What's wrong with chasing numbers?

[Alan]

If you use EPD's with some amount of thought and intelligence do you feel there is a problem with chasing EPD's? My thoughts on doing it with intelligence is first be as sure as you can the bull is going to help in the desired phenotype you're after including frame size. Don't go after bulls with a low acc or hope a young bull of the moment is going to do what you want to do.

As an obvious type of an example; if I had a cow I wanted to get her calves BW down but maintain a good REA and IMF in I would chase a bull like 242, 60 and 70 acc in the two carcass EPD's and a -0.1 BW with a .93 acc. But 3027 (I know horns, but I have changed my thoughts on using horned bulls on polled cows with little horns in the back ground) I would put Rib Eye, Harland and Progress in there also.

So what's wrong with casing numbers?

This post is more a question than a statement. The boards have seemed a bit slow lately.

The lurker.

 

[novaman]

I am asking the same question everytime I read a thread where somebody comments on "chasing numbers". I personally don't consider my breeding as chasing numbers as much as it is striving for steady genetic gain. I won't see as much genetic gain by going with a run of the mill (by the numbers) bull as I would using a bull that might be more of an outlier. I need every advantage I can get so I can remain competitive with all the other producers out there. Just my 2 cents.

 

[backhoeboogie]

They're your cows. Do whatever it is you want to do with them.

I met an excited breeder through my SIL. Went with my SIL to take a look. He's running cows on his granddad's place and all excited about numbers and AI.

In my opinion he doesn't have first things first. He's got good fertile ground but it is weed choked. He's working on those numbers but throwing on his nickels into feed sacks. You see the same thing here on this forum. Pics of cows and the pastures look untended. The old grandad came out and started saying the same thing about the pastures. He's too old to take care of them and got out of cattle. That kid (late 20's) should take a listen to the old timer.

The excitement he has is refreshing. It looks to me like he's losing money tho.

If you can make money with those numbers Alan, go for it. Use every tool available. I like seeing cows and bulls on PASTURE and nothing else. I like looking at their offspring. That is more in line with my program.

 

[Julian]

Chase numbers and numbers are what you are going to get.
The majority of the ads in breed journals document this.

 

[SRBeef]

Chase numbers and numbers are what you are going to get.
The majority of the ads in breed journals document this.

here is a big difference between "chasing" numbers and "using" numbers. If you are a breeder you can stack things to produce numbers, or you can use numbers, along with phenotype, etc, to make better breeding decisions.

As a bull buyer, I am learning to look at a bull more critically but there are some very important characteristics of a bull that can not be seen: CED, IMF, REA etc.

Numbers are another tool in the toolbox and are only useful when they are used, along with other tools, to give a more complete picture of what I am considering buying. jmho. Jim

 

[VanC]

Chase numbers and numbers are what you are going to get.
The majority of the ads in breed journals document this.

here is a big difference between "chasing" numbers and "using" numbers. If you are a breeder you can stack things to produce numbers, or you can use numbers, along with phenotype, etc, to make better breeding decisions.

As a bull buyer, I am learning to look at a bull more critically but there are some very important characteristics of a bull that can not be seen: CED, IMF, REA etc.

Numbers are another tool in the toolbox and are only useful when they are used, along with other tools, to give a more complete picture of what I am considering buying. jmho. Jim

For what it's worth, I think you're going about it the right way. Numbers can be an excellent tool when used as part of the total picture but can lead to a disaster when used as the sole reason for buying a particular animal. This last instance is what I think of when I hear the term "chasing numbers". Just as there are certain traits that can't be seen, there are others that can't be measured without visual appraisal.

A bull with great numbers won't do much good if he can't stand up during the breeding season and get the job done. That's where looking at his structure comes in. I suspect that's what Julian was referring to.

For the commercial producer that retains heifers, a bull whose daughters only last a couple of years will cost him money in the long run, regardless of what his numbers say. That's where looking at his producing female relatives, especially his dam, comes in. I could go on and on.

EPDs are, in my opinion, one of the greatest advancements in breeding we've seen, if used correctly. The breeder who doesn't utilize them will be eventually be left behind. I just hope it doesn't mean that a new generation of breeders are being created that know little or nothing about the important traits that can only be measured by actually looking at the animal. Whether you're selling or buying, I don't think that would bode well for the future.

