# OPENING UP A CAN OF WORMS (halter horses)



## SorrelHorse

I agree.

Jester, our stud, is the model of the preferable halter horse to me. He is small, yes, about 14.2hh. But I've had judges come up to me and go "Dang....He's kinda perfect isn't he?"

And Jester has an ROM in Reining, I've been doing Gymkhana on him since I was a tiny girl, cutting, some english work even. 

There was a horse in the area who looked almost exactly like him, but it also exactly what you're tlaking about....a big clodhopper with over muscles frame, thre times the size of what a normal cowhorse should be. Everyone got mad because Jester would always beat him out.

I feel so fortunate to have owned such an amazing horse. I can only pray that more halter horses will turn out like him one day, and maybe his babies can do something too.


----------



## AmazinCaucasian

SorrelHorse said:


> I agree.
> 
> Jester, our stud, is the model of the preferable halter horse to me. He is small, yes, about 14.2hh. But I've had judges come up to me and go "Dang....He's kinda perfect isn't he?"
> 
> And Jester has an ROM in Reining, I've been doing Gymkhana on him since I was a tiny girl, cutting, some english work even.
> 
> There was a horse in the area who looked almost exactly like him, but it also exactly what you're tlaking about....a big clodhopper with over muscles frame, thre times the size of what a normal cowhorse should be. Everyone got mad because Jester would always beat him out.
> 
> I feel so fortunate to have owned such an amazing horse. I can only pray that more halter horses will turn out like him one day, and maybe his babies can do something too.


 
My hat's off to the judges for recognizing what a good halter horse should be! I owned a stud for a while that was halter bred. He was sold to me by a top 50 breeder because(in their opinion)he had undesirable characteristics such as too much foot and leg (0 shoe on a 1270lb horse) and too much wither. Which to me meant he was better suited for a saddle horse.

I don't know where the change will have to come from. Maybe judges? They're the ones rewarding them


----------



## Annnie31

Couldnt agree more. The breeding of Quarter Horses solely for the Halter class has in many ways divided the breed. On the other hand several performance horses have shown halter and done quite well and then gone on to ride. It is a shame that we cant do both at the same time. 
We had a stallion in the 80's sired by Impressive Tommy out of a old foundation bred mare that we haltered lightly here in Canada but there was never enough horses in his class to get the points with AQHA. We raised him from yearling, showed him and broke him ourselves and he placed at Quarterama in Halter and in the 3 year old snaffle bit (11th) with about 50 horses and 3 cuts at the time. We never did breed alot of mares because we sold him to Germany but it was fun doing both and he was an awesome horse that did well in Germany.


----------



## MHFoundation Quarters

I agree 100%! 

The essence of good conformation is based on functionality and that in turn should mean ability and soundness under saddle. I've seen the qh halter world go through a lot of changes, not a fan of today's halter horse by a long stretch. Our oldest stud has quite a few AQHA halter pts & was IQHA Gr. Champion Stallion for the state 3 different years while also earning pts in multiple riding events. But alas this was 25 years ago when halter horses were riding horses also. I know mine wouldn't even get looked at in today's aqha halter ring as they aren't 16+ hands of the incredible hulk on legs that look about as sturdy as toothpicks. 

I have a very good friend who raises halter horses, owns both AQHA & APHA World Champion halter stallions, but neither has ever had a saddle on their back. I've discussed my feelings on that with him many times, amazingly he does somewhat agree with me. His take on it is - for him its business and money to be made where it can be and as long as that's the direction it can be made in that's where he will be. I think in general that's where today's halter world is. Its all about money and not enough about the horse. It won't change until halter standards and judging of them change. 

I love the idea of a mandatory riding class for halter horses. What great possibilities that has!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Mocha26

Yes! I totally agree!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## farmpony84

I love a big stocky quarter horse. I ride my horse in several disciplines but we never come out with a blue because my horse is too narrow for halter, although his feet are tiny enough. He's too short and stocky for english and he's too tall and lanky for western. To me, he's perfect.









PS - MHF, everytime I see your Avatar I think it's my Beauty (just for a second). We should introduce them sometime. I could get a great western pleasure horse!


----------



## MHFoundation Quarters

farmpony84 said:


> PS - MHF, everytime I see your Avatar I think it's my Beauty (just for a second). We should introduce them sometime. I could get a great western pleasure horse!
> 
> [/ATTACH]


I like yours too farmpony! They can have muscle & functionality at the same time! Woodstock just lost his boy bits a couple weeks ago, so no baby making for him. I'm a bit sad but he had a tendon injury that's set his training back farther and he's getting a bit older so past point of heavily promotable. He's going to make a great all-around gelding for my daughter down the road after I've had my fun with him for a few years. I am having my old man Hondo (Woodstock's sire) collected & freezing for myself but I might be persuaded to share


----------



## gigem88

No arguement here, I totally agree!


----------



## Endiku

Very much agreed!

Back a few years ago we were on the market for a horse to add to our herd for lessons, and we were offered a QH gelding that had been in the Top Ten National Halter quarterhorses a few years back. Excited, we went to see him. The gelding was 16 hh, nearly 1,400 pounds, and so fat and overmuscled that he looked like someone had just dumped him in oil. Not wanting to discriminate though, I went ahead and tacked up.

For one, my saddle didn't even fit him properly. I had to go borrow a girth from a fried with DRAFT horses, and my girth generally even fits our 17.3hh thoroughbred! Once I slip-slided up on his back, I asked for a walk. Sure, no problem. Then a trot. His trot was one of the most uncomfortable things I've ever had to sit. His legs were so small that he seemed to forget where they were, making his trot sort of...'lumpy.' I asked for a simple, large circle. When I did that, he slid off balance, tripped, regained his footing, then proceeded to do a very lopsided circle with his head as high as it could get (not very high, his neck was super short!) and his body in no way round. I worked him for about 30 minutes, in that time I absolutely could not get him to contact me through the reins or round himself. When I got off, he was puffing and sweating like I'd run him four hours, when we'd never even gone past a slow canter.

To say the least, I was dissapointed! He was pretty, sure, but that gelding would never make a lesson horse, much less a reiner, roper, racer, or anything else that QHs were originally bred to do.

We ended up buying this girl- Jasmine, a 15 hh QH mare. A bit funnier looking than him maybe, but muscled RIGHT (a bit thin...but muscular all the same) and a very capable (and marish xD) lesson horse.


----------



## Alwaysbehind

Another agreement to the OP's post.


----------



## newhorsemom

I'm not very familiar with the QH world so this might be an obvious question, but how do they build up all of that muscle if the horses aren't ridden?


----------



## rlcarnes

I totally agree. QH are one of the most well known breeds for all around performance. The halter horses look like body builders on crack! I am most definitely a QH girl but where is the functionality? I understand that there is money in halter but if they just stand there and look "pretty" (According to current standards) What is the point. They go into the ring for a total of five minutes and stand? Where is the competition?

I really like making mandatory at least one riding event required for halter horses. It would really shake thing up a bit.


----------



## MHFoundation Quarters

newhorsemom said:


> I'm not very familiar with the QH world so this might be an obvious question, but how do they build up all of that muscle if the horses aren't ridden?


Halter bloodlines, treadmills & hot walkers.


----------



## paintedpastures

MHFoundation Quarters said:


> Halter bloodlines, treadmills & hot walkers.


 Well for the most part, But when my girl was old enough I rode her to condition her. . 
I think some these horses aren't as bad as they seem but get ruined by some of these conditioning programs.You pull that halter weight off them,don't be putting them in shoes as yearlings to make these long/small upright feet,give them some outdoor free excercise. Hmm you have a different looking,sounder/healthier horse


----------



## goneriding

A functional horse is a beautiful horse.


----------



## Hoofprints in the Sand

Wow, I'm excited so many posts are popping up about Halter horses, since I've always known my mare's bloodlines were halter-woven but didn't really know a whole lot about what that meant. So it's great to be learning about it!  

Someone on my halter thread said she was a good "riding horse" too and I wasn't sure entirely what that meant but this cements it in I think! She was a rescue who I've turned into my little Eventer so she's certainly performing!


----------



## bsms

How can anyone object to horses like these :shock::


----------



## Alwaysbehind

The second photo the horse actually has feet. The horses that are winning now days have feet two sizes smaller than those on the same size body.


----------



## Hoofprints in the Sand

^^True from what I've been reading...my pony has big solid bare feet and never has any lameness issues because of it!


----------



## Hoofprints in the Sand

Here's a better one of her feet actually...and she's 14.4hh for reference


----------



## farmpony84

bsms said:


> How can anyone object to horses like these :shock::


I can't see the first horse, this computer is wierd but I actually think the bay (I'm assuming he's the second horse) is really cute....

I mean... REALLY cute...


----------



## farmpony84

Since we are looking at tiny little feet. Here's Rileys feet. He's not standing very square but you can see them. They've actually grown this summer... some...


----------



## Allison Finch

I was reading a halter post, a while back, and the halter horse owner actually said that they were not bred to ride. REALLY?? How far has the QH world sunk that they breed horses that are not even usable? Post legs, horrible feet, HYPP, and so much more that makes for a horse I don't even find attractive anymore.

I'm sorry to offend halter people, but your breeding programs/ideals have produced travesties, IMHO.


----------



## farmpony84

Allison Finch said:


> I was reading a halter post, a while back, and the halter horse owner actually said that they were not bred to ride. REALLY?? How far has the QH world sunk that they breed horses that are not even usable? Post legs, horrible feet, HYPP, and so much more that makes for a horse I don't even find attractive anymore.
> 
> I'm sorry to offend halter people, but your breeding programs/ideals have produced travesties, IMHO.


The huge issue is that until the judges stop pinning them, the breeders will continue to breed and create them. The changes can't begin at the lower levels becuase it's a business. It has to filter down from the top. It's like the peanut roller lope, until the judges started pinning the more forward moving lope, the broken four beat lope continued to be the way to go. These days it's getting better. 

I noticed some rule changes in the halter divisions just came down recently so it's getting better but again, it always takes time. With the new rules regarding HYPP things will begin to change but even those are slow to take effect. Eventually HYPP horses will not be elidgeable for registration as breeding stock which means it is not going to be cost effective to breed them.


----------



## coffeegod

bsms said:


> How can anyone object to horses like these :shock::


Photoshopped??? IhopeIhopeIhope...


----------



## farmpony84

coffeegod said:


> Photoshopped??? IhopeIhopeIhope...


Nope. Go look up Mr Yella Fella!:shock:


----------



## rlcarnes

bsms said:


> How can anyone object to horses like these :shock::


How is this attractive? I kinda like the bay- without all the bulk he might just make a good looking horse. However... The first looks like Arnold (the Governator) back in the day. His caption should be "I'll Be back!". Well that is if he can stay sound enough to make it? 

It has been a loooonnnng time since I have shown halter- and nothing serious just local and 4-h stuff (never won my guy has a big scar on his shoulder from b4 I got him) But How do these big halter horses trot? they look like they can barely move!


----------



## farmpony84

rlcarnes said:


> How is this attractive? I kinda like the bay- without all the bulk he might just make a good looking horse. However... The first looks like Arnold (the Governator) back in the day. His caption should be "I'll Be back!". Well that is if he can stay sound enough to make it?
> 
> It has been a loooonnnng time since I have shown halter- and nothing serious just local and 4-h stuff (never won my guy has a big scar on his shoulder from b4 I got him) But How do these big halter horses trot? they look like they can barely move!


I can't look at the first one until I get home. My computer here is funky like that. The second one, to me, looks like he could be transformed into a riding horse (probably a ranch/cutting horse) but he could drop some of that bulk and be able to move and be useful. Just my opinion.


----------



## goneriding

This is a Yella Fella stallion which I don't think he's as bad as his sire. Still, muscle is nice but too much is useless to me. 

Heza Rockafella


----------



## smrobs

Allison Finch said:


> I'm sorry to offend halter people, but your breeding programs/ideals *have produced travesties*, IMHO.


Sorry, a little off topic but when I first read that, I saw it as "have produced transvestites" :rofl:. It still works though, with mares looking like this.



















I am another that agrees wholeheartedly with the OP. I can remember back in the day when many of the winning halter horses were also performance horses.

Heck, this guy was halter champion quite a few times at many AQHA shows...he was also superior heading and heeling horse.


















This mare set Appaloosa history as a 3 year old at the '78 national show by winning at halter, get of sire, and WP.









This is the best picture I have of her without tack and it makes her look much more downhill than what she was.









And this horse was a multiple time champion in halter, WP, and calf roping









This guy was also halter and WP champion but he had the ability to do anything else you asked of him.










I think the best example of what a proper halter horse should look like in current times was posted in another thread just a few days ago. I mean, halter, WP, HUS, trail, reining, some jumping, and speed events like poles? How much more versatile can you get. The only thing he's lacking is some form of cattle event like working cow horse or roping.
NewGallery


----------



## goneriding

OMG.....That first mare is gross, to me.


----------



## equiniphile

I couldn't agree more. I've heard AQHA is trying to change the standards for more correctness, and hopefully weed out the posty-legged, over-muscled guys. Sure hope it's true.

Halter should be about horses with perfect, PERFORMANCE conformation.


----------



## Allison Finch

Wow, some of those halter/performance horses are beautiful.

I agree that change is slow. Look how long it took for changes to start in WP. It will HAVE to come from new standards being made and adherence mandated. It was just a case of....like a little muscle? Let's selectively breed for so much muscle, we produce unusable, unattractive (to many horsemen) horses.

Couple more who I believe are a bit over the top........


----------



## goneriding

This is a QH to me!

Hendricks Reining Horses-Starlights Wrangler


----------



## Cinnys Whinny

I agree with OP, especially where it comes to Quarter Horses. When I was growing up, a Quarterhorse was supposed to be the ultimate in versatility.... the horse that could do it all. I think that a QH, and the other QH types should be judged on their ability to be versatile. Big bulldog horses with tons of muscle and spindly delicate legs probably can't do much of anything easily, and I think it's really kind of sad...


----------



## Cinnys Whinny

Allison Finch said:


> Wow, some of those halter/performance horses are beautiful.
> 
> I agree that change is slow. Look how long it took for changes to start in WP. It will HAVE to come from new standards being made and adherence mandated. It was just a case of....like a little muscle? Let's selectively breed for so much muscle, we produce unusable, unattractive (to many horsemen) horses.
> 
> Couple more who I believe are a bit over the top........


What's sad is there a breeder not to far from my house and his foals come out looking like that top photo the second they are born.....


----------



## coffeegod

farmpony84 said:


> Nope. Go look up Mr Yella Fella!:shock:


:faint: Sweet baby Buddha on a pogo stick....way to overbreed. Unreal.


