# 'Cut or Keep' Breeding Quality test



## AQHA13 (Apr 19, 2017)

QH group: Keep#1
Haflinger group: Keep #1
Appy group: Keep #2

This was a really cool idea! It would be fun if people did this more often.


----------



## smrobs (Jul 30, 2008)

QH Group

1) Depends. His conformation is average, nothing horrible but nothing spectacular either. If he had a wonderful temperment paired with good bloodlines and good work ethic, then I might keep him around for breeding.

2) Cull. Shoulder is too steep, pasterns are way too upright, croup is steep, hind end is underdeveloped, he looks over at the knee, and there is something wonky with his back. In all honesty, that horse looks like he is in pain, like the middle of a bout of colic or something.

3) Probably cull. His entire hind end just looks wonky. He is clearly a halter bred horse with the posty hind legs and diaper butt, however, if you were to cut him off at the withers and put a better hind on him, I would for sure keep him. His shoulder angle is beautiful and his head is nice and refined.

Draft group:
I don't really know much about Haffy conformation but I would likely keep all 3, depending on temperment and ability. They all appear to have nice solid conformation.

Spotted group:
1) Depends. Has same issue as the first QH, nothing horrible that jumps out at me, but nothing really spectacular either. Would depend on termperment and ability. I do like his coloring and his head/neck though.

2) Keep. I don't know much about how dressage horses are supposed to look/move/ride, but I find him to be appealing. Eye-catching for certain.

3) Cull. Sweet looking horse but kinda fugly confo. Straight shoulder, goose rumped, very downhill, mean-headed, short necked, and just an overall weak looking hind end.


----------



## twogeldings (Aug 11, 2008)

AQHA13 said:


> QH group: Keep#1
> Haflinger group: Keep #1
> Appy group: Keep #2
> 
> This was a really cool idea! It would be fun if people did this more often.


I honestly wish people would critique breeding stock more often :lol: I can look at a horse and say, 'Well, I see an unrefined head, steep shoulder, and poor rump'. Then someone else can look at the very same horse and find five more things that I completely missed.


----------



## ShutUpJoe (Nov 10, 2009)

Ok I'm going to give it a shot. Even though I SUCK at conformation. So here is an uneducated point of view. 

1. CUT: Looks downhill. Heavy in the back, lighter in the front. I think he lacks chest or chest muscling. Definitely looks un-proportioned. If I put my hand over his hind end it looks like it belongs to a different horse and the same with his body to his neck. He doesn't have an attractive face. Neck doesn't tie into his head well. 

2. CUT: I don't like his head, his neck is too long. His back looks off to me. I don't like how he is holding his front legs under him. Looks like he is leaning forward. Don't like his small nostrils and muzzle. 

3. KEEP: She looks more balanced than the other two. Nice wide nostrils. Attractive head. Looks like she is a halter horse from hermuscling. I don't like her hocks but I'm not sure why. 

1. KEEP: I don't like the way they stand some Haflingers. The stance throws me off. He's got the lighter build of the original Haflingers which is what breeders are now striving for. Nice back.

2. Uh.... CUT: I don't like her (I'm assuming) hocks, either that or she's standing funny. 

3. CUT: I think he (?) would make a fantastic gelding. He's got a nice light build. I don't like his small muzzle and nostrils, don't like his long head, don't like the way his head ties in to his neck. I do like the rest of him. 

1. CUT: Doesn't look proportioned to me. Downhill. Don't like his neck. Don't like his front legs. They look like toothpicks compared to the rest of him. The only thing attractive about him is his color.

2. KEEP: Looks like he is a good performer. Can't tell much by his pic. Lovely color, lovely head, lovely shoulder. Looks balanced.

