clod hopper
Member
- Location
- SHREWSBURY, shropshire
What neilo is trying to tell you is the "French" ram is/was cr*p!!
Lanark texel sales, today.
- Thread starter Greythundercloudys
- Start date
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
Those sort of numbers would give high 90’s for accuracy ime, which probably right as they rarely move once that much data is in.
A lamb with known recorded parentage, that is fully recorded himself (weights and scan) will be in the 70’s normally, as the ram in the OP is.
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
I’ll dig his number out for you when I get in and PM you.
The daughters that lambed here meant he had some data to move his maternal ebv in the right direction, which was to below average. 8 week wt also below breed average.
so you cock upon one lamb and all non recorded lambs are shite?
you‘d lose 80 of Signet members overnight.
M-J-G
Member
Neil talking to himself these days?What neilo is trying to tell you is the "French" ram is/was cr*p!!
M-J-G
Member
Only because they set the accuracy bar too low in the first place.
M-J-G
Member
So several hundred progeny puts you into the 90s, that doesn't leave much for when their sons and daughters have progeny.
One issue I have with such tiny numbers having such an influence is how easy it makes it for cheaters.
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
Not at all, or I wouldn’t keep trying to find that gem in the unrecorded population (although regular disappointment mean I do so far less often now)..
My point was that unrecorded stock that get poor indexes aren’t necessarily being mistreated by BLUP, sometimes they are just poor performers, which their ebvs generally describe pretty well ime, given enough data to work with.
If you choose not to provide enough data for that because you don’t want to put the time & expense into collecting it then fair enough, but don’t blame the system for being out to get you, imho of course.
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
Several hundred progeny in most uk sheep breeds would be of a scale where sons & daughters were producing, and contributing data too.
It’s always going to be a compromise on numbers, but plenty seem to think they should be able get sky high ebvs off the back of a couple of lambs in a backyard flock that have done well.
You appear to think nothing is worthy of decent ebvs unless they have 1000+ progeny recorded (which is very few sheep, of any breed).
BLUP has it somewhere between, which is generally about right imo.
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
did you type that with a straight face?
I did, because knowing what the ram bred, his ebvs do accurately describe his genetic merit. They describe exactly what I can expect from using him, which is surely the whole idea?
M-J-G
Member
I don't dispute some might not do well and ideally all rams would be bred at 1000ft in the North of Scotland on sh1t grass so that no matter where they went in the UK it would be heading to lower ground and heading to a kinder climate, but life isn't like that.
Unfortunately a lot of sheep are born on good land in soft southern climates and they have to go north to rough it in rushes on boggy uplands whilst chasing tail around a hillside in the sleet.
But plenty of them do fine.
I bought a Ram lamb last year, he was fed for a sale but I managed to buy him on farm. He came home and got turned out to grass with a few tail end fat lambs and later got chucked out with the stock rams and until he was turned out to work and he has always looked good despite not getting any attention.
As a shearing having still never given him concentrate (cos why would I) he's a ball of flesh that I wouldn't want him any stronger if I'm honest.
3 years ago I bought a sale ready shearling privately a few weeks pre Kelso, he has been shown at the Highland as a lamb so no doubt had his share of feed.
He came home and got put out to grass and hasn't had concentrate since, he was a strong sheep when I bought him and he's probably only gotten stronger in the the time we've owned him.
We have a couple of home bred rams that have never had concentrate in their lives and nobody could have walked in at any stage and told which were forage reared and which weren't as they all cope just the same.
I'm not a believer in feeding breeding stock, but plenty that are fed go to farms and do what they are supposed to do.
Last edited:
I understand that. My view is that it doesn’t pay its way in giving an objective evaluation on our scale, so why pay even more money for marginal juggling. Effort isn’t an issue, bucks is.
M-J-G
Member
No, I refer to accuracy not the breeding values!
I don't think 30 lambs warrants an accuracy of 80% particularly if they are all on one or two farms.
It paves an easy path for corruption.
Last edited:
M-J-G
Member
You don't, but links help.
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
You don’t, but it does (obviously) improve accuracy of the data & ebvs.
It’s not just about sharing the ram though, if siblings, parents, progeny & relatives are in recorded flocks then all their performance data feeds into the analysis too.
yous guys need to get a hobby
mind you....if i have trouble sleeping , could be that this is the thread to read.....infact...
mind you....if i have trouble sleeping , could be that this is the thread to read.....infact...