----------



## Hukassa

What is even sadder to me than people thinking this looks good and breeding for this look is how because they breed their bodies so big and their feet so small just standing around can give them such horrible foot problems. We use to board with a lady who owned a nationally known halter horse, never been ridden a day in her life, never had any bad injuries but just her weight on such small feet caused laminitis. Goodness and I always thought she was prettier out of condition.


----------



## WhoaNow

IMO, Some of these overly muscled QHs look more like beef cattle (on steroids).
They look 'all pumped up':shock: Not pretty, nor functional:?


----------



## Cinnys Whinny

Hukassa said:


> What is even sadder to me than people thinking this looks good and breeding for this look is how because they breed their bodies so big and their feet so small just standing around can give them such horrible foot problems. We use to board with a lady who owned a nationally known halter horse, never been ridden a day in her life, never had any bad injuries but just her weight on such small feet caused laminitis. Goodness and I always thought she was prettier out of condition.


I've seen stuff like that too. When I first bought Cinny I had him boarded on personal property where I was planning on leasing an 8 year old paint. The horse was a Grand Champion at lunge line, halter, yadda yadda yadda...... was built like that Yello Fella horse. The lady had never actually ridden her herself. Well, turns out the horse was virtually unrideable. Not only was she the roughest ride I have ever been on in my life but she was always lame, sore and could barely move for 3 days after every ride. I stopped riding her after 3 rides because I felt sorry for the poor girl.


----------



## Alwaysbehind

I keep looking at the photos of the chestnut that Allison posted above and wondering how that horse moves around comfortably. Eeek.

That horse is a perfect example of the 'if a little is good more is better' theory going way wrong.


----------



## farmpony84

The chestnut must bet he one I can't see. Getting mad now!


----------



## ponyboy

goneriding said:


> A functional horse is a beautiful horse.



I agree, and IMO judging an animal based on appearance alone inevitably leads to problems. It enables breeders to select for traits that aren't practical or even healthy. Dogs are being ruined because of this.


----------



## Cinnys Whinny

ponyboy said:


> I agree, and IMO judging an animal based on appearance alone inevitably leads to problems. It enables breeders to select for traits that aren't practical or even healthy. Dogs are being ruined because of this.


Oh yes.... lets breed our retrievers to be pretty..... gee now almost all the retrievers end up with hip displasia, whoops!


----------



## apachewhitesox

Well I agree with pretty much everything that has been said so far. The first time I saw a quarter horse it was a halter horse and I thought they all looked like that it was kind of gross. I officially didn't like quarter horses until I met my friends mare who is very functional and has a great conformation she is a perfect example of a good quarter horse.


----------



## goneriding

I see more steep pasterns too......Ugh


----------



## trailhorserider

Whomever said functional is beautiful is right! 

That is one of the reasons I am always defending grade horses. Sure, some of them are fuglies. But until breeders of purebred horses can get their acts together and quit producing fuglies themselves, give me a good, sound, usable grade any day!

I love my little 14.3 Mustang who is built like a tank AND has good bones and feet. 

If I could change one thing about the Quarter Horse, it would be to give them larger bones and feet. It just doesn't seem right to have a big heavy horse with tiny feet and skinny legs. That is not attractive to me!

I love stocky, tanky horses. Cobs. Draft crosses. Drafty Mustangs. Warmbloods. I say hubba hubba to a big pretty horse. So I should love Quarter Horses. But the feet and legs on some of them scare me a lot!

My best friend has some awesome, usable Quarter Horses though! Driftwood bloodlines. She used them for trail riding and they are trail horses deluxe. 

I am afraid halter Quarter Horses remind me of the super cows:


----------



## Starlite

the photos of the "super-horses" posted here are disturbing...and if starving a horse to death constitutes abuse, then this should too because the result is a constantly lame, miserable animal that spends its life in pain.


----------



## bubba13

Many of them don't live all that long.


----------



## rlcarnes

Starlite said:


> the photos of the "super-horses" posted here are disturbing...and if starving a horse to death constitutes abuse, then this should too because the result is a constantly lame, miserable animal that spends its life in pain.


I never though about it like that. It is kind of abuse if you purposely breed a horse that you know will be lame and have conformation faults. "But it will win for a couple years and breed a few times to make me more money then it will die because of consistent lameness issues and inablilty to really be a horse." Why?...

When ever there is manipulation of a perfect creature look for the root of the evil- $$$Money$$$ If there were no money or high status that came along with breeding horses like that then there wouldn't be any (of course this is true for all disciplines not just halter-not to say that they are all bad every discipline has its good and bad points). Gotta love greed!


----------



## ScharmLily

bsms said:


> How can anyone object to horses like these :shock::


I am stunned :shock:! Is that really what QH halter horses look like? I do not show, so I don't see halter classes very often. Those horses are ridiculous though, why would you actually WANT small legs and feet?! Around here, people usually regard bigger feet and joints as better. The legs on those horses look comparable in size to those of my arab gelding....except he is 14.3 hands and about a quarter of the size...personally I love his large, strong feet and good bone substance.


----------



## morabhobbyhorse

I agree Scharm, I haven't been to a halter show in years and had no idea these monstrosities of nature were what was winning now. They are just gross, nothing is in proportion on them. I have a non-registered Morab with feet like saucers, LOL but they fit her size, she has a neck like tractor, and nice hind quarters. I was kidding the other day that if I 'roped' the barn, I figured she could pull it over, but she doesn't look like these things. Just nice, regular definition. Ugh


----------



## smrobs

Never mind, had a blonde moment :lol:.


----------



## Alwaysbehind

smrobs said:


> Never mind, had a blonde moment :lol:.


No fun if you get to edit them before we get to read them and enjoy those moments along with you.


----------



## smrobs

No, I read ScharmLily's post as "is that what QHs really look like" and so I went into this whole big thing about what real QHs look like, pictures and all....until I re-read hers and saw the "is that what _halter_ QHs really look like" so my post would have been off topic and pointless.

:lol:


----------



## Alwaysbehind

We would have enjoyed the pictures though.


----------



## smrobs

Well, this is the most important one that I posted. I believe something like him should be close to the QH breed standard.

Also, I simply adore everything about him and it is my dream to someday have a mare up to his quality and the money for a stud fee.


----------



## Hukassa

^^ I love metallic cat. =)


----------



## Alwaysbehind

He is very handsome.

Hard to believe that the amount of muscling he has is not enough for the halter breeding people.


----------



## Starlite

smrobs said:


> well, this is the most important one that i posted. I believe something like him should be close to the qh breed standard.
> 
> Also, i simply adore everything about him and it is my dream to someday have a mare up to his quality and the money for a stud fee.


droooool.


----------



## paintedpastures

Well funny how these threads bashing disciplines be it halter, western pleasure HUS, people always dig up the extremes & then make it seem that all the horses of said discipline are like that. Not saying there isn't those beefcakes on stilted pencil legs out there in halter,or crippled up horses troping down the rail in WP. not all horses showing are like that:-o & shouldn't be depicted as the norm:-( Just how many of you have actually show halter or frequent your local breed shows to know first hand?? 
I can think of a stallion that has 11 world titles in halter & can't say he looks like these halter horses.


----------



## Starlite

Nobody is "bashing" a discipline as a whole, but the unscrupulous breeders who are practicing "selective breeding" and generating freaks of nature who live a life of pain because they are deformed, over muscled, and are not capable of activities that the breed standard states they are intended for are free game. Sorry charlie if you choose to take it personally.

P.s. Im on my phone, so I dont have spell check...i know its bad bear with me lol.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## smrobs

Paintedpasture, I would love to see a picture of a "normal" looking multiple time world champion halter horse. I don't mean normal for halter, I mean normal for a horse, without straight hocks or upright pasterns or tiny hooves, or 3 times the muscle mass of a normal horse.

I don't go to breed shows but I really don't need to. I can do a google search and find pictures of what's winning and, unfortunately, they look just like others that have been posted in this thread.

AQHA World champion "performance" halter mare: Very upright shoulder and front pasterns, tiny feet, straight hocks, too much muscle to be athletic.









2009 AQHA world show champion in open and amateur 2 year old mares: pasterns are better but she has chicken bones in her legs, straight hocks again.









2 time AQHA world champion stallion: Bones look decent enough for a standard horse (1000-1200 pounds), but he weighs 1800 pounds (that's almost as heavy as my 18hh Percheron), upright pasterns, straight hocks, back so short that you would be hard pressed to find a saddle short enough to fit even if he would stay sound for riding.
*pic is copyrighted so here is the link*
Kids Classic Style, AQHA Stallion - World Champion~World Champion Sire

Unfortunately, the "normal" looking halter horses are not the ones winning where it matters, in the big shows. When real horses start winning world championships and those stilt legged bags of beef start placing at the bottom of the class, you won't hear another word's complaint out of me.


----------



## WhoaNow

Looking at these pictures makes me think of the differences between human athletes as well.
These halter horses are akin to body builders,..., all muscle, but not athletically fit, and certainly not aerobically fit.

I also agree with the poster who said a functional horse is a beautiful horse.


----------



## morabhobbyhorse

OMG, that link went to the first horse posted here who looked so grotesque. I'm sorry if anyone took exception to what I said, I didn't mean to offend anyone, but how can you LOOK at those 'things' and see any beauty in them. I saw the one picture of his back and he literally is as wide as my friend's Percheron only her mare has the legs and feet to carry a back that wide. And their shoulders are what really freaks me out, LOL. If I saw one of those in person I think I'd take off in terror.


----------



## paintedpastures

Unfortunately, the "normal" looking halter horses are not the ones winning where it matters, in the big shows. When real horses start winning world championships and those stilt legged bags of beef start placing at the bottom of the class, you won't hear another word's complaint out of me.[/QUOTE]

You are right that alot of these halter horses that have a more desirable functional conformation aren't making it to these big shows,but are still winning superior halter titles or have earned AQHA or APHA championships. Many These freak of nature halter horses that are being promoted in the big journals & are seen at these big shows are not a good representation & make up just a smaller precentage of the many more halter horses out there that are more of the norm that is being shown more locally at the breed shows & are a better represention for the breed registries. I like halter horses in general, do any of those examples appeal to me...NO.They to me are an embarrassment to the breed & discipline. But I have seen many halter horses I like being shown at our breed shows & those are the ones I prefer to identify as more the norm of "real" halter horses 

The link to a multiple world champion that I think is not too over the top like many of these horses at that level of showing Tribune


----------



## morabhobbyhorse

He looks like a 'normal' horse, GORGEOUS but normal. Maybe he will become the 'norm' for halter horses and the other ones will quit being bred.


----------



## Katze

omfg those were some nasty sad looking horses! I hope to god that doesn't become the norm!!


----------



## Celeste

Fortunately for the breed, most people who raise quarter horse breed "normal" horses and use them for riding. When all this crap goes out of fashion, the real horses will still be there.


----------



## smrobs

^^That's a good point Celeste, there will always be folks that breed "real" horses that you can take to a halter class and then take them and work them 3 weeks straight on a ranch or go and win a reining or cutting on them.

I guess I still just don't understand why horses like this weren't the peak of halter horses. This type defines what a QH is.
Performance Stallions | 6666 Ranch

I especially adore this guy.
Playboys Buck Fever | 6666 Ranch


----------



## bsms

In fairness to the QH world, I've seen Arabians (my love) that cost a lot of money, but that I wouldn't own on a bet. Horses should no more look like sea horses than they should like body builders gone wild.

Fortunately, there are lots of breeders doing it right, and the horses winning by freakishness are all way out of my price range anyways.

And don't get me started on what the show world does to working dogs...:evil:


----------



## trailhorserider

You know who I really think is beautiful conformationally? Dunbars Gold. Paint him any color at all, and I think there is a gorgeous horse there. 

Dunbars Gold


----------



## AmazinCaucasian

I haven't kept track with the status of the Impressive bloodline being excluded from AQHA, so maybe it's better now. But a few years ago if you wanted to win, you had Impressive. So, my question is *has anyone else ridden one that had a paralysis episode? * Or been handling a horse that had one? 

One more thing thing that was mentioned a few times was soundness issues. I can remember trimming a barn full of halter horses several years back. All the young horses were buck-kneed and mildly foundered. The older ones had to be heavily buted to work on their feet. Almost all had crooked feet, mostly toed in from being so base-wide. The toed in horses developed sidebone by the time they were old enough to ride. Quarter horses aren't the only breed to be guilty of this. Apps and Paints, Palomino Assoc., you name it, they all had similar problems with lameness.


----------



## bubba13

Not all Impressive-bred horses have HYPP or PSSM. And Impressive is in the bloodlines of numerous performance champions.

It is a good point, though--how much of the hoof/leg problem in halter horses is genetic, and how much is due to fitting?


----------



## AmazinCaucasian

yes most of them I rode were N/H and I owned one that was N/N. The best I can recall, the one that had an HYPP episode was N/H...can that be right Bubba? What's PSSM? 

As far as foot soundness, the founder was definitely fitting and the conformation problems were genetic. I fixed the youngster's pigeon-toed in old mamas and tried to keep them sound for another breeding.


----------



## bubba13

Are ALL of the conformation problems genetic, though? I haven't dealt much with halter horses myself, but from speaking to my farrier and others, some of this is also due to fitting. Crooked legs, such as pigeon toes, could be caused by really bad shoeing/trimming early in life, just as inherently crooked legs in a foals can sometimes be corrected with appropriate therapeutic farriery. Now, you can't explain away the straight hocks and all that stuff--that's obviously genetic--but I've also heard halter trainers quoted as saying that they want to feed their colts up so much that they are literally trembling on their feet, meaning their bulk is nearly too much for their legs to support. Surely this can't be good for proper bone development...

And yes, H/H and N/H horses can (and frequently are) symptomatic, though apparently there are pretty good dietary measures to help "control" the diseases effect, and N/N horses are healthy, unaffected, and unable of passing on the disease.

PSSM is another very common muscle disease in Quarter Horses. I *believe* that Impressive was a carrier of that, as well, and that many N/N Impressive bred horses who "still have HYPP, or the Impressive-bred curse" are actually suffering from PSSM. Polysaccharide Storage Myopathy - CVM - UMEC, University of Minnesota


----------



## MHFoundation Quarters

bubba13 said:


> Are ALL of the conformation problems genetic, though? I haven't dealt much with halter horses myself, but from speaking to my farrier and others, some of this is also due to fitting. Crooked legs, such as pigeon toes, could be caused by really bad shoeing/trimming early in life, just as inherently crooked legs in a foals can sometimes be corrected with appropriate therapeutic farriery. Now, you can't explain away the straight hocks and all that stuff--that's obviously genetic--but I've also heard halter trainers quoted as saying that they want to feed their colts up so much that they are literally trembling on their feet, meaning their bulk is nearly too much for their legs to support. Surely this can't be good for proper bone development...


