Debating whether to breed from a bird that never raced but comes from an excellent pedigree vs. a proven racer with an average pedigree.
The unraced bird is a direct son of a big winner - bought as a squeaker from a top loft. Never raced because I only had a handful of birds that year.
The racer has won several local races but parents weren’t anything special.
Which would you choose?
This is the eternal debate in pigeon breeding.
My philosophy: racing ability is the ultimate test. A bird that performs on the road has PROVEN it has what it takes. Pedigree is just potential.
That said, direct children of exceptional birds often breed well even without racing experience. The genetics are there.
If I had to choose one, I’d take the proven racer. But ideally, pair them together and get the best of both.
Depends on what you value.
Top European breeders often never race their best breeding stock. Too valuable to risk. PIPA auctions are full of unraced birds that produce winners.
But that only works if the pedigree is truly exceptional. “Direct son of a winner” means nothing if the parents were one-hit wonders.
What’s the full pedigree? That matters more than just the sire.
The racing experience itself matters less than what it tells you about the bird.
A proven racer has demonstrated:
An unraced bird with good pedigree MIGHT have these traits. The racer definitely does.
I’d breed from both, track the offspring, and see which produces better results. That’s the only real answer.