By your definition twogeldings I then have Bettered the QH Breed and I've had foals with poor conformation so I've destroyed the breed. I don't know one breeder thats bred a number of horses that hasn't done the exact same thing. Breeding the best in no way gurentees a good foal.
With every breeding there is ALWAYS a chance of poorer conformation. There is no horse with a 'perfect' conformation. Every single horse has it's faults. I completely see your point, but, by breeding Good + Good you have a higher chance of breeding better
. Not always best, or biggest, or most perfect. But breeding good. Breeding WISELY.
Take in for example my two Missouri Fox Trotter geldings. They have a naturally beautiful gait, good conformation, nice papers. But Loki is bossy and can be pushy and Red doesn't understand people yet and can henceforth seem stand-offish and grouchy. If I didn't know better I would probably walk away thinking that Foxtrotters are a bunch of arses that are just a waste of time.
They're fault is there temperament (being a bunch of arses a lot of the time) but they better there breed by representing it well with there gait, and conformation.
Loki's full brother, another example. Parents are fantastic horses, but he has a big head and a roman nose. He just came out that way. Nothing you can do about it. He makes up for it with his personality, conformation, and linage. They bred good and got an ugly duckling with a big heart.
A Quarter Horse from great parents may have a bad conformation, but betters it's breed with it's wonderful personality and gentle nature. Another with a mean temperment and good conformation may better it's breed for being top notch in barrels, or sorting, or even English riding.
Spyder; Unfortunately yes, there are people out there who just breed JUST for profit. It is not a practice I like to see at all, but it is done. Thoroughbreds are unfortunately a breed were this is done quite a lot it seems. It really saddens me, especially when you read how many end up after just a few races in the meat pens.
"So who gets labeled as " I guess with no world beaters out there by your stud, he can't be that good".................and then potential people will go to the "world beater" foal producer's stud that in the end may not be suitable for that particular person."
My geldings sire has produced many good foals, but most have been sold as trail, pleasure or family horses, even though many of them would do great in the show ring. He isn't well known and has been met with skepticism by some. Especially with a low stud fee of $250.
He's about 16-17 years old now, never been shown, his only job is really breeding and relaxing. But he has no stud-like vices, no aggression, no nothing. I have two of his foals, certainly not the best examples of what he can produce but I am happy with both of them. I absolutely adore a weanling black colt of his. I haven't met a foal of his I haven't liked, honestly. Cross or not.
There are, of course, faults in my argument and general definition of 'bettering the breed', which I do hope are pointed out and corrected by other members. The simplest definition I would say would probably be 'Breed Smart'.
Like Spyder pointed out with the high ranking studs. Bigger and better doesn't always really mean
better. So breed smart, breed careful, and enjoy what you do.
Big and small, every horse has a chance to better the breed if bred right, trained right, and loved.