This is a great point, bubba. I had this discussion with my vet awhile back. I know some folks (nice people, though possibly not the smartest...) who raise body builder type halter horses, they stand a son of Mr Yella Fella. They had 8 cases of epiphysitis (sp?) last year alone. I asked the vet about it as a general question of is it bloodlines & breeding or mare & foal nutrition and care that causes the majority. Her words were "When they are fed out like feeder steers it sets them up for unsoundness." Their joints can't keep up with the growth rate of their bodies and it trashes their growth plates. I myself wonder if that isn't as much of their future soundness issues as their naturally large size & bloodlines in itself.


----------



## Celeste

As far as Arabians go, I'm sure that some people like them for their "seahorse" heads. I do think they are pretty, but I got interested in Arabs after having two horses with navicular lameness. In my experience, they are not prone to it. I just got tired of the expense of special shoes, lameness on long rides, and the lameness at all. With my Arab, I put plain shoes on her, and I never expect lameness. My mare is sound and full of energy. She will go as far as I can stand it, and she is still ready to go more. Now, if my body would hold up like it did when I was a kid..........


----------



## bubba13

They say that, and then I knew a rather well-conformed Arabian mare who was diagnosed with bad navicular and had to be retired from riding at age eight.

Quality farrier care and correct conformation (and common sense in riding/working) are the best ways to ensure long-term soundness. But they are not foolproof.


----------



## Katze

trailhorserider said:


> You know who I really think is beautiful conformationally? Dunbars Gold. Paint him any color at all, and I think there is a gorgeous horse there.
> 
> Dunbars Gold


 
Aah! gorgeous, i agree!


----------



## TheMadHatter

I haven't read every single post on here (there's 9 pages people!! lol) so forgive me if I just repeat something that someone else says 

Most halter horses nowadays make me sick, and I show in halter!! My Cisco (everyone has the perfect horse I know, but we're all biased by nature ) is a muscular little devil and I love it...since I RIDE HIM! I need a bulky horse to carry me through headhigh bushes and up steep terrain and I love a thick, brickhouse type horse (see Blue, my appy) but these so called 'Halter Champions' today are just vile. You cannot possibly ride those animals! I show against one in particular that actually has cellulite. She doesn't have muscle she is just severely obese!! I think the fat issue is just as bad as the over muscled issue. My boy is halter bred but I've seen both his parents and each were very versatile and thats what I look for in halter horses. I blame the judges. They place bigger and bigger horses who have obvious flaws over horses who have proper muscling and the ability to be ridden. I have a saying, "I'd rather show a UFC Fighter than a body builder or sumo wrestler." 
A halter horse that I think is gawjus and built great is KH Money Man. He's just right to me build wise. Cut but not overly bulked and his owner rides him too. 
Now a funny lookin horse is Kids Classic Style. Ick! 
Here is his pic: http://www.scheckelpaintandquarterh...photos/KIDS CLASSIC STYLE RUNNING_sm copy.jpg

Poor thing looks like he can barely move!


----------



## Fowl Play

Cinnys Whinny said:


> Oh yes.... lets breed our retrievers to be pretty..... gee now almost all the retrievers end up with hip displasia, whoops!


We have field labs (ones that are bred to hunt and actually DO hunt). I have very strong feelings about people that have ruined the labrador breed by beefing them up and having fat, flabby labs jogging around a small show ring and calling that "the ideal lab". It makes me sick when I watch the Westminster dog show and the majority of the sporting breeds have absolutely no field experience at all. When I've talked with show people, the say "it takes too much time to make a champion, we can't worry about stuff like that." Right, since breeding a dog that can do what it's intended to do would be a waste of time.

The same works for horses. We joke at our barn that a halter horse is a "lead 'em and feed 'em" horse.


----------



## kiwigirl

OK, What the...?!!! How can you say that you like horses and then do THAT to them??? I'm sorry this is a knee jerk reaction but WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS????


----------



## kiwigirl

Oh man, I just kept looking through this thread and it just got worse and worse!










Where is the responsibility of the industry? How is this good for a breed? This is not normal!

I don't understand, I am bewildered and bemused by this thread!


----------



## Hukassa

^^Can anyone tell me this horses name? I think I remember him being a stud, and that he died but not much else. Just to show my mom that if she actually does ever breed her horse that she need to go with a lighter built horse to balance her out. J.J's not a freakishly huge halter horse, but I wouldn't want a quarter horse much more muscular than her.


----------



## bubba13

Sir Cool Skip.


----------



## Hukassa

Thank you.


----------



## Hukassa

This isn't gross or a travesty, this is just extremely sad.:-x


----------



## OTTBLover

^^ 
OMG That poor horse!


----------



## Deslumbrar

Im not sure whats going on with that mare... but another mare from that same breeder:










These guys arent just muscular... THEYRE FAT. Look at the mare I posted. Her skin bunches from her looking backward. You can see fat pockets on her body. Fat over the muscle makes it look larger.

If they were solid muscle, you would see muscle separation and more veins through their upper legs.


----------



## rlcarnes

smrobs said:


> ^^That's a good point Celeste, there will always be folks that breed "real" horses that you can take to a halter class and then take them and work them 3 weeks straight on a ranch or go and win a reining or cutting on them.
> 
> I guess I still just don't understand why horses like this weren't the peak of halter horses. This type defines what a QH is.
> Performance Stallions | 6666 Ranch
> 
> I especially adore this guy.
> Playboys Buck Fever | 6666 Ranch


Nice horses I totally fell in love with Paddys Irish Whiskey- I love bays  Now to find a mare to breed to.....:-o


----------



## WickedNag

All I have to say is great post! I love stocky horses too but have you seen Sir Cool Skip? Really that is not an example of what I want in my horses....


----------



## farmpony84

Hukassa said:


> This isn't gross or a travesty, this is just extremely sad.:-x


I don't know the history on this particular mare but I remember someone posted a link to that fugly blog once and they were discussing her. I had gone to her website and read her stats, she had a huge amount of points and even championships if I remember. I'm wondering if she had suffered some sort of tramatic injury or something because her back to me looks like it's painful and her legs aren't right either...

I know ya'all are "hatin" (I just wanted to use that word) on the halter horses in this thread but I wanted to say, at the AQHA shows I have been attending this summer the halter classes have gotten much smaller. There aren't nearly as many as those monsters in the ring. They have created a "new" division which is the Performance Halter classes. In order to compete in these classes, the horse must have earned an ROM, which means these horses are actual riding horses that are pinning. 

When they go through the classes they will pull back the 1st and 2nd place horse from the Halter and the Performance Halter classes to place the grand and reserve grand horses. I have yet to see a halter horse win grand or reserve grand, it is always going to the Performance halter horses. I think the look of the halter is going to evolve over the next few years and it's going to be for the better.


----------



## rlcarnes

rlcarnes said:


> Nice horses I totally fell in love with Paddys Irish Whiskey- I love bays  Now to find a mare to breed to.....:-o


Ok wait I just watched his video... He jiggles when he walks! and his neck is very short. He is nice to look at in his picture on their website though  Ex the breeding- you'd have to have breed to a appendix mare to get a normal looking horse!


----------



## Celeste

The horse in post #89. OMG.
Please tell me that this is not a successful show horse.
His legs look like a broken table. Forelimbs, cannon behind knee.
Hindlimbs---- straight as a stick. 
Can he walk?
Poor baby.
I am assuming that the skinned up places are from laying down too much due to lameness?


----------



## Celeste

*"Fat over the muscle makes it look larger."*

I'm going with that. Not for my horse. For me.
I'm not fat. I'm well muscled. :lol:


----------



## Alwaysbehind

Farmpony, you do have to admit that it is scary that is having to evolve though. How did it ever get to the point that the horses winning in halter were so funky looking that they are totally not functional? How did it get to the point that they had to make a new halter division for horses that are actually ridden?

I personally am not hating on halter horses. I am hating on a system that keeps falling for 'if a little is good more is better'. If a little muscle is good then a whole boat load until they look like freaks is better, right? If having delicate legs makes the muscles look bigger then having no bone at all and scary small feet will make it look great, right?

This problem is not just in halter horses (though that is what this thread is about). It seems to be happening every where.


----------



## farmpony84

How quickly did all this happen? I'm curious because back in the 90's my dream was to show AQHA but the money wasn't there. Those horses didn't move anything like they do now and they didn't look anything like they look now. I've only been showing AQHA since Riley was born and he's only 5 which gives me only about 3 years in the circuit. I've seen a lot of changes filtering down since I started but I'm thinking those changes were probably in the works years before that.

What is the name of that painful looking mare? I wanted to go pull her points.... (I'm curious)


----------



## Hukassa

I'm not trying to hate on the halter industry, just the breeders that think its ok to breed a horse that will probably be lame later in life just so they can win in the show ring. The mare's name is Sonny's Red Lace, who has far as I can find has not had any injuries but navicular and a torn cervix during a foaling that makes her harder to breed.


----------



## farmpony84

Hukassa said:


> I'm not trying to hate on the halter industry, just the breeders that think its ok to breed a horse that will probably be lame later in life just so they can win in the show ring. The mare's name is Sonny's Red Lace, who has far as I can find has not had any injuries but navicular and a torn cervix during a foaling that makes her harder to breed.


I don't want anyone to think I'm defending this horse, I'm really mostly curious as too why they are proud enough of her to post her on their web page. This picture is from 2006 and she was born 04/12/1989 which makes her 17 at the time of the photo. Not all that old by my standards...

She was shown 5 times, has 2 wins, and a .5 point. I think maybe they just really love her.


----------



## bubba13

If you want more examples from fhotd, how about this mare?










And I'm surprised no one has posted this image yet.


----------



## rlcarnes

bubba13 said:


> If you want more examples from fhotd, how about this mare?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm surprised no one has posted this image yet.


First mare is gross. How could she foal? But please tell me that the second photo is photoshopped? I hope... :/


----------



## bubba13

But there's really not _all_ that much difference between photos 1 and 2 though, is there?


----------



## Alwaysbehind

Now that you say that, Bubba.... It makes me sick to my stomach.


----------



## Celeste

How could she not have navicular with those front legs?


----------



## bagof4grapes

newhorsemom said:


> I'm not very familiar with the QH world so this might be an obvious question, but how do they build up all of that muscle if the horses aren't ridden?


I agree with the OP and I'm going to bring up another point against the way halter horses are bred. Even if you actually like the muscely look of these horses and can manage to ride them somehow, this should be the nail in the coffin...

People actually breed HYPP N/H and H/H horses and they don't bother to treat their seizures because they believe the muscle seizures make the horse's muscles bigger without actually having to condition them.

I've had arguments with people who genuinely believe that there's no way to breed HYPP out of horses for good and that if your HYPP positive horse has never shown symptoms, then he will never show symptoms. Those of course are usually the people who get fallen on when their non-symptomatic HYPP positive horse collapses dead after its first and only seizure.

*HUGE FACEPALM*

AQHA has taken a huge and very positive first step to eradicating HYPP horses from the show ring completely by disallowing H/H horses to be registered in the AQHA. Of course, that won't do much to get rid of the disease completely because N/H horses still pass on the gene. Still, it's a step in the right direction and it's one that not many people thought the AQHA would make.

Anyway, if that doesn't sicken you, I don't know what will.


----------



## Hoofprints in the Sand

bubba13 said:


> If you want more examples from fhotd, how about this mare?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That second one has got to be photoshopped!!! Please please please say it is a fake!!!
> 
> And I'm surprised no one has posted this image yet.


_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## nrhareiner

AQHA now offers and have for some time Performance halter. Which in a way I find to be a great thing and on the other hand not sure why there is a need when a halter class should be just that a standard for performance.

Big problem within AQHA is the diversity of the breed as a whole. One one end you have the HUS/Jumpers and on the other end the Cutters and reiners. They are all QH but they look a world apart.

What is comes down to in Halter is the judges and what is put in front of them. They can only judge what is there yet they need to place the horse who is correct and do get a job done in which the QH was bred to do.


----------



## farmpony84

bagof4grapes said:


> AQHA has taken a huge and very positive first step to eradicating HYPP horses from the show ring completely by disallowing H/H horses to be registered in the AQHA. Of course, that won't do much to get rid of the disease completely because N/H horses still pass on the gene. Still, it's a step in the right direction and it's one that not many people thought the AQHA would make.
> .


In 2020 N/H horses will no longer be accepted into the registry as breeding animals which means only geldings or non-breeding mares can be registered.


----------



## bagof4grapes

farmpony84 said:


> In 2020 N/H horses will no longer be accepted into the registry as breeding animals which means only geldings or non-breeding mares can be registered.


Oh really? That's wonderful! However, I want to ask "Why 2020? Why not now?" From now to 2020 thousands of new HYPP-positive horses will be created. Why let that happen?

Also, may I ask where you got your information from?


----------



## rlcarnes

nrhareiner said:


> AQHA now offers and have for some time Performance halter. Which in a way I find to be a great thing and on the other hand not sure why there is a need when a halter class should be just that a standard for performance.
> 
> Big problem within AQHA is the diversity of the breed as a whole. One one end you have the HUS/Jumpers and on the other end the Cutters and reiners. They are all QH but they look a world apart.
> 
> What is comes down to in Halter is the judges and what is put in front of them. They can only judge what is there yet they need to place the horse who is correct and do get a job done in which the QH was bred to do.


For performance halter that is true but in 'Regular' halter i guess- How can you place a horse with OBVIOUS conformation faults that when passed on to offspring will produce unsoundness? Is it a best of the worst kind of thing? How do you place any when they all look like that? Regular halter horses cannot do what a QH was bred to do. Unless QH are now only good for standing and not moving.


----------



## rlcarnes

bagof4grapes said:


> Oh really? That's wonderful! However, I want to ask "Why 2020? Why not now?" From now to 2020 thousands of new HYPP-positive horses will be created. Why let that happen?
> 
> Also, may I ask where you got your information from?


The reason is irresponsible breeders. they think that their horse will be spared and that there is only a 25% chance that their foal will have the disease. I say Why risk it? give me a normal QH any day


----------



## Alwaysbehind

farmpony84 said:


> In 2020 N/H horses will no longer be accepted into the registry as breeding animals which means only geldings or non-breeding mares can be registered.


I still do not get why it is going to take until 2020 for this to go into affect.
I say 16 months after the rule has been decided on is plenty of time. That allows the idiots who bred for a chance of a N/H horse the chance to register the outcome of that years breeding and then they are done.


----------



## rlcarnes

Alwaysbehind said:


> I still do not get why it is going to take until 2020 for this to go into affect.
> I say 16 months after the rule has been decided on is plenty of time. That allows the idiots who bred for a chance of a N/H horse the chance to register the outcome of that years breeding and then they are done.


Good point Why wait another 9 years?


----------



## Alwaysbehind

rlcarnes said:


> Good point Why wait another 9 years?


Because the passing of this new rule is lip service. It is so they can say, "See, we do care, we passed a rule" all while letting the breeders continue to do as they have been.