3. CUT: Ugly head, neck is too short for it. Long back, looks like it might sag. Don't like her hind end.


----------



## dressagebelle (May 13, 2009)

For the QH's, 
1) Keep, of the three, he is the best looking. He isn't spectacular, but he looks like he's got a good hind end. Bloodlines would definately play a part in keeping him or culling him but he is the best of the three.
2) Cut, he's got funky conformation, I agree with smorbs that something just looks wrong with his back, and he does look like he's in pain. His shoulders are too steep, and his front legs are set way underneath him.
3) Cut, he's also got some funky conformation. He does have a pretty nice head, and good neck. His hocks are a bit too straight, his hind legs sit a bit far underneath him, and his neck doesn't tie into his body as nicely as horse 2.
Haflingers
Really depends on what type you want. 
1) Cut, he is definitely nice looking, but his back looks a little bit weak, not quite as nice as horse 2, his butt slopes a little too sharply, and his tail is set a bit weird.
2) Keep, he's got a nice level top line, he's got that nice round butt, good leg bone, looks like he's got a nice wide chest, and he just looks a little bit thicker which I think a draft horse should be.
3) Cull, he's a bit too refined, got thin legs, his butt isn't quite as nice looking, though he does look like he's got a nice back, he just over all looks too long and lanky, though I might keep him and see how he fills out if he is young.
Spotted
1) Cut, even though he's clearly a baby, he has a huge butt that does not fit in with the front half of his body. His neck ties in a bit too high to his body, and he looks a bit ewe necked. 
2) Keep, he has a nice shoulder angle, good hind end, looks like he's got a nice topline, it looks like he has a nice amount of curve from his hock to his butt. 
3) Cut, he is a plain looking, his hind end is clearly higher then his withers, making him extremely down hill. He is lacking muscle, has a week looking back, and a short neck. His shoulder angle is too straight, and just lacks in a lot of places.


----------



## corinowalk (Apr 26, 2010)

Ok! Heres Mine!

QH 
1.The only I would keep. He looks like a good using horse. Nice roundness to him. From what I can tell of all three horses, he has the best pastern length and angle. Hes certainly got a speedy, youthful look to him. His head isn't the most refined but you rarely ride up there! LOL

2.This horse looks like his legs come out from his belly. Very straight hind legs. Very straight shoulder. Downhill a bit (can't be sure with that pic) and has a roach back. Not severe but enough. His pasterns seem quite upright. I betcha hes got a jack hammer pony trot. 

3.Very attractive horse. It was a tough call for me between this horse and #1. I prefer a more compact horse so #1 won. I don't like the way his croup slopes off. Good shoulder, pretty face, pasterns are nice but not as nice as #1. Deep in the girth though. He is a bit long backed and could probably cover some ground. Would probably make a nice english horse. 

Haffies!

1.While I find him the most attractive, I believe he is what is considered a 'modern' haffie. A lighter build, a more refined face. He doesn't have what I look for in a haffie but he sure is pretty! I like his look. Very balanced. Nice clean straight legs. Good shoulder, back and pasterns. I just don't know that he is the 'breed ideal' I would keep him before I kept the others

2.First thing that jumps off the page at me is his front legs look off. His pasterns in the front seem very upright. The back doesnt look much better. Hes got a longer back for a compact draft. Very pretty face and a double mane that I believe is desirable in haffies. I think he would probably make a decent gelding. 

3.Looks aweful young. I dont find his face particularly attractive. Nice big trot to him eh? Its hard to give a critique when you cant see his natural stance but I would probably cut him. His chest looks weak and his back seems a tad long. 

Spotties

1.Is young. Would probably keep this boy intact though. Very nice build, pretty head, nice straight legs. His neck looks thin but I guess him to be around 18 months. That will probably change. He looks like he could excel in just about anything.

2. While this looks to be a very talented horse, Its hard to judge without a squared up shot. I would probably keep this horse intact but...I cant say for sure. Something seems a bit weird about the legs...

3.Cut, for sure. Ugly head, poor shoulder, long slightly roached back, long upright pasterns. Of all the horses, I would let this one pass me up.


----------



## Chiilaa (Aug 12, 2010)

I wouldn't know the first thing about what horses to keep or cut. My redeeming feature is that I know this =P

IMO all the people that come on here asking "should I breed such and such mare?" need to realise that there is a LOT more to it than 'should I'. If you can't tell if your mare is of breeding quality, then I am sorry, you should not be thinking about breeding anyway. You just don't have the knowledge base.