 

[dun]

Chase numbers and numbers are what you are going to get.
The majority of the ads in breed journals document this.

here is a big difference between "chasing" numbers and "using" numbers. If you are a breeder you can stack things to produce numbers, or you can use numbers, along with phenotype, etc, to make better breeding decisions.

As a bull buyer, I am learning to look at a bull more critically but there are some very important characteristics of a bull that can not be seen: CED, IMF, REA etc.

Numbers are another tool in the toolbox and are only useful when they are used, along with other tools, to give a more complete picture of what I am considering buying. jmho. Jim

BINGO, we have a winner!

 

[vclavin]

genotype + environment = phenotype. A + B =C. Phenotype is determined by 2 things, not just one. EPD's are to aid in the genotype, you are responsible for the environment to whic the genotype is matched up with. Bad match = bad phenotype.
Valerie

 

[pdfangus]

sometimes the numbers take on a life of their own.

Our BCIA sets criteria for sires to qualify their calves for market premiums in a preconditioning and certification program.

Problem is that to get bull calves to qualify for the premium levels I have to use bulls with extraordinary yearling epd numbers. I just quit chasing em becasue i was getting calves of a phenotype that I did not like.

 

[Herefords.US]

What's wrong with chasing numbers?

Simple!

Because "chasing numbers", particularly to the novices and those so-called breeders who are catering to that type business, becomes a race toward the maximum rather than the optimum.

The "if more is better" then EVEN MORE MUST BE EVEN BETTER mentality has resulted in creating a bunch of cattle that are out of balance with their natural environment(or in the the case of BW, "if less is better" then EVEN LESS MUST BE EVEN BETTER!).

EPDs are particularly attractive to novices because it provides them with something they are familiar with, numbers, to use for comparison. They aren't nearly as comfortable when they actually have to look at the cattle, their actual performance records and/or actual measurements, then evaluate and compare them.

Evaluation based on phenotype is an applied science that requires a lot of study and is still somewhat subjective. Some people have honed a greater skill at it than others. Some people have a natural talent for it while others must work many times as hard to learn it.

It's just a whole LOT easier to compare sets of numbers - even if their accuracy is low and they don't mean very much.

George

 

[Dylan Biggs]

Most of the pitfalls of chasing numbers have already been pointed out above. Jim makes a good point that is a concern for me also which is that chasing numbers quite often leads down the "more is better road", which begs the question when is more actually enough or too much. Is 85 ww enough or is 95 better, there was a brief time when the HARB Pendelton bull was 100 or more on weaning is that enough.

Breeding cattle especially maternal cattle calls for the selection for and evaluation of a very wide array of traits many of which can not be critically evaluated by a number. You can have good numbers but poor feet or poor bags or poor udders or poor disposition or poor fleshing or poor mothering or, poor fertility, or,or etc.

If you define "chasing numbers" as assessing quality based on numbers alone that IMHO is a very risky practice. :tiphat:

 

[bigbull338]

theres a few things you must know before you ever start chasing numbers.an if you dont know those things you could be in trouble.i dont care if your a comm or reg breeder EPDs used correctly are great.used wrong they can be a train wreck.example if you want to produce show heifers.your cows have tobe bred todo so.but alot of breeders forget the main thing.that once that show cows career is done she must produce in the pasture.the bulls must also fit the cows they are being bred to.

 

[Alan]

Chase numbers and numbers are what you are going to get.
The majority of the ads in breed journals document this.

here is a big difference between "chasing" numbers and "using" numbers. If you are a breeder you can stack things to produce numbers, or you can use numbers, along with phenotype, etc, to make better breeding decisions.

As a bull buyer, I am learning to look at a bull more critically but there are some very important characteristics of a bull that can not be seen: CED, IMF, REA etc.