----------



## farmpony84

bagof4grapes said:


> Oh really? That's wonderful! However, I want to ask "Why 2020? Why not now?" From now to 2020 thousands of new HYPP-positive horses will be created. Why let that happen?
> 
> Also, may I ask where you got your information from?


I don't know why 2020. It was in one of the AQHA e-mails I get. I'll go see if I can find it. I know that back in 03 there was a petition to have it start in 2010...


----------



## farmpony84

This is the current rule:

Effective with foals born on or after January 1, 2007,
all descendants of the stallion Impressive, AQHA registration number
0767246, shall be required to be parentage verified and HYPP
tested, subject to the conditions in (c)(2) above. Any foal testing
homozygous positive for HYPP (H/H) will not be eligible for registration
with AQHA.​


----------



## nrhareiner

rlcarnes said:


> For performance halter that is true but in 'Regular' halter i guess- How can you place a horse with OBVIOUS conformation faults that when passed on to offspring will produce unsoundness? Is it a best of the worst kind of thing? How do you place any when they all look like that? Regular halter horses cannot do what a QH was bred to do. Unless QH are now only good for standing and not moving.



Judges can only place what is in front of them. If people do not put their performance horses into a regular halter class then the judges can only place what is there and there is no up side put putting a performance horse into a regular halter class. I use to show all my young horses in AQHA halter. I stopped b/c of how the AQHA shows are run. Heck do not even show AQHA much any more. NO good reason or benefit to do so.


----------



## Alwaysbehind

nrhareiner said:


> Judges can only place what is in front of them.


I agree with this at say a local open show level.

I think at the higher breed show level the judges should have a right to not place anything that is not good.

If every horse out there (for example) has their poll well below withers and is troping the judge should make a statement by not giving anyone a ribbon or at least not giving anyone first.


What is currently in the show ring is there because the judges were placing it. It is not a case of 'everyone sucks so...'. It is a case of judges rewarding huge balls of muscles with tiny feet and no legs so people bred more balls of muscles with tiny feet and no legs.


----------



## nrhareiner

It is a big circle. The judges can only place what is there and people only bring what they think will win and breeders will bred only what people want and they want what will win. So until someone steps up and gives the judges something that they can place and justify as to why they placed it nothing will change.

There is too much money paid into the class to not place something. Also if they did not place a first then how do you do the points? It is no just not giving a puuuurrrrty blue ribbon there are points given. It is not just as easy as saying there is no first place. So what you just do not give out points for first? What dose that change. Second still gets points and so on. 

Again people who do not like what they see in a given class in a breed show needs to step up and give the judges something different to place.


----------



## Katze

bubba13 said:


>


omg...please tell me that it's a balloon horse, it cannot be real.....


----------



## farmpony84

Ya'all are mean. These horses could be descendents of the great Mr. Ed and he could be reading these comments right now! And how do you think he's going to feel when he sees his great aunt saggy bottom on here??? SHAME ON YOU!


----------



## LauraKate

Katze said:


> omg...please tell me that it's a balloon horse, it cannot be real.....


Naw, that's not real! His feet are too big!:lol:


----------



## Katze

LauraKate said:


> Naw, that's not real! His feet are too big!:lol:


 LOL!:lol:


----------



## bagof4grapes

nrhareiner said:


> There is too much money paid into the class to not place something. Also if they did not place a first then how do you do the points?


Seriously? When are are people going to start caring more about the well being of these horses than money or points? Are the points going to go bad or magically disappear if they're not given out? And even if they are, who cares? Are people going to go bankrupt from the $30 they paid for the class and won nothing? People pay $30 and win nothing in classes all the time. It'll just teach them not to breed %&#$ horses because they won't win anything.

Heck, I don't care if someone DOES go bankrupt due to their horses winning nothing in every single class. THE HORSES. COME. FIRST.

Say it with me, people: horses > money & points


----------



## Allison Finch

No, judges don't have to pin horses. I was in a dressage show many years ago riding in an upper level class. I was the only one riding this test. I blew a couple of tempi changes and I let the judge know that I would be happy with a lower ribbon. Just because I was the only one in the class should not mean I should get a blue ribbon, IMO. A blue should be earned. I was happy to take a second place.

If judges would do the right thing, then the word would fly like lightening. Change would happen really fast.


----------



## Celeste

I have three words to say about horses that are abused for shows.

Tennessee Walking Horse.


----------



## Allison Finch

Uh, celeste.....This is not a thread about TWH's so, please don't try to hijack the thread. Start your own thread.


----------



## nrhareiner

bagof4grapes said:


> Seriously? When are are people going to start caring more about the well being of these horses than money or points? Are the points going to go bad or magically disappear if they're not given out? And even if they are, who cares? Are people going to go bankrupt from the $30 they paid for the class and won nothing? People pay $30 and win nothing in classes all the time. It'll just teach them not to breed %&#$ horses because they won't win anything.
> 
> Heck, I don't care if someone DOES go bankrupt due to their horses winning nothing in every single class. THE HORSES. COME. FIRST.
> 
> Say it with me, people: horses > money & points


So you have shown in an AQHA Halter class? Right? If you have never entered a horse in a show any show then you have little right to say what is and is not pinned and where they place. The fact is that people enter shows to get opinions. They get them. The problem is if there are no others in that class to judge the judges have what is there.

The problem is that if you do not like any horse to place first or even second then you have one that is good enough for 3rd then how do you give out the points? Robins it is easy. Not so much with points and money. If the horse who should have been 3rd good enough to win? IF so then that horse should have just been placed first.

If you do not like the way things are then get in there and change them. I show and when I do not like something going on with in the association in which I show I make it known to the people running it. Same at a show. If I do not like something I let them know. I do it nicely but they know. If it does not change then I move my business just like I would with anything.

Also a class in which I show is a lot more then $30. Heck that is the judges fee for the class.

My point is that if you do not like what you see in the ring then get something that is better and take into the class and give the judges something new to look at and judge.

Also these horses are very very well cared for. They are bred for a purpose. Again you may not like it but until you are willing to put your money out there and show a horse who is different then stop talking.


----------



## Celeste

Oops. Sorry. I'd take it off, but there is no edit button.


----------



## kiwigirl

I have no experience on showing horses so I cant speak about what happens at them. The thing that actually sticks in my craw happens on this very forum. You go to the breeding section and suggest that you want to breed your unregistered, no name horse and then sit back and watch the ugliness descend. 

People get stuck in bashing "backyard breeders". Pontificating on how back yard breeders destroy the integrity of breeds. Ranting on and on about how only responsible breeders with registered horses should be allowed to breed horses because they are the only ones who really have the breeds best interest at heart. What a load of crap.

If the people breeding these halter horses are an example of "responsible" breeders then I will take my chances with a back yard breeder. I bet the horses shown on this thread come from "great bloodlines", and yet the result from those bloodlines, manipulated by the "responsible" breeder is absolutely appalling.


----------



## nrhareiner

Again it is a viscous circle. People breed what people buy people buy what wins judges pin what is in front of them. Plane and simple. If given a different choice and it wins then breeders would breed that as that is what people will want b/c it is what wins. With Halter horses it is easy to go to an extreme that you do not see in other disciplines. There is a reason why they are called lead and feed horses. This is why they end up like this. 

Again it is easy to sit behind a computer screen and say you do not like something it is something different to go out and do something about it.


----------



## bagof4grapes

nrhareiner said:


> Again you may not like it but until you are willing to put your money out there and show a horse who is different then stop talking.


And what right do you have to tell people what they can and can't talk about? I will continue talking until my dying day, about this subject and about many others. Try and stop me. Go ahead!

And yes, I HAVE entered horses in classes. I've paid that money. I've been there and done that and I STILL think that if there are no horses worthy of the ribbons, that none should earn the ribbons, especially if it means that bad breeders will be discouraged.

Heck, even if I had no show experience, the stinkin' show doesn't matter. It's just a stupid show. The quality of life for these horses ALWAYS comes first.

I don't give a rat's patootie how the shows are structured, how points are given out, what kind of money it costs to enter shows, or how much money is earned from shows. I'll keep saying it as many times as I have to, long after people are sick of hearing me say it, THE HORSES COME FIRST. Even if it means that shows are disbanded for good, THE HORSES COME FIRST. ALWAYS. PERIOD.

It doesn't matter how well these horses are taken care of. The more poorly bred horses that are created, the more unwanted horses there will be to get abused, neglected, and sent off to slaughter. A poorly built horse who can't even support its own weight to stay sound for life can be living a life of luxury, but he will still be in pain. And there's no one to blame but the greedy, selfish breeders. So long as the judges keep rewarding these horses, the breeders will continue to breed them.

And why should I have to enter my own horses in these classes in order to change things? First of all, I have no interest in showing halter. Second of all, I don't have the time, money, and resources to show in the way that would be required to make any sort of difference. Third of all, I highly doubt one person would be able to change the way things are done at all unless they managed to start placing on a national level. Even then it's doubtful. Heck, even an online petition would have more influence.

Besides, why aren't you fighting for the horses? Are you really saying that the money and points that come out of showing are more important than the lives of these horses? You sound like someone who shows. Why don't YOU enter some shows and change things? Practice what you preach! Come on.


----------



## bagof4grapes

kiwigirl said:


> If the people breeding these halter horses are an example of "responsible" breeders then I will take my chances with a back yard breeder.


And kiwigirl, I think people here are actually saying that most halter horse breeders are NOT responsible breeders. Both they and backyard breeders need to get another hobby.


----------



## nrhareiner

bagof4grapes said:


> And what right do you have to tell people what they can and can't talk about? I will continue talking until my dying day, about this subject and about many others. Try and stop me. Go ahead!
> 
> And yes, I HAVE entered horses in classes. I've paid that money. I've been there and done that and I STILL think that if there are no horses worthy of the ribbons, that none should earn the ribbons, especially if it means that bad breeders will be discouraged.
> 
> Heck, even if I had no show experience, the stinkin' show doesn't matter. It's just a stupid show. The quality of life for these horses ALWAYS comes first.
> 
> I don't give a rat's patootie how the shows are structured, how points are given out, what kind of money it costs to enter shows, or how much money is earned from shows. I'll keep saying it as many times as I have to, long after people are sick of hearing me say it, THE HORSES COME FIRST. Even if it means that shows are disbanded for good, THE HORSES COME FIRST. ALWAYS. PERIOD.
> 
> It doesn't matter how well these horses are taken care of. The more poorly bred horses that are created, the more unwanted horses there will be to get abused, neglected, and sent off to slaughter. A poorly built horse who can't even support its own weight to stay sound for life can be living a life of luxury, but he will still be in pain. And there's no one to blame but the greedy, selfish breeders. So long as the judges keep rewarding these horses, the breeders will continue to breed them.
> 
> And why should I have to enter my own horses in these classes in order to change things? First of all, I have no interest in showing halter. Second of all, I don't have the time, money, and resources to show in the way that would be required to make any sort of difference. Third of all, I highly doubt one person would be able to change the way things are done at all unless they managed to start placing on a national level. Even then it's doubtful. Heck, even an online petition would have more influence.
> 
> Besides, why aren't you fighting for the horses? Are you really saying that the money and points that come out of showing are more important than the lives of these horses? You sound like someone who shows. Why don't YOU enter some shows and change things? Practice what you preach! Come on.



I do show and I do breed. I enter the classes with horses how are not halter bred and I do well with my young horses when I show in halter at AQHA shows. Which is not as much as I use to. Why? B/C showing AQHA proves nothing for what I breed for. 

So yes I do practice what I preach. I am out there breeding good sound well proven horses. I do put my horses first. I use trainers who do things the way I want and in return I put good horses under them and they win.

You say one person can not make a difference. I say it starts with one person.


----------



## bagof4grapes

nrhareiner said:


> I do show and I do breed. I enter the classes with horses how are not halter bred and I do well with my young horses when I show in halter at AQHA shows. Which is not as much as I use to. Why? B/C showing AQHA proves nothing for what I breed for.
> 
> So yes I do practice what I preach. I am out there breeding good sound well proven horses. I do put my horses first. I use trainers who do things the way I want and in return I put good horses under them and they win.
> 
> You say one person can not make a difference. I say it starts with one person.


That's fantastic. You're capable of doing that. So keep doing it and fight the good fight. But don't tell others they can't talk if they can't help. I'm doing what I can with my limited means which for now mostly involves getting the word out there.

But I stand by what I said. If the horses are suffering then something's gotta change, no matter how much money is involved. And the horses ARE suffering.


----------



## trailhorserider

kiwigirl said:


> I have no experience on showing horses so I cant speak about what happens at them. The thing that actually sticks in my craw happens on this very forum. You go to the breeding section and suggest that you want to breed your unregistered, no name horse and then sit back and watch the ugliness descend.
> 
> People get stuck in bashing "backyard breeders". Pontificating on how back yard breeders destroy the integrity of breeds. Ranting on and on about how only responsible breeders with registered horses should be allowed to breed horses because they are the only ones who really have the breeds best interest at heart. What a load of crap.
> 
> If the people breeding these halter horses are an example of "responsible" breeders then I will take my chances with a back yard breeder. I bet the horses shown on this thread come from "great bloodlines", and yet the result from those bloodlines, manipulated by the "responsible" breeder is absolutely appalling.


I agree! Until the breeders of purebreds can prove they have the horse's soundness and health in their best interest, I will continue to happily buy grade horses. And purebreds if they are the right fit. (Actually, I've probably owned more papered horses than not, but papers were never a consideration in the purchase). 

So until the AQHA starts producing more horses with sound legs and feet, I am in no hurry to rush out and buy one for top dollar when I can get a well trained grade horse for much less. Quarter Horses have nothing on my Mustang. He has all the muscle AND he has good bone and feet. And the most willing disposition. Even my friend with Quarter Horses that are so nice I could never afford them will borrow my Mustang when she needs an extra horse for a beginner to ride. :mrgreen:

So yeah, purebreds are great, but I really don't think grades should be bashed when there are as many poorly bred purebreds out there as there are.


----------



## bagof4grapes

trailhorserider said:


> I agree! Until the breeders of purebreds can prove they have the horse's soundness and health in their best interest, I will continue to happily buy grade horses. And purebreds if they are the right fit. (Actually, I've probably owned more papered horses than not, but papers were never a consideration in the purchase).
> 
> So until the AQHA starts producing more horses with sound legs and feet, I am in no hurry to rush out and buy one for top dollar when I can get a well trained grade horse for much less. Quarter Horses have nothing on my Mustang. He has all the muscle AND he has good bone and feet. And the most willing disposition. Even my friend with Quarter Horses that are so nice I could never afford them will borrow my Mustang when she needs an extra horse for a beginner to ride. :mrgreen:
> 
> So yeah, purebreds are great, but I really don't think grades should be bashed when there are as many poorly bred purebreds out there as there are.


