
 

OLF

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
153
Reaction score
0
Location
Peterborough, NH
So you can disregard the Hoffman calves since they're all ETs and their data doesn't count. Just study the W4 Ranch calves. It's a large herd with many bulls, so the contemporary groups are probably large which adds to the reliability of the data.

As a side note, I will be attending an association meeting at the home of KEB Excalibur E Deal tomorrow. I will let you know how he looks.
 
OP
Herefords.US

Herefords.US

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
4
Location
North Central Texas
OLF":1xq40b1h said:
So you can disregard the Hoffman calves since they're all ETs and their data doesn't count. Just study the W4 Ranch calves. It's a large herd with many bulls, so the contemporary groups are probably large which adds to the reliability of the data.

As a side note, I will be attending an association meeting at the home of KEB Excalibur E Deal tomorrow. I will let you know how he looks.

Where was the "reliability of the data" when all their EPDs were exactly the same - BEFORE they had any progeny?

The answer is: There WASN'T any reliability in them!

Just as there is no reliability in the EPDs of any one or two year old Hereford bull with no recorded progeny - and the EPDs of MOST Hereford cows, regardless of how old they are.

George
 

HerefordSire

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
5,212
Reaction score
0
Location
Arkansas
OLF":3c5myxe2 said:
So you can disregard the Hoffman calves since they're all ETs and their data doesn't count. Just study the W4 Ranch calves. It's a large herd with many bulls, so the contemporary groups are probably large which adds to the reliability of the data.

As a side note, I will be attending an association meeting at the home of KEB Excalibur E Deal tomorrow. I will let you know how he looks.

OLF...normally, I don't think the current global prediction system, using the formulas, will work as expected if the ET calf initial values are discarded. For example, all three bulls are ET calves. Their initial EPD accuracies are symbolized as "P", and in effect, a neutral numeric magnitude in regards to accuracy. However, the initial EPD magnitude is a simple average of the bull and dam and is not neutral globally. This is an an excellent predictive value and represents the probability that the majority of progeny's performance will fall in this address space. However, locally speaking as in this case, since these are specific flushmates and our context is not global, I think we can cancel out the effect of the initial values in order to understand that the logic is correct and dependable as a valid prediction tool even though accuracy levels may be lower than desired. Therefore, I agree with you.....we can disregard all ET calves data except for the BW ratio if there is any.
 

HerefordSire

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
5,212
Reaction score
0
Location
Arkansas
rocket2222":2zxjgk6z said:
Brandonm22":2zxjgk6z said:
His sire (Channing) is a +5.3 and his dam is a +2.4. He may become a calving ease sire but I would wait for him to put at least 40 calves on the ground (preferably 100) before I put any faith in that +1.0 number. I don't see what there is in this to dog EPDs with though.

Everybody seems to be putting a lot of pressure on bulls for the lack of accurate epds, when the real problem is the cow herd, you will not trust a bulls epd unless he's got a hundred or so calves on the ground, yet it's a great cow if she had two or three good calves, or one good calf, then shes flushed. No wonder epds aren't accurate, it seems like all the so called top breeders cow herds have a revolving gate. They are "upgraded" on a regular basis simply to improve their epd's on paper, so called "good" heifers are now flushed as 2 year olds, without a clue if they could make it past a 5 year old without a fertility or udder problem. You get a cow who has a couple of calves that get good carcass scans and she a breed leader, a bull gets 40 calves scanned [ on cows who have no true performance data, 2 or 3 calves ] then complain the bulls data as being unreliable. The mature cow herd is now a group of 4 or 5 year olds, the probability that their real performance actually matches their on paper epd's is even less likely than that of their brothers.

rockett2222.....I hope to revisit this issue soon. The data should be easy enough to inspect to see if you are correct. You might show an example like George did to save time and to make your point less abstract.
 

HerefordSire

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
5,212
Reaction score
0
Location
Arkansas
DOC HARRIS":394vrczt said:
In order to help these 'breeder's' who disbelieve, distrust, and disavow the effectiveness of the ACCURATE uses of EPD's, and to help aleviate their angst in relationship to how worthless EPD's seem to be - in their eyes - I would suggest that they just don't consider them in their accurate analysis of Phenotype and their own incisive interpretations of quality beef cattle. This exercise would allow them to analyze their seedstock selections with alacrity and exactness, and not be confused by Genetic facts and figures, which, admittedly, are sometimes difficult to understand and confusing to the uninformed mind. This would certainly make their lives less complicated and convoluted. :clap: :tiphat:

DOC HARRIS

DOC HARRIS....I think the masses want to believe in the system more than they do. An excuse I read all the time is accuracy and age of animal or quantities. Any excuse will do though. Same result. Fill in the blank. I believe it is too abstract for the masses to grasp and the system almost demands blind faith.....the data is multi-dimensional and is hard to structure tabularly. On top of that, the search tools afforded by the AHA in this case, are difficult to obtain data efficiently to find patterns or test reasoning. In my view, the math should work perfectly if the world is perfect such that everyone is 100% ethical. Even this value could be compensated for within a high degree of accuracy after testing and tweaking. Also, if the majority of breeders find this too abstract to put faith in, the system won't work because it behaves like a self fullfilling prophecy...almost behaving like a magnet. The closer you get to it, the more force it pushes or pulls. If you stand back, and believe, it will work. But....as you can see, the opposite is occurring where a breeder group pays $50K for low EPDs and an individual $2.5K for high EPDs.
 

Keren

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
3,415
Reaction score
0
Location
My little patch of earth, Perth, WA, Australia
DOC -

dont assume that those who 'disagree' with Breedplan and EBVs/EPDs do not properly understand the system.

I have a thorough understanding and in depth knowledge of the EBV/EPD system, how the figures are generated, what each figure means and the implications of the data.

It is BECAUSE of my knowledge and understanding that I have decided not to use EPDs/EBVs, not because of a lack of understanding. Our cattle are not in Breedplan, nor do I take much notice of the figures on the (very few) cattle we buy in from outside breeders.
 

Latest posts

Top