----------



## WickedNag (Sep 7, 2010)

QH group #1
Halflingers ??? as I don't know anything about them but I would keep #2
Appy #2

I just read that I am suppose to say why I would keep or cull
I have no reason... I am not a confirmation expert but those are the 3 that look best to my eye. My judge friend tells me that I have a good eye for quality  even if I don't know what to look for other than the overall picture.


----------



## MaggiStar (Mar 19, 2010)

QH-
1-keep. decent confo nice honest useful looking horse not fantastic but seems decent.
2-cull-built soo soo downhill that would throw a dodgy foal.
3-cull-actually horrific!

haffies
1- keeps-lovely flashy looking horse look like you would get a nice foal out of him very decent conformation
2-nice but to me i wouldnt breed just keep him as a riding horse
3-cull-could be nice but is still to undeveloped for me in a few years might be lovely

spotted
1-cull- he is just hrown together with various differnt bits that are obvious for start his neck is very unattractive to me
2-keep-very very flashy horse nice confirmation powerful and strong
3-keep-i dont know why but this horse really attracts me as a nice riding hirse not a top performance horse though


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

Okay, here goes!

QH group:

1. Keep. If I am actually keeping any of them that is. I really don't care for horses built downhill, but out of the three, I like number one the best! Attractive, round, nicely muscled but not overdoing it. 

2. Cull. I don't know why, but this horse almost looks a bit roach-back, or stiff looking. He just looks downhill and uncomfortable to me. He is also super straight in the pasterns, like if you rode him he would pound his legs into the ground. Just my opinion, of course, since I don't actually know the horse.

3. Cull. Against the grain I know, but I never liked halter bred horses very much. They kind of look like beef cattle. I would guess this one is related to Impressive, but I could be wrong.

Haflinger group:

I was expecting to see some really nice haffies, but none of them look quite like the haffies I have seen before, who are more compact and muscular. But here goes:

1. Cull. I would love to love him as he has a beautiful color and is nicely groomed, but I don't like the tubular body. I would like to see him deeper in the heart-girth. 

2. Cull. Probably a very nice horse, but not a very flattering photo. It makes her look old (due to the heave line) and her back looks long. 

3. Keep. This horse doesn't look like a typical haffie to me either, but it also looks like a very young horse so hopefully it will put on some bulk and muscle as it grows. 

I like haffies that look like small drafts, and really none of these convey that to me. Maybe number two, but it just isn't a very flattering photo. So out of the three, I would take my chance on what I presume is the youngest horse.

Spotted group:

1. Cull. A very nice horse except that it is built very downhill. I hate riding a horse with downhill conformation, because it always feels like you are riding downhill. But other than that, I like this horse. Still, I would try not to breed for downhill conformation if I can help it.

2. Keep. But it is almost an unfair way to judge this horse because it isn't in untacked and standing naked like the rest. But collected up and being ridden, it looks like a keeper. 

3. Cull. Downhill, long back, possible problem with the front left leg, but it could also be the photo. But she does have a very nice color. 

So those are my picks.


----------



## Charis (Jul 6, 2010)

twogeldings said:


> _Working Breeds_
> *QH Group*
> 1.
> 
> ...


My opinions are above and bolded.


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

I feel like I should probably explain more about my placings in the QH group.

I am judging them based on what _I _would breed, not necessarily the breed standard. In other words, l value a good using horse, not just a look-pretty. I feel like number 1 in the QH class would actually be a good using horse. Number 3 has nothing going for it other than beef on the hoof. I bet it is a successful halter horse, but I personally hate how halter Quarter Horses are being bred. I want a horse that will actually stand up to hard use. So that's why, even though I'm sure a ton of QH breeders would scoop up #3, I personally would rather have #1. I don't think #3 would hold up to frequent, long trail rides. Which is kind of sad actually. Number 1 is downhill, but is actually an attractive horse otherwise which I thing would be a good using horse. 