It's not the grade horses being bashed, it's their breeders. True, grade horses make fantastic pleasure and trail horses because of their tendency to be level-headed, and some perform fantastically in the show ring. Heck, I have my own BLM Mustang and and I rave about him! But the fact stands that a majority of horses in meat buyer auctions and slaughter houses are grade horses.

It's great when a grade horse can find a forever home with a loving human but that's a rare occurrence. There just isn't enough demand for the grade horse and backyard breeders are creating them faster than they can find good homes.

Breeders who breed for what's winning instead of what's best for the horse are bad, but so are backyard breeders. Most people would also gladly take a grade horse over an Arnold Schwartzapony but the problem is that those people have other options and are usually looking for something else.


----------



## bubba13

It's poor quality that gets me. And indiscriminate breeding of any sort. Ideally, only excellent quality registered stock should be bred, with the rare phenomenal grade exception (I'm very much oversimplifying the complex issues here). In the end, just because I'd rather see good quality grades bred over poor quality registered stock....that doesn't mean I exactly condone the breeding of grades, 99% of the time....and I've owns some excellent grade horses.


----------



## Alwaysbehind

I do not see the points thing as that big of a deal. Maybe I am missing something you are trying to say, but it is not rocket science.

The horse given 3rd when no first or second is given get the points for 3rd. No points for first and second are given.


----------



## farmpony84

Alwaysbehind said:


> I do not see the points thing as that big of a deal. Maybe I am missing something you are trying to say, but it is not rocket science.
> 
> The horse given 3rd when no first or second is given get the points for 3rd. No points for first and second are given.


That's not how the points system works in AQHA. In order for the first place horse to receive .5 points there must be 3 horses in the class. Only first place would receive a half point.

If there are 5-9 in the class then first would receive 1 point and second would recieve .5 point. If there are 10-14 in the class then first would receive 2 points, second 1, and third .5. So in other words, earning points is really hard....


----------



## pintophile

bsms said:


> How can anyone object to horses like these :shock::


My expression as I looked at these pictures:

:lol: :rofl: Hahahaha look at how fat he is! 

:lol:..

..

..

:|..

:shock: OH GOD! That's not photoshopped.

Seriously though, is this picture edited? Because I cannot fathom any horse looking like that first one in real life. How is that healthy?


----------



## nrhareiner

A lot of what you see on halter horses in genetic. Same as any discipline these horses are bred to have a lot of muscle. Just like some humans tend to have more muscle then others and some no matter how much they work at it will never have a lot of muscle. They maybe strong but they will not be bulked. It also has to do with how you work out as to what type of muscle you get.

Being bred for halter then feed like they are and worked the way they are it builds on what they already have. 

Problem is when things go too fare. People have lost sight of what a halter horse should be and you really see this change when Impressive started to win. He had great conformation and balk to go with it and then he passed that on. That is what started winning and it just went from there.


----------



## trailhorserider

bagof4grapes said:


> It's great when a grade horse can find a forever home with a loving human _but that's a rare occurrence._ *Really!??? *There just isn't enough demand for the grade horse and backyard breeders are creating them faster than they can find good homes.


I know I am feeding near the bottom of the horse food chain. Not quite at the bottom (I have never actually bought a horse at auction or a rescue) but all my horses have been free-$2000 max. And actually the $2000 was for the exceptionally nice Mustang! But baring a catastrophe or flat out making the wrong purchase, I always try to give my horses forever homes. And I've gotten purebreds as cheap or cheaper than the grades. So at this level (pleasure trail riding) I really don't see any difference between purebreds and grades. You can have good and crappy examples of both. 

Whether or not a horse has papers really has zero impact of whether or not I purchase the horse. I am pretty happy with good horses of whatever breed or mix of breeds that come my way as long as they are kind, trained, and sound.

I'm not condoning backyard breeding though. At least not the kind we think of when we say "backyard breeding." But a well thought-out cross, or a well trained Mustang, sure, bring 'em on!


----------



## farmpony84

pintophile said:


> My expression as I looked at these pictures:
> 
> :lol: :rofl: Hahahaha look at how fat he is!
> 
> :lol:..
> 
> ..
> 
> ..
> 
> :|..
> 
> :shock: OH GOD! That's not photoshopped.
> 
> Seriously though, is this picture edited? Because I cannot fathom any horse looking like that first one in real life. How is that healthy?


I like this one...


----------



## Alwaysbehind

farmpony84 said:


> That's not how the points system works in AQHA. In order for the first place horse to receive .5 points there must be 3 horses in the class. Only first place would receive a half point.
> 
> If there are 5-9 in the class then first would receive 1 point and second would recieve .5 point. If there are 10-14 in the class then first would receive 2 points, second 1, and third .5. So in other words, earning points is really hard....


I still do not see this as overly complicated.

Say there are three people in the class and the judge places them 3rd thru 5th, no one would get any points (using the information you provided for points).
Same would be true if there were nine people and the judge started at 3rd. They are making it known that no one deserves points here.
If it is a big class the judge can either start at 4th of if they think someone is OK but not great they can give them 3rd and give them that half a point.


----------



## rlcarnes

Alwaysbehind said:


> I still do not see this as overly complicated.
> 
> Say there are three people in the class and the judge places them 3rd thru 5th, no one would get any points (using the information you provided for points).
> Same would be true if there were nine people and the judge started at 3rd. They are making it known that no one deserves points here.
> If it is a big class the judge can either start at 4th of if they think someone is OK but not great they can give them 3rd and give them that half a point.


I agree it would be confusing and a LOT of people would be upset at not getting points but it would be better for the breed!


----------



## nrhareiner

rlcarnes said:


> I agree it would be confusing and a LOT of people would be upset at not getting points but it would be better for the breed!



I am not sure how it would be better for the breed. If you go and look at the points on a given horse there is no way to know unless you do some more digging as to where they placed with in class. If a horse has 10 points they could have gotten all 10 in one show or 100 shows. You do not know until you dig. So you are not changing anything. The only way to change it is to give the judges something different to look at that he can justify placing first.


----------



## bagof4grapes

trailhorserider said:


> I know I am feeding near the bottom of the horse food chain. Not quite at the bottom (I have never actually bought a horse at auction or a rescue) but all my horses have been free-$2000 max. And actually the $2000 was for the exceptionally nice Mustang! But baring a catastrophe or flat out making the wrong purchase, I always try to give my horses forever homes. And I've gotten purebreds as cheap or cheaper than the grades. So at this level (pleasure trail riding) I really don't see any difference between purebreds and grades. You can have good and crappy examples of both.
> 
> Whether or not a horse has papers really has zero impact of whether or not I purchase the horse. I am pretty happy with good horses of whatever breed or mix of breeds that come my way as long as they are kind, trained, and sound.
> 
> I'm not condoning backyard breeding though. At least not the kind we think of when we say "backyard breeding." But a well thought-out cross, or a well trained Mustang, sure, bring 'em on!


Yes, *really*. I'm sure that you buy all the grade and mixed breed horses you can get your hands on and that's great. I love them as well and I plan to own more when I can afford it. However you seem to be missing the point.

*The ratio of grade horses to people who would buy them is WAY off-balance. There are simply far more grade horses than there are good homes for them.* It doesn't matter how much YOU, as an individual, love them (which I think is great, btw). It's all to do with how many people there are like you, and the simple fact is that there are a lot of them, yes, but it's still not enough.

I don't need to continue arguing this point because the auction reports speak for themselves. Go to an auction and take note of what you see. Check out a rescue website and take note of the breed of most of those horses. A good majority are marked as "GRADE" HORSES!

And it's not just the backyard breeders who are creating these grade horses either. A lot of times it's just a mindless person who's misplaced their horse's papers. They swear the horse is purebred but they can't prove it because there are no papers and now the horse is as good as grade. You can sometimes take the seller to small claims court for fraud to get the papers back, but that doesn't always work.

I had a quarter horse mare whom I was sure had papers and had shown at some point but they were long gone and there was no hope of ever getting them back. She had almost gone to slaughter and I adopted her from a rescue. Fantastic horse and totally didn't deserve the fate she was about to receive.

I once went to look at a gelding to buy whom his owners claimed was a purebred AQHA, although they "would have to go look for his papers" because they didn't know where they were. Yeah, riiiiiight. I got on him to ride and after the very first floaty, paddle-legged stride I was certain that horse was at least half Paso. After I was pretty sure I was never going to see those papers and the owners refused to bring down the price (I would have been totally happy buying a grade horse, but not for what they were asking since they insisted he was papered) I said a polite "no thank you" and walked away.

Situations like this come about much more often than you'd think and they usually don't end well for the horse. (Though to clarify, that gelding wasn't headed for slaughter or anything. He had a good home and was well cared-for. There was just no way I could afford what they were asking, I had gone hoping to talk down the price after finding out his papers were lost, and the owners were a bit delusional.)


----------



## farmpony84

Alwaysbehind said:


> I still do not see this as overly complicated.
> 
> Say there are three people in the class and the judge places them 3rd thru 5th, no one would get any points (using the information you provided for points).
> Same would be true if there were nine people and the judge started at 3rd. They are making it known that no one deserves points here.
> If it is a big class the judge can either start at 4th of if they think someone is OK but not great they can give them 3rd and give them that half a point.


I think they would have to DQ horses in order to not place them and in order to DQ them, there would have to be a fault. 

I found some DQ stuff for behavior:

(4) Judges should disqualify and excuse from the ring prior to final placing a horse that: 

(A) exhibits disruptive behavior such that it or other horses are unable to be inspected by the judge; 

(B) exhibits disruptive behavior such that the safety of the horse, the handler, an exhibitor, a judge or another horse is endangered; 

(C) is not under the control of the exhibitor; 

(D) becomes detached from the exhibitor; if a horse becomes detached from an exhibitor and causes other exhibitor(s) to lose their horse(s), only the initiating horse will be disqualified and excused; 

(E) has fallen and is on its side with all four feet extended in the same direction; 

(F) is observed with blood on its body, including, but not limited to, the nose, chin, mouth, tongue, or gums, regardless of cause; or 

(G) is lame. 

(5) Rather than disqualify, a judge may choose to fault a horse that is exhibiting disruptive behavior so long as such disruptive behavior does not qualify as being any of the behaviors described in (A) – (E) immediately above. 

(6) If a horse exhibits disruptive behavior described in (A) – (E) immediately above and causes other exhibitor(s) to lose their horse(s), only the initiating horse will be disqualified and excused. The decision of the judge(s) will be final. 

Going back to look for physical faults.


----------



## farmpony84

(1) All horses whose registration certificates are marked with a Parrot Mouth notation (see Rule 205(a)), cryptorchid notation (see Rule 205(b)) or excessive white notation (see Rule 205(d)) are ineligible to compete in halter classes. 

(2) One of the most important criteria in selecting a horse is conformation, or its physical appearance. While it could be assumed that most horses with several years’ seasoning and past performance have acceptable conformation, the goal in selection should always be to find the best conformed horse possible. 

(3) Rating conformation depends upon objective evaluation of the following four traits: balance, structural correctness, breed and sex characteristics, and degree of muscling. Of the four, balance is the single most important, and refers to the structural and aesthetic blending of body parts. Balance is influenced almost entirely by skeletal structure.


----------



## farmpony84

...and I know you'll rip this apart but here is what I found:

(b) The purpose of the class is to preserve American Quarter Horse type by selecting well-mannered individuals in the order of their resemblance to the breed ideal and that are the most positive combination of balance, structural correctness, and movement with appropriate breed and sex characteristics and adequate muscling. 
(c) The ideal American Quarter Horse shown at halter is a horse that is generally considered to be solid in color and possesses the following characteristics: the horse should possess eye appeal that is the result of a harmonious blending of an attractive head; refined throat latch; well-proportioned, trim neck; long, sloping shoulder; deep heart girth; short back; strong loin and coupling; long hip and croup; and well-defined and muscular stifle, gaskin, forearm and chest. All stallions 2 years old and over shall have two visible testicles. These characteristics should be coupled with straight and structurally correct legs and feet that are free of blemishes. The horse should be a balanced athlete that is muscled uniformly throughout.


----------



## bagof4grapes

farmpony84 said:


> I think they would have to DQ horses in order to not place them and in order to DQ them, there would have to be a fault.
> 
> I found some DQ stuff for behavior:
> 
> (4) Judges should disqualify and excuse from the ring prior to final placing a horse that:
> 
> (A) exhibits disruptive behavior such that it or other horses are unable to be inspected by the judge;
> 
> (B) exhibits disruptive behavior such that the safety of the horse, the handler, an exhibitor, a judge or another horse is endangered;
> 
> (C) is not under the control of the exhibitor;
> 
> (D) becomes detached from the exhibitor; if a horse becomes detached from an exhibitor and causes other exhibitor(s) to lose their horse(s), only the initiating horse will be disqualified and excused;
> 
> (E) has fallen and is on its side with all four feet extended in the same direction;
> 
> (F) is observed with blood on its body, including, but not limited to, the nose, chin, mouth, tongue, or gums, regardless of cause; or
> 
> (G) is lame.
> 
> (5) Rather than disqualify, a judge may choose to fault a horse that is exhibiting disruptive behavior so long as such disruptive behavior does not qualify as being any of the behaviors described in (A) – (E) immediately above.
> 
> (6) If a horse exhibits disruptive behavior described in (A) – (E) immediately above and causes other exhibitor(s) to lose their horse(s), only the initiating horse will be disqualified and excused. The decision of the judge(s) will be final.
> 
> Going back to look for physical faults.


I think for the good of the horses the rules that are already in existence can be changed. They're not engraved on a stone tablet.


----------



## Alwaysbehind

I do not think you would have to disqualify a horse to not place it.

If there are six ribbons and you start placing at 3rd then only three people get ribbons.


If there are 10 people out there and there are only six ribbons the four who do not get ribbons have not bee disqualified.



I do not disagree that the judges need something else to place, the problem is, the judges have not been placing 'normal' shaped horses in the past so why would anyone put a non-hunk horse in the class just to not place?


----------



## farmpony84

I don't know this horse but he placed 5th at the world. He's a pretty "normal" looking horse. He's stout but he's well built.


----------



## Alwaysbehind

Did not watch the whole nine minute video. Is there a conformation type shot in there?
To me he looks lame on the right hind.

Is it normal that they are so short strided that they have to jog to keep up with someone who is not walking all that fast?

Curios, what placed above him?


----------



## bagof4grapes

Alwaysbehind said:


> Did not watch the whole nine minute video. Is there a conformation type shot in there?
> To me he looks lame on the right hind.
> 
> Is it normal that they are so short strided that they have to jog to keep up with someone who is not walking all that fast?
> 
> Curios, what placed above him?


He looks lame to me too. The right hind stride is noticeably shorter than the left hind stride. His stride in general is very short, too.