Numbers are another tool in the toolbox and are only useful when they are used, along with other tools, to give a more complete picture of what I am considering buying. jmho. Jim

Thanks for all the post, I think this one really hits it on the head, but all the post were useful. I think the use of EPD's are much to valuble of a tool to be brushed a side. Although I do agree that for the newbie novice numbers may be all they have to go on... it was for me at the time. So when the newbie hobby guy buys his small property and goes out and spends a few thousand $$ buying his first few head from the long time cattle people, they may put too much weight on EPD's and not look at other important areas when purchasing stock..... but that is all part of the learning process... as a hobby guy myself, I know I better have the money to back up my mistakes.

Now that I have some years under my belt, I have learned the hard way that I better develope an eye for phenotype and doability in my environment, along with a long list of other things such as care and conditioning of my cattle and pastures. Since my cattle skill have deleveloped a very small amount over the past several years I have realized two things; first is I'll never get to the point I want to be in the knowledge of cattle to have the type of herd I desire. secondly I know that I can use EPD's as a very valuble tool when selecting bulls to breed to my cows, bearing in mind that I'm using bulls with proven acc's.

Please also remember this post comes from a guy that knows he's a hobby guy and has far too much to learn, more than he can achieve in his life time, but loves his hobby and is thankful for proven EPD's.

With that said, what do you folks think is a proven EPD as far as acc ratings (percentages) go? is a .60 proven enough, too much , or should it be a .90?

Thanks again,

Alan

 

[dun]

what do you folks think is a proven EPD as far as acc ratings (percentages) go? is a .60 proven enough, too much , or should it be a .90?

Thanks again,

Alan

.60 is starting to be semi-reliable, .75 is fairly reliable, above .80 is much better. The thing to remember is that even at .90 there will/may be still 33% that fall outside of what is expected.

 

[3waycross]

what do you folks think is a proven EPD as far as acc ratings (percentages) go? is a .60 proven enough, too much , or should it be a .90?

Thanks again,

Alan

The thing to remember is that even at .90 there will/may be still 33% that fall outside of what is expected.

Dun I know I went to school a year or two after you but that math doesn't make any sense. Can/will you please elaborate.?

 

[dun]

what do you folks think is a proven EPD as far as acc ratings (percentages) go? is a .60 proven enough, too much , or should it be a .90?

Thanks again,

Alan

The thing to remember is that even at .90 there will/may be still 33% that fall outside of what is expected.

Dun I know I went to school a year or two after you but that math doesn't make any sense. Can/will you please elaborate.?

It has to do with the bell curve. The bell only encompasses 66%, doens;t matter if the accuracy is .99 or .01. The lower the accuracy the greater possibility of variation.
Download and look at page 3
http://redangus.org/node/115/Genetics/2 ... o_EPDs.pdf

 

[WichitaLineMan]

Start your search here:

 

[WichitaLineMan]

This just goes to show that very, very, very few people understand statistics. And without understanding statistics you can not fully understand EPDS.

3Way is one of the better (smarter?) posters here and he has shown that he does not understand the basics of the bell curve.

Average Joe Rancher is being led astray with EPDS and that is my story and I'm sticking to it!

 

[KNERSIE]

This just goes to show that very, very, very few people understand statistics. And without understanding statistics you can not fully understand EPDS.

3Way is one of the better (smarter?) posters here and he has shown that he does not understand the basics of the bell curve.

Average Joe Rancher is being led astray with EPDS and that is my story and I'm sticking to it!

To fully understand it you need to go one step further and have the mathematical knowledge to understand the matrix used to calculate the EPDs, and go back in the past and learn the motivation behind breeding values and it becomes clear its just another tool that is being abused today.

 

[Herefords.US]

This just goes to show that very, very, very few people understand statistics. And without understanding statistics you can not fully understand EPDS.

3Way is one of the better (smarter?) posters here and he has shown that he does not understand the basics of the bell curve.

Average Joe Rancher is being led astray with EPDS and that is my story and I'm sticking to it!

I think the problem is (and it was with me, too, at first) that it's hard to believe that something can become that widely used and accepted and actually be a total ruse.

And EPDs are not a TOTAL ruse, but when an auctioneer has a very plain looking virgin bull in the ring and yells out "Look at those EPDs!" - it becomes very reminiscent of the snake oil salesmen and flim-flam men who used to go from town to town peddling their wares, as far as I'm concerned.

As attributed to P. T. Barnum or Joseph Bessimer, depending on whom you believe, "There's one born every minute!"

George