Number 2 in the QH class isn't even a contender. It is the least desirable horse of the group because it just doesn't look comfortable and sound. It looks stiff and "off" and it's back looks arched.
*
Hey, I really like this thread! I LOVE "play" judging horses! Let's do more of this!*


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

Here is a really cool video on conformation, from a veterinary surgeon's perspective. It's about 2/3 down the page, and an hour long, but I found it totally worth watching. It's called 
*"Conformation, Performance, and Injury: A Surgeon’s Insight"*

and here is the link: The Horse | Videos: Horse Courses

What's cool about it, is he tells you what he actually finds causes unsoundness in the real world, such as toeing-in, and what doesn't actually seem to cause soundness problems in the real world, such as back-at-the-knee. So if anybody has the time to watch it, I think there is a lot of good information there. I know I learned a lot!


----------



## twogeldings (Aug 11, 2008)

I'll draw up each horses 'results' today and you guys will get to find out who's the stallion, who's the gelding, and who's the mare! Plus which one has been actively shown and which ones got the most cuts and keeps  

Gotta run at the moment though, chickens to chase :roll:


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

I know who one of these horses is, and without giving it away, based on comments BOTH ways about this horse, all I will say is, 
Ha ha Ha!


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

I'm keeping an eye out for the results.


----------



## kitten_Val (Apr 25, 2007)

QH: personally I'm not fun of breeding either of them (including the 1st one, I don't like his neck and front legs). I LOVE the 3rd horse's head, BUT you don't breed for the head alone. :wink:

Haffi: 1st one all the way. 

Spotty: definitely not 1st and 3rd one, may be 2nd, but standing pic would be much better.


----------



## DanceOfTheDead96 (Sep 28, 2010)

Quarter Horses:
#1 Keep. Not the best example of a Quarter Horse, but out of these choices he looks the best put together, and like he'll stay sound the longest.
#2 Cut. 
#3 Cut. This one looks the worst to me...

Haflingers:
None of them look like a draft horse to me.
#1 Keep.
#2 Cut. I don't like the front legs... might just be the way its standing. The chest is to narrow. Back looks to long.
#3 Cut.

Spotted 
#1 Cut.
#2 Keep.
#3 Cut.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## corinowalk (Apr 26, 2010)

I think #2 in the spotted is a mare. Not sure why but I felt compelled to say that! LOL


----------



## NittanyEquestrian (Mar 3, 2009)

I liked how someone else did this. I think I found the mares/geldings and recognized some of them but to avoid a novel I'm going to pretend they're all studs/colts. 



twogeldings said:


> I always noticed some confusion on the forums when it came to breeding quality animals. This 'test' is to see how well one can identify 'good' quality from 'bad' quality. It will include stallions, mares, and geldings. Just think of it as practice, and remember, not every stallion and mare used for breeding will be perfect.
> 
> The idea of the test is to look at the group of three horses and decide if you would 'cut' that horse (i.e, remove it from your 'breeding program') or 'keep' the horse (retain it for offspring). Not every picture will be a perfect conformation shot either!
> The catch is that you need to include _why_ you would either cut the horse, or keep it. It can be as simple as 'that one is too downhill' or as extensive as 'He has a beautiful sloped shoulder, stunning topline, and fine muscling, but his head is very unrefined and doesn't tie in well'.
> ...


Interested to know the history of these guys/gals. Good idea!


----------



## twogeldings (Aug 11, 2008)

I got about half of everything written up then got dragged away again  I should have time to finish it tonight or tomorrow though!


----------



## TheLastUnicorn (Jun 11, 2010)

Out of the QH's... honestly, I'd cut them all. None of them are spectacular (to me), and the world has a lot of QH's. If I HAD to choose my favorite - it would be #3 - however, I don't like Halter QH's. 

Out of the Haflingers - I'd keep #1, not without faults, but overall a nice looking Haffy... more body wouldn't hurt him #2 gets cut... and #3 I reserve judgement on the basis that the photo is really hard to tell from, but "he'd" probably be cut too. 

Out of the Spotties - #1 is cut, #2 is the potential keeper for this group - but I would like to see more reach from behind (might be this horse's ability... might be a rider error) - another photo or two wouldn't hurt  , I