----------



## Alwaysbehind

bagof4grapes said:


> He looks lame to me too. The right hind stride is noticeably shorter than the left hind stride. His stride in general is very short, too.


Maybe soundness is not important to a halter judge.


----------



## farmpony84

He's a western pleasure horse. Doesn't look lame to me but does drag the toe of a foot. I think there is no happy for you guys. You want to place them 3-6 and not place anything from 1 and 2 which makes absolutely no sense to me and it really doesn't matter whether the horse is lame or sound, has conformation or not because you "hate" what halter stands for and what the industry has become. I get that.

What I don't get is, why don't you do something about it? Write a petition, do whatever.... Make a difference.


----------



## Celeste

This horse and the other horses in the class look pretty "normal" from what I can see. None of that freak stuff. 
To me, it is hard to see the horse's gait well because he is being held in and resisting the handler.


----------



## Alwaysbehind

Dragging the toe of just one foot (and not the corresponding foot) is lame/off.

I simply asked what placed above him. Were horses 1 thru 4 shaped like him or were they the beef cake with no feet and pasterns model?

I did not say I did not think he was an improvement over some other shapes. I simply stated that he looks lame. Stabbing one toe is not what most people would consider sound.

Look at the difference between how this horse carries himself and how your horse carries himself. Vast difference.


----------



## Celeste

He really does look stiff.


----------



## anndankev

Back to the topic of the new rules not taking effect until 2020. It was explained to me at the time that to effect it immediately would bring financial ruin to many breeders, trainers, and exhibitors who base their livelyhood on the horses who would be affected. And in turn these same people are the one's that directly and indirectly provide the lion's share of funding for the association itself. 

So essentially time was allowed for those affected to be able to make the necessary changes and stay afloat.

I know this is not eloquently stated but I hope you can see what I mean. On a baser level phrases like vicious circle, and bite yourself in the a$$ come to mind.

All the associations whether they have H(orse) or any other animal in the name are organizations of and for people only.


----------



## farmpony84

My horse drags his toe. So does his mother. It's not lameness in this case. I think it has more to do with the western pleasure movement. I think they do it compensating the way they are trained to move. I'm not advocating it because there are so many things about it that I dislike and that is part of why I will never be the 1st place winner. I enjoy it and I want to do it but winning isn't really that big a deal to me.


----------



## Alwaysbehind

Dragging both toes is different than dragging one toe more than the other.

Your horse (from what I have seen from what you post here) moves totally differently than this horse. He might drag his toe but his legs are still free flowing. Not stabbing into the ground.


----------



## farmpony84

Alwaysbehind said:


> Dragging both toes is different than dragging one toe more than the other.
> 
> Your horse (from what I have seen from what you post here) moves totally differently than this horse. He might drag his toe but his legs are still free flowing. Not stabbing into the ground.


Maybe that's my problem... That horse is pinning! ****... Geuss I shall never win huh? The difference is, 20 years from now, I still plan to own my horse. 20 years from now, that guy will be on his 12 horse unless that one wins the world and makes him big big money....


----------



## trailhorserider

bagof4grapes said:


> *The ratio of grade horses to people who would buy them is WAY off-balance. There are simply far more grade horses than there are good homes for them.*


Take the word "grade" out of the above quote, and leave in "horses" and I think we can agree. 

The problem is not too many GRADE horses. It's too many HORSES in general right now. My Missouri Fox Trotter mare was slated to be sold at auction. I bought her for $500. And guess what, she has papers. From what I understand, she actually has very good bloodlines. Papers didn't save her from a grisly fate. Training did. I bought her to ride and even though she was used as a broodmare she was fairly nicely trained. I am really enjoying her. But I wouldn't have bought her if she wasn't trained, and I would have bought her with or without papers. Papers are nice, but they don't make the horse. Disposition, conformation and training make a good horse, imo. 

There are just too many horses available in general right now. The market is flooded. The economy sucks. There is a lot of supply and not as much demand as there once was. Which is probably why they sold her. They were breeding her and probably 15 other mares to their Quarter Horse stallion. Irresponsible, yes. But they were downsizing their breeding operation, so that is a good thing. Better late than never I guess.

I still think with or without papers, a horse with good disposition, conformation and TRAINING will always find a market. A good gelding in particular around 6-10 years of age with training always brings good money around here, grade or not. 

I'm sure the least I could find a good looking gelding in that age range, nicely trained with or without papers would be around $2500. Maybe a little less if you can compromise on the stellar conformation and it wasn't a registered QH. 

I actually LIKE the horse market being a bit low right now. It makes me feel like I could actually go out and buy a decent horse if I had room for one. (Now if hay prices would only come down!)


----------



## nrhareiner

trailhorserider said:


> Take the word "grade" out of the above quote, and leave in "horses" and I think we can agree.
> 
> *In general I agree until you get to the upper level horses. Then the supply dose not meet the demand. I have no problems selling what I breed and for very very good prices.*
> 
> The problem is not too many GRADE horses. It's too many HORSES in general right now. My Missouri Fox Trotter mare was slated to be sold at auction. I bought her for $500. And guess what, she has papers. From what I understand, she actually has very good bloodlines. Papers didn't save her from a grisly fate. Training did. I bought her to ride and even though she was used as a broodmare she was fairly nicely trained. I am really enjoying her. But I wouldn't have bought her if she wasn't trained, and I would have bought her with or without papers. Papers are nice, but they don't make the horse. Disposition, conformation and training make a good horse, imo.
> 
> *I agree lower end horses need training to make them marketable. This is why I am a big believe in training and showing my mares along with my stallions. I will have to somewhat disagree about papers. They give you so much info that you can have a very very good idea of what a given horse should be like. Also where do you think that disposition conformation and trainability comes from? The horses pedigree.*
> 
> There are just too many horses available in general right now. The market is flooded. The economy sucks. There is a lot of supply and not as much demand as there once was. Which is probably why they sold her. They were breeding her and probably 15 other mares to their Quarter Horse stallion. Irresponsible, yes. But they were downsizing their breeding operation, so that is a good thing. Better late than never I guess.
> 
> *Again it depends on what you breed. There is still a very good demand in what I breed and do. However if you take the same breed, QH and say a different discipline things might be different. It comes down to knowing your market.*
> 
> I still think with or without papers, a horse with good disposition, conformation and TRAINING will always find a market. A good gelding in particular around 6-10 years of age with training always brings good money around here, grade or not.
> 
> I'm sure the least I could find a good looking gelding in that age range, nicely trained with or without papers would be around $2500. Maybe a little less if you can compromise on the stellar conformation and it wasn't a registered QH.
> 
> I actually LIKE the horse market being a bit low right now. It makes me feel like I could actually go out and buy a decent horse if I had room for one. (Now if hay prices would only come down!)


Thing is that while $2500 is not on the ubber low side when you think about what went into that horse it is very very low. If I was only getting $2500 for a horse or even a foal. I would not be breeding. It is not worth the time effort and what I have into the breeding when you consider my time.


----------



## morabhobbyhorse

*I have actually read all 17 pages of this, LOL.*

Horses overly muscled with no use, grade horses with beautiful conformation, and ability, people losing money if these monstrosities were to be stopped reproducing today instead of 2020, points, ribbons, money. Disqualifying, non-disqualifying. I have only one grade horse to mention to perhaps make some of you remember where WORKING QH's got theor great start, along with a lot of other breeds. 
FIGURE


Thankfully I am lucky enough to a 'back yard' version of her great, great and so on sire.


----------



## Allison Finch

farmpony84 said:


> I don't know this horse but he placed 5th at the world. He's a pretty "normal" looking horse. He's stout but he's well built.
> 
> ‪Long Version: Absolutely No Doubt, Performance Halter Stallions at 2008 AQHA World Show‬‏ - YouTube


So, in a class that big, for this horse to place 5th....he must be considered pretty good representative of the QH breed. 

I'm not getting into a lameness debate BUT....at 3:59 and 7:35 the pose shows a horse with sickle hocks. AND, at 8:29 I see a horse terribly base narrow both front and back. Is this really what the breed is about? Back in the day when I showed western (yeah, long time ago) base narrow was really bad. Wide square stance with no sickle hocks was what won. 

How did this change as a standard?


----------



## farmpony84

Allison Finch said:


> So, in a class that big, for this horse to place 5th....he must be considered pretty good representative of the QH breed.
> 
> I'm not getting into a lameness debate BUT....at 3:59 and 7:35 the pose shows a horse with sickle hocks. AND, at 8:29 I see a horse terribly base narrow both front and back. Is this really what the breed is about? Back in the day when I showed western (yeah, long time ago) base narrow was really bad. Wide square stance with no sickle hocks was what won.
> 
> How did this change as a standard?


Me no know....


----------



## trailhorserider

nrhareiner said:


> Thing is that while $2500 is not on the ubber low side when you think about what went into that horse it is very very low. If I was only getting $2500 for a horse or even a foal. I would not be breeding. It is not worth the time effort and what I have into the breeding when you consider my time.


I think breeding is a labor of love. I have heard it said that the most you can really hope for is to break even. But I am not in that position so I don't know.

I agree that $2500 does not reflect the cost of what goes into a horse. I paid $500 for a nicely rideable ex-broodmare, and she was a steal. Because I could not even get a month's training for $500! Somebody down the line (probably everybody down the line) lost money on her. But in general that's what horses do anyway- drain our money. We have them (I hope) because we love and enjoy them.

I don't think those at the top of the market have nearly as much to worry about as those at the bottom of the market. Top quality is always in demand. But I am thankful for the lower end horses because I could not afford a top-end horse.


----------



## beau159

Ick, ick, ick to those over-muscled "Arnold" meatcake horses. I do some showing at local levels, and kind of watch national stuff here and there, and with that limited exposure, even *I* have seen what the halter horse has progressed to. Ick. 

And I am not at all impressed with the video of that horse that took 5th in the world. I'm not expert, by any means, but I have surely seen horses that move better than him. He seemed to look alright ... but again, as this topic has pointed out, looks are NOT everything. The horse needs to be able to move and perform.

My cousin raised paints, mostly with showing and halter bloodlines. His stallion (who left us in a freak accident :-( ) was extremely well-mannered (didn't even know he was a stallion, unless I told you) and quite the looker. And he excelled at just about anything from halter to western pleasure to reining to trail and, most recently, roping and speed! This is not the best picture of him, but the only one I have. I used him a couple times for carrying sponsor flags when I was rodeo queening. Now HE was the definition of a good-looking halter horse that could still perform and be a happy camper doing it.


----------



## bubba13

Looks like a nice horse, beau.


----------



## bagof4grapes

trailhorserider said:


> I think breeding is a labor of love. I have heard it said that the most you can really hope for is to break even. But I am not in that position so I don't know.
> 
> I agree that $2500 does not reflect the cost of what goes into a horse. I paid $500 for a nicely rideable ex-broodmare, and she was a steal. Because I could not even get a month's training for $500! Somebody down the line (probably everybody down the line) lost money on her. But in general that's what horses do anyway- drain our money. We have them (I hope) because we love and enjoy them.
> 
> I don't think those at the top of the market have nearly as much to worry about as those at the bottom of the market. Top quality is always in demand. But I am thankful for the lower end horses because I could not afford a top-end horse.


It's true that people don't make a lot of money breeding horses, if any at all. But the goal should not be to breed a mediocre horse. If that's all you can breed then you need to stop.

You're forgetting that even good breeders with high-quality stock turn out a lot of mediocre foals in between their top-quality foals. Not every breeding is going to strike gold. Genetics is a strategy game but a lot of it is still based off of chance and you can't always be right on. The mediocre foals will be gelded and sold as pleasure and small show horses for those who can't afford the alternative.

Folks also seem to think that if all cheaper horses suddenly stopped getting bred the only horses left on the market would be expensive horses. But that's not even close to true. The economy has a convenient way of balancing itself out. When the quality of horses goes up but the budgets of buyers stay the same, the sellers of higher quality horses are going to have a hard time selling at the same high prices. They will be forced to bring their prices down so horses will be worth less money but the quality will be better.

Not only will it give the less rich people better stock to choose from but it will also discourage breeders of mediocre quality because they won't be selling well enough to support their business.

Everyone wins! Especially the horses.


----------



## trailhorserider

bagof4grapes said:


> It's true that people don't make a lot of money breeding horses, if any at all. But the goal should not be to breed a mediocre horse. If that's all you can breed then you need to stop.
> 
> You're forgetting that even good breeders with high-quality stock turn out a lot of mediocre foals in between their top-quality foals. Not every breeding is going to strike gold. Genetics is a strategy game but a lot of it is still based off of chance and you can't always be right on. The mediocre foals will be gelded and sold as pleasure and small show horses for those who can't afford the alternative.
> 
> Folks also seem to think that if all cheaper horses suddenly stopped getting bred the only horses left on the market would be expensive horses. But that's not even close to true. The economy has a convenient way of balancing itself out. When the quality of horses goes up but the budgets of buyers stay the same, the sellers of higher quality horses are going to have a hard time selling at the same high prices. They will be forced to bring their prices down so horses will be worth less money but the quality will be better.
> 
> Not only will it give the less rich people better stock to choose from but it will also discourage breeders of mediocre quality because they won't be selling well enough to support their business.
> 
> Everyone wins! Especially the horses.


Sounds like good logic to me.


----------



## bagof4grapes

trailhorserider said:


> Sounds like good logic to me.


Thank you! And of course this goes for all animals who tend to be victims of backyard breeding, not just horses.


----------



## nrhareiner

bagof4grapes said:


> You're forgetting that even good breeders with high-quality stock turn out a lot of mediocre foals in between their top-quality foals. Not every breeding is going to strike gold. Genetics is a strategy game but a lot of it is still based off of chance and you can't always be right on. The mediocre foals will be gelded and sold as pleasure and small show horses for those who can't afford the alternative.
> 
> *While this is true in many respects. A breeder who is breeding top quality horses. That breeders culls are going to be better then the vast majority of what is out there and will still bring a good price. Not as much as a true open level prospect but still very good money.*
> 
> Folks also seem to think that if all cheaper horses suddenly stopped getting bred the only horses left on the market would be expensive horses. But that's not even close to true. The economy has a convenient way of balancing itself out. When the quality of horses goes up but the budgets of buyers stay the same, the sellers of higher quality horses are going to have a hard time selling at the same high prices. They will be forced to bring their prices down so horses will be worth less money but the quality will be better.
> 
> Not only will it give the less rich people better stock to choose from but it will also discourage breeders of mediocre quality because they won't be selling well enough to support their business.
> 
> Everyone wins! Especially the horses.


This last part is flawed. The people buying the upper level horses do not have money problems. They have disposable income to continue to buy the high $$ horses. This is why you do not see a dip in the price paid for these horses even in a down economy.

What you are forgetting is that where the horses come from that the lower price people can afford are the older show horses who are retired but can still be ridden be it on the trail or teaching kids the ropes in the show ring. Then you have the wash outs from the upper level who can and do go on to be great mounts at lower levels be it in the same discipline or anouther. This is where the horse will come from to meet the demand that is left from the mediocre breeders stop breeding.


----------



## bagof4grapes

nrhareiner said:


> This last part is flawed. The people buying the upper level horses do not have money problems. They have disposable income to continue to buy the high $$ horses. This is why you do not see a dip in the price paid for these horses even in a down economy.
> 
> What you are forgetting is that where the horses come from that the lower price people can afford are the older show horses who are retired but can still be ridden be it on the trail or teaching kids the ropes in the show ring. Then you have the wash outs from the upper level who can and do go on to be great mounts at lower levels be it in the same discipline or anouther. This is where the horse will come from to meet the demand that is left from the mediocre breeders stop breeding.


I think you're thinking about things in a very black-and-white sense. Every high quality horse will not be worth exactly the same. There will be a variety of quality amongst the horses of higher quality and the culled mediocre quality horses. Assuming that there is some kind of quality standard that gets enacted to created this change in breeding programs, not all mediocre breeders will stop breeding completely (in fact, my guess is that many will stubbornly refuse), they'll just be forced to improve their stock. The good breeders will also be able to breed even more and make more money (even though some of their prices will have to decrease) because there will be more demand. The number of horses available on the market will decrease (which will minimize horses getting neglected and sent to slaughter auctions) but not a lot. There will still be more horses for sale than can be sold to the richer horse buyers with unlimited budgets. The horses left over will have to go somewhere and their prices will have to be lowered in order to get sold to the folks who do have limited budgets.

And it won't just be older horses, either. There are dumb people out there who sell their horses for all sorts of stupid reasons. There are also dumb people out there who don't know what their horse is worth and they'll WAY underprice him. There are also people who move and can't take their horses with them and need to sell FAST. There will still be off the track TBs, QH's, Arabs, and SBs that need homes. There are horses who get sold cheap after someone dies, gets divorced, after they're abandoned at shows or boarding stables, or someone mistakes their horse for having a behavioral problem when they really just have an ill-fitting saddle. That applies to today's market and that won't change because the kinds of people selling these horses will remain the same.

Rescues and auctions will still exists but there will be much fewer of them, so they will still be options for people who are very limited on budget. But hey! The quality will be higher! Not by much, but it will improve and that's something.

Even if there aren't quite enough affordable horses to go around, won't it be worth it to see fewer horses being starved and sent to slaughterhouses? Isn't it very selfish to say that you want the pick of the litter for an affordable price even if it means the other horses end up with a very bad fate? Horses aren't cars. They are living creatures. They were not created to satisfy the human market. Their well being should be our first priority.


----------



## nrhareiner

bagof4grapes said:


> I think you're thinking about things in a very black-and-white sense. *NO I am thinking of it as a business.* Every high quality horse will not be worth exactly the same. There will be a variety of quality amongst the horses of higher quality and the culled mediocre quality horses. Assuming that there is some kind of quality standard that gets enacted to created this change in breeding programs, *What sets standards is the show ring and this is what sets prices. If you have to proven horses the foals from these horses are going to command more money. *not all mediocre breeders will stop breeding completely (in fact, my guess is that many will stubbornly refuse), they'll just be forced to improve their stock. *Perhaps but they can do that now. There is nothing stopping them from improving. They just do not. * The good breeders will also be able to breed even more and make more money (even though some of their prices will have to decrease) because there will be more demand. *This goes against every business plan that is proven to work. Do not breed more breed better. Do not creat more for less create less for more. * The number of horses available on the market will decrease (which will minimize horses getting neglected and sent to slaughter auctions) but not a lot. *This is the opposite of what you just said in the line before. You can not have it both ways.*
> There will still be more horses for sale than can be sold to the richer horse buyers with unlimited budgets. *No there is not. People who want top level open prospects are not going to go look at lower level horses. The fact is that there are not enough of the top open level prospects out there. That is why the prices for these prospects have continued to go up. Again basic supply and demand. *The horses left over will have to go somewhere and their prices will have to be lowered in order to get sold to the folks who do have limited budgets. * Again there are not enough upper level horses out there. There is and always has been a good market for good horses. This market is not driven by the economy.*
> 
> And it won't just be older horses, either. There are dumb people out there who sell their horses for all sorts of stupid reasons. There are also dumb people out there who don't know what their horse is worth and they'll WAY underprice him. There are also people who move and can't take their horses with them and need to sell FAST. There will still be off the track TBs, QH's, Arabs, and SBs that need homes. There are horses who get sold cheap after someone dies, gets divorced, after they're abandoned at shows or boarding stables, or someone mistakes their horse for having a behavioral problem when they really just have an ill-fitting saddle. That applies to today's market and that won't change because the kinds of people selling these horses will remain the same.
> 
> *Again these type of horses are not the ones I am talking about. People who have top prospects have ways of getting the horses into hands that can over come these problems. There will always be people who will have these issues? Yes. The OTT horses are always going to be there b/c the way the races are done are aged related so there are limited ways to show these horses with in this area. *
> 
> Rescues and auctions will still exists but there will be much fewer of them, so they will still be options for people who are very limited on budget. But hey! The quality will be higher! Not by much, but it will improve and that's something.
> *If people stopped breeding with emotion and did it with an out look like a business this would be a moot point. Quality would go up regardless.*
> 
> Even if there aren't quite enough affordable horses to go around, won't it be worth it to see fewer horses being starved and sent to slaughterhouses? Isn't it very selfish to say that you want the pick of the litter for an affordable price even if it means the other horses end up with a very bad fate? Horses aren't cars. They are living creatures. They were not created to satisfy the human market. Their well being should be our first priority.


There will always be affordable horses. However I do not think a horse for cheap is a good thing. There is a reason they are cheap. I am not rich by a long shot. However that did not stop me from getting good well bred horses and proving them out. It can be done. By doing so I have fewer horses then a lot of people who may breed but the ones I have are of higher quality. SO in the end I will come out ahead of those with more horses to breed and sell.

Horses are living creatures but you can not humanize them. They are what they are and they need to be cared for responsibly. Having their well being in mind should be the first reason NOT to breed low level horses. Why you should not breed your mare just b/c you want a piece of her or for all the other reasons people give to breed that are emotion based. If you breed well bred well conformed horses and train them and make them worth something. That is what will save them. Not anything else in the long run.


----------



## trailhorserider

nrhareiner said:


> If you breed well bred well conformed horses and train them and make them worth something. That is what will save them. Not anything else in the long run.


I agree with this. And I don't think they have to necessarily be purebreds or show horses. I would not pay extra for a top bred show horse because I don't show. People at the top of the horse market (particularly halter people) don't breed what I want in a riding horse. (I know performance horses are bred to ride nrhareiner so this is not directed at you). 

Isn't it kind of obsurd to think horses should only be bred for the upper levels of particular disciplines when I think pleasure horses make up the majority of the horse market. I understand if that is the only place people are making money right now, but don't people want versatile horses anymore? Horses you can actually take out and ride in the real world, not horses who have only lived their lives in a barn and arena?

I think everyone should be responsible to their animals, especially if they breed. But I don't think we need to be breeding only for the elite market. Some people want a good usable riding horse. It doesn't have to be at the top of a particular discipline. I don't want to pay extra for a horse at the top of a discipline I don't even care about. I just want a good, sound riding horse with good training. I would even go so far as to say that show people (particularly halter people) are actually ruining the conformation and riding ability of some of our best breeds. We are talking about it here with Quarter Horses, but I have heard the same said about Arabians, Morgans, etc. 

I think I said this somewhere earlier, but temperment, conformation and training make the horse. The horse should be sane, sound, and rideable. Why even breed for a horse you can't ride? Because even if you aren't able to ride and just want a pet, a regular riding horse will still fit that bill just fine. 

I guess I am on a bit of a rant because I think horses should be sound and rideable and many of the people who only think purebreds are worth breeding don't even see how purebred breeders are actually destroying the use-ablility of the horse by breeding horses with funky conformation that will not stay sound. Give me a grade over a halter horse any day! I don't care if the halter horse has papers. I ride the horse, not the papers. I don't care if the grade has unknown parentage if he is sound, sane, trained and rideable.

I think training, temperment and conformation play a nearly equal part in creating a good horse. It's hard to have a desirable horse if one of those parts is missing. I don't need papers to see if the horse has good conformation. That is something I can see with my own eyes. 

Registration is something responsible breeders do to keep track of their horse's parentage. But it doesn't make one horse better than another horse. It's like saying one brand of clothing is better than another simply because it's got a fancier label on it.


----------



## nrhareiner

trailhorserider said:


> Isn't it kind of obsurd to think horses should only be bred for the upper levels of particular disciplines when I think pleasure horses make up the majority of the horse market. I understand if that is the only place people are making money right now, but don't people want versatile horses anymore? Horses you can actually take out and ride in the real world, not horses who have only lived their lives in a barn and arena?
> *The thing is you can have both. ALL my horses including my stallion trail ride. They do a lot of other things not just reining and reined cow horse.* *Once these horses are done showing especially the geldings where you do you think they go? They go onto pleasure homes. With people who trail ride and maybe show at a local open show. I know of one gelding here locally who was a finished reiner did well and when he retired from reining he was bought by a person I know and he is now teaching all her grand kids the ropes in HUS and Jumping. I know others who go on to be speed event horses and do quite well. Others who are used at trail horses and for fun. I even know a few whos soul job is grass mowing.* *So why breed more of this type of horse?*
> 
> 
> I think everyone should be responsible to their animals, especially if they breed. But I don't think we need to be breeding only for the elite market. Some people want a good usable riding horse. * These 2 markets are not seperate. They are one and the same of you are doing it correctly. Halter horses are just different. Most of the people I know who breed and show halter do so b/c they can not ride for one reason or the other but love horses. * It doesn't have to be at the top of a particular discipline. I don't want to pay extra for a horse at the top of a discipline I don't even care about. I just want a good, sound riding horse with good training. I would even go so far as to say that show people (particularly halter people) are actually ruining the conformation and riding ability of some of our best breeds. We are talking about it here with Quarter Horses, but I have heard the same said about Arabians, Morgans, etc.
> 
> *Halter horses with in the QH breed are a very very small % of the breed that they can no more ruin it then I can make it rain.*
> 
> I think I said this somewhere earlier, but temperment, conformation and training make the horse. The horse should be sane, sound, and rideable. Why even breed for a horse you can't ride? Because even if you aren't able to ride and just want a pet, a regular riding horse will still fit that bill just fine. *While this is true and I touched on it ealier in this post. I know several people who love horses love breeding but for what ever reason can not ride. They want to show they want to be part of it all. So what is left for them? Halter.*
> 
> I guess I am on a bit of a rant because I think horses should be sound and rideable and many of the people who only think purebreds are worth breeding don't even see how purebred breeders are actually destroying the use-ablility of the horse by breeding horses with funky conformation that will not stay sound. Give me a grade over a halter horse any day! I don't care if the halter horse has papers. I ride the horse, not the papers. I don't care if the grade has unknown parentage if he is sound, sane, trained and rideable.
> 
> *Again the halter horse is such a small % of any breed that you can not lump them into the general population of horses. What you say you want I have standing in my pasture. They are not separate and never should be. I also disagree that you can not ride papers but that is for anouther debate. Also I have absolutely no problem with training useing riding of grade horses. I do however have a problem breeding them as you never know what you will get. You do not know if that horse is what its breeding says it should be or if it is a fluke. This is where knowing a pedigree comes into breeding.*
> 
> I think training, temperment and conformation play a nearly equal part in creating a good horse. It's hard to have a desirable horse if one of those parts is missing. I don't need papers to see if the horse has good conformation. That is something I can see with my own eyes.
> 
> *This is true that you can see conformation with your eyes however do you know if that horses conformation is what its breeding says it should be? I have seen horses who do not look like what their pedigree says they should look like good or bad makes no difference. Just b/c that horse has a good temperament what if that is a fluke with in that line? Same with the conformation might be good here but what if that is not the norm for that line? Then what will you get from the next generation?? That is why I have no problems with training and riding of grade. Go for it. They make great horses. Just do not breed them.* *Also if the breeding is not there for certain things all the training in the world will not get the horse to do that thing well. This is why you see certain lines excell at certain things and others not so much.*
> 
> Registration is something responsible breeders do to keep track of their horse's parentage. But it doesn't make one horse better than another horse. It's like saying one brand of clothing is better than another simply because it's got a fancier label on it.


This last part I disagree with 100%. Although there are exceptions to the rule the rule will normally win out. Why is it so important to keep track of all the pedigrees and earnings on a horse if it plays no role? Why do certainer lines do better at certain things then other lines do? 

As for cloths. I disagree there to to an extent. Go buy a $4 t-shirt from WallyWord and then go buy a $7 T from say Khols. The $7 t is going to be much better and last a lot longer then the $4 T from WM. I know as I have a dresser full of both.


----------



## morabhobbyhorse

I agree with you Trail because I have a wonderful, $500.00 Morab that I wouldn't trade for one of those gross looking halter horse. Her conformation is just about perfect, and I believe she can do anything. I currently working on her reining so I can take her to a local gymkhana and give her SOMETHING to do. She needs a job, and more than just the trail riding I do. And gymkhanas are FUN. I know she's built for it, the old fashion kind of horse you used to see at these events, with a low center of gravity. But if she doesn't like it, I'll find her some other job. I've had her 3 years and I seriously wouldn't trade her for another horse. And if I can ever find a stud I think is up to HER standard I intend to breed her. But only because I raised a foal before and did all of his training, and know I can raise a good, usable horse. But for right now I'm having too much fun with her to think about having to spend time away from her working with another horse, even if it is a foal of hers.


----------



## trailhorserider

*The thing is you can have both. ALL my horses including my stallion trail ride. They do a lot of other things not just reining and reined cow horse.* *Once these horses are done showing especially the geldings where you do you think they go? They go onto pleasure homes. With people who trail ride and maybe show at a local open show. I know of one gelding here locally who was a finished reiner did well and when he retired from reining he was bought by a person I know and he is now teaching all her grand kids the ropes in HUS and Jumping. I know others who go on to be speed event horses and do quite well. Others who are used at trail horses and for fun. I even know a few whos soul job is grass mowing.* *So why breed more of this type of horse?*
Because you already said that a price of (for example) $2500 doesn't even cover the cost of you getting a foal on the ground. That's why I feel there is a market for "cheaper" horses. Do you sell your retired show geldings for $2500 or less? Probably not. If you do, then I am mistaken and apologize. 

I am not condoning over-breeding, or breeding poor quality horses. But I have no problem with good grade horses.

Basically, I have been a horse lover my whole life. I feel very grateful just to be able to have a horse. I guess I don't want to be priced out of the market for selfish reasons. I would really like to be able to always own a 1/2 way decent horse. I don't ask for perfect conformation. I don't ask for papers. Just a safe, sound, trail-safe horse. That is all I ask for.

I used to think that halter horses where the breed standard that everyone should strive for (in theory). But I guess what we all agree is that they have sort of become irrelevant to what an actual using horse should look like.


​


----------



## amp23

Okay so I've been kinda keeping up with this thread, though I don't know too much about halter horses or anything. But I do have to agree that the way they are bred to be now is kind of ridiculous. If a horse is in too bad a shape to be ridden, they should not be shown. Their confomation should come before the fat and muscle.

Here is a site I just found, the picture of Sparklin With Luv makes me want to cry... Who would honestly think that horse is healthy and not overweight? Tiny legs and feet with all that weight she's carrying.

http://www.twinacresranch.com/mares.html


----------



## bagof4grapes

trailhorserider said:


> Because you already said that a price of (for example) $2500 doesn't even cover the cost of you getting a foal on the ground. That's why I feel there is a market for "cheaper" horses. Do you sell your retired show geldings for $2500 or less? Probably not. If you do, then I am mistaken and apologize.
> 
> I am not condoning over-breeding, or breeding poor quality horses. But I have no problem with good grade horses.
> 
> Basically, I have been a horse lover my whole life. I feel very grateful just to be able to have a horse. I guess I don't want to be priced out of the market for selfish reasons. I would really like to be able to always own a 1/2 way decent horse. I don't ask for perfect conformation. I don't ask for papers. Just a safe, sound, trail-safe horse. That is all I ask for.
> 
> I used to think that halter horses where the breed standard that everyone should strive for (in theory). But I guess what we all agree is that they have sort of become irrelevant to what an actual using horse should look like.


I'm very, very, very much against overspecializing horses, like the Arnold Schwarzta-pony halter horses. You're right, a halter horse is supposed to be a fine representative of the breed. It should be a versatile, athletic horse with correct conformation and type for its breed.

Any horse should be able to go out for a trail ride without going lame because the mean rocks hurt his little feetsies. You never know when a horse could end up in a bad situation and if he can't cope with whatever he's thrown into he's going to get thrown away. It can happen to ANY horse. I've SEEN it.

Trail, you're imagining a future horse market where almost every horse for sale is a fancy, primpy show horse who goes ballistic if a leaf blows across his path, or he goes into a coma if he doesn't get all his supplements. That's just not what a good horse IS. And that's not the kind of future I'm pulling for. All horses, no matter what they're bred for, should be healthy, easy-keeping, have a good, quiet mind, strong feet, strong legs, and resilient to illness. Of course that wouldn't happen every time no matter how well we're breeding, but that should be the goal.

All of those things will help the horse live longer, stay sound longer, be easier to train, cheaper to care for, and make him a generally happier, healthier horse and a much more pleasant horse for us to own.

I'm also not against the breeding of crosses, so long as they're well thought-out and responsibly bred. After all, breeds were created by the crossing of other breeds. And crossing allows one to take valuable traits from one breed and mix it with another to achieve desired results, rather than having to stick with the same traits.

Although I have to say that I agree with nrhareiner about having papers. It's not horrible if a horse doesn't have them, but it does make the horse worth less than a papered horse. Papers keep many important bits of information and history on an individual horse, such as tests that have been performed (HYPP, HERDA, genetics tests, etc...), a history of previous owners, pedigree so that genetic information can be tracked down (wouldn't you want to know if your horse could have a genetic disease that was passed down by a certain ancestor?) and other things that would be very beneficial to know for such an investment.

Even if you didn't pay much for your horse, you still pay a lot to care for him. If something were to happen and you needed to get more information on your horse but you couldn't because he's not registered, that would REALLY suck after having put so much of your life and money into him.

Some people are fine with that, but many aren't. And that's why a papered horse is worth more. Not necessarily that it's a "better" horse, but simply that it's going to sell for more money and be a more valuable investment than a grade horse.


----------



## bsms

For business models, think cars for a moment. There is a market for Mercedes & BMW, and it is true that they are also good cars for driving to the store - but most can't afford to buy them. We're the ones buying Fords and Hondas.

For the pleasure horse market, where I live, you can get a good riding horse for $1000 or less. I sold an Arabian mare with no issues, who had been ridden by my 12 year old daughter, for $600 because I wanted to control who she went to. Had I sold her on the open market, tho, her value wouldn't have topped $1200...I'd guess $800-1000 would have been about right.

Someone buying a horse for occasional riding can buy a decent grade or even purebred horse for well under $2000. They can spend more if they have it, but they don't need to do so.

Halter horses win shows. OK. But the judges, and the organizations that control the sport, OUGHT to breed to a conformation that allows the horse to do double duty as a ranch horse or a working horse. Horses that put 1800 lbs over tiny hooves don't cut it anywhere but a show ring, and their breeders and judges ought to be ashamed of themselves.


----------



## bsms

bagof4grapes said:


> ...And that's why a papered horse is worth more. Not necessarily that it's a "better" horse, but simply that it's going to sell for more money and be a more valuable investment than a grade horse.


Depends on the market you are catering to. For someone interested in showing or competing, yes. For general riding...not really. For horses selling in the $750-1500 range, basic conformation and training counts far more than papers.


----------



## trailhorserider

bsms said:


> Halter horses win shows. OK. But the judges, and the organizations that control the sport, *OUGHT to breed to a conformation that allows the horse to do double duty as a ranch horse or a working horse.* Horses that put 1800 lbs over tiny hooves don't cut it anywhere but a show ring, and their breeders and judges ought to be ashamed of themselves.


*Yes, that's what I'm trying to say!* 



bsms said:


> Depends on the market you are catering to. For someone interested in showing or competing, yes. For general riding...not really. For horses selling in the $750-1500 range, basic conformation and training counts far more than papers.


Yes, also what I am trying to say.

All things being equal, training can make the difference between an unwanted horse and a wanted horse. Papers generally won't save the horse unless it also has other things going for it, such as training, soundness, and good disposition.

My Fox Trotter is a good example of this. She is registered. She had 10 foals in 16 years. She was slated to go to auction and I bought her for a song because she was trained and the price was right. What would have happened if she wasn't broke to ride? It's the training that got her a home with me. I feel sorry for broodmares (and other horses) that nobody took the time to train. If they loose their home, what are their odds of finding another good one?


----------



## bagof4grapes

bsms said:


> Depends on the market you are catering to. For someone interested in showing or competing, yes. For general riding...not really. For horses selling in the $750-1500 range, basic conformation and training counts far more than papers.


It counts for more, yes, for someone who doesn't want a papered horse. But the papered horse still sells for more money. I'm talking about how much the horse is worth on the general market. Look up equine classified ads. Can't argue cold, hard fact.

If you were suddenly in a desperate situation and had to get rid of your horse fast, a papered horse would be much easier to sell than an un-papered horse with the same attributes.

And yes, training and a good, sound mind and body will sell a horse faster than papers, but if you're selling a well-trained horse with papers and a well-trained horse without papers, the papered horse will sell faster and for more money.


----------



## trailhorserider

bagof4grapes said:


> It counts for more, yes, for someone who doesn't want a papered horse. But the papered horse still sells for more money. I'm talking about how much the horse is worth on the general market. Look up equine classified ads. Can't argue cold, hard fact.
> 
> If you were suddenly in a desperate situation and had to get rid of your horse fast, a papered horse would be much easier to sell than an un-papered horse with the same attributes.
> 
> And yes, training and a good, sound mind and body will sell a horse faster than papers, but if you're selling a well-trained horse with papers and a well-trained horse without papers, the papered horse will sell faster and for more money.


Papers are a plus. So is the perfect age, gender, color, etc. So yes, papered horses often sell for more. Geldings sometimes sell for more. 8-12 yr olds often sell for more. Horses in fancy colors sell for more. But selling price does not often reflect quality. Sometimes it just reflects the value of the horse in the eyes of the person that is selling it.

Papers are a positive, not a negative. But they don't make the horse. In the end, they are just an ID card for the horse. An identity. 

But yes, average it out, and papered horse often sell for more. There are a lot of cheap papered horses out there right now, that except for a set of papers, are not any different from a grade horse.

Hey, I'm not an argumentative soul. I just feel a need to defend all the honest, non-papered using horses in the world. I love and appreciate them just the way they are.  And if they all went away today, I would be heart broken!

And I would certainly rather have a well trained Mustang than a fancy halter QH horse that can't work a lick! (No offense to fancy halter QH's that CAN work a lick).  

Really, it should be both. Good looking horses should also be able to work. I think sometimes people lose sight of form vs. function. Halter horses should be beautiful athletes. Not the weirdo fashion models of the horse world. They should be what the rest of the breed aspires to. The best of their type. We should go "Ooh and ahhh I want one!" Not "OMG, that horse is freaky!"


----------



## bagof4grapes

trailhorserider said:


> Papers are a plus. So is the perfect age, gender, color, etc. So yes, papered horses often sell for more. Geldings sometimes sell for more. 8-12 yr olds often sell for more. Horses in fancy colors sell for more. But selling price does not often reflect quality. Sometimes it just reflects the value of the horse in the eyes of the person that is selling it.
> 
> Papers are a positive, not a negative. But they don't make the horse. In the end, they are just an ID card for the horse. An identity.
> 
> But yes, average it out, and papered horse often sell for more. There are a lot of cheap papered horses out there right now, that except for a set of papers, are not any different from a grade horse.
> 
> Hey, I'm not an argumentative soul. I just feel a need to defend all the honest, non-papered using horses in the world. I love and appreciate them just the way they are.  And if they all went away today, I would be heart broken!
> 
> And I would certainly rather have a well trained Mustang than a fancy halter QH horse that can't work a lick! (No offense to fancy halter QH's that CAN work a lick).
> 
> Really, it should be both. Good looking horses should also be able to work. I think sometimes people lose sight of form vs. function. Halter horses should be beautiful athletes. Not the weirdo fashion models of the horse world. They should be what the rest of the breed aspires to. The best of their type. We should go "Ooh and ahhh I want one!" Not "OMG, that horse is freaky!"


Yes, I agree with you. However, the point I'm trying to make is that un-papered horses usually get the short end of the stick. They're the ones that end up in feedlots and on slaughter trucks, more often than papered horses. My argument is simply that it should also be the goal of a breeder to breed horses who _can_ be registered, and make sure that they actually make an effort to register them if they can. Even when breeding crosses, stick to breeds that mix well together and can be registered in legitimate registries, like Appendix QH's and half-Arabs.

To me, personally, a horse without papers is just as desirable for my own purposes as a horse with papers. But the hard truth is that un-papered horses are often stuck with a hard life and many end up on a French dinner plate. To ensure that the horses you breed will have as good a chance at life as possible, it's best to make darn sure they get registered. It's a kindness to the horse more than anything else.


----------



## bsms

I am not opposed to registered horses. I sold one ($600!) and own another (sweepstakes nominated, as well). And the folks I know who have owned horses all their lives look at my papered Arabian mare and my unregistered Appy/Arab cross gelding, and prefer the gelding.

I prefer the mare, but at their price point ($1000-1500), papers do not count for a lot. No more than $100 or so, which would be within the noise level of bargaining skill.

BTW - I wouldn't breed my mare. It would be far cheaper and more reliable to buy a yearling and let someone else take the genetic chances.


----------



## Celeste

When I bought the horse that I am riding now, I was actually at the farm to look at their stallion. I was planning on breeding my mare. The price difference in the stud fee and a nice weanling already standing there on the ground was just not enough to make me want to breed. The horse that I bought was the correct conformation, color, size, etc. that I wanted. The brood mare was a much better horse than my own mare. Also, my mare didn't have to take time off from riding for being in foal. If I want another horse, I will probably buy rather than breed. The stud fee for a horse that I would want and that would be a good match for my mare would be too high. I also have to much time and money in training my mare to want to take the risks involved with pregnancy. On the other hand, I think that most horsemen eventually want the enjoyment of raising a foal. I am glad that I have raised several. (All the babies I have ever raised will die on my farm of old age. I will never sell them.)


----------



## blue eyed pony

Can I just add, I have a grade filly with fabulous conformation, colour, flashy looks AND temperament, and she is very well trained/handled for a foal her age. I paid $1000 for her. I'm constantly getting comments from experienced horsepeople along the lines of 'gorgeous baby, she'll be a superstar under saddle'. BECAUSE the market is down, and she is not registered and as far as I know not eligible to BE registered, she was cheap. Her low price combined with her quality and the fact that she's buckskin are what made me get a filly. I wanted a colt or a gelding.

And I have a registered Anglo Arab gelding with good confo apart from his longish cannons, training (ex-high-level eventer), temperament, flashy looks (bright bay with white). I paid $2000 for him. He is a great horse, sold to me cheap because his previous owner's first priority was the home he got.

I have never paid more than $2500 for a horse and I have, and have had, some FANTASTIC horses.


----------



## Desilovesmojo

I agree 100%. The horses they have in halter today are so awkward to ride. A gal at the barn I board at brought in her halter horse and we got to talking and she ask if I would start him under saddle. He was the laziest most unwilling horse i've ever had to work with and I think its mostly because nobody in his 14 years ever asked him to do anything but stand square. He was a good boy on the ground but the minute you were up on his back all of his good humor was out the window.


----------



## blue eyed pony

That's training more than discipline though - good groundwork, as I'm sure you know, makes starting them to saddle a lot easier. If they already understand moving away from pressure, it becomes easier to teach them the undersaddle aids. My foal, at 8 months, is already learning about sideways and is fluent in forward and back. She is learning about having things on her back (rugs, birds etc) and I have been using my 10 foot rope to teach her about the feeling of having something tied around her middle. I lean across her back (no weight) to get her used to the idea of me on top of her. She is learning about traffic and come 3 years' time when I start her she will be totally used to it. All these things will make starting her much easier when the time comes.

However, many people believe that sufficient groundwork is walk, trot and stand. This is what my foal had at 5 months of age. If a 5 month old foal is fluent enough in these things to show successfully (she did, champion unregistered exhibit), then an adult horse should be fluent in many many more and yet most in-hand people don't bother... Why? Because they can't be bothered training it? Don't know how? Don't think it's important? I don't know. Please, no one be offended, I'm trying to understand here... Could someone enlighten me?


----------



## Calmwaters

I agree with everyone else I have always loved quarterhorses for there all around goodness but the halter horses of today are awful. Whats the point of haveing a horse that can't do anything but look pretty. Its a shame in my opinion.


----------



## blue eyed pony

^ and some of them don't even do that!! I am a huge QH fan, Mum has one and he is GORGEOUS, but those over-muscled things are just hideous.

Oh and Mum's horse has the typical light on bone and small feet that a lot of halter-bred QH's have, but his head sure ain't pretty. He has just the right amount of muscle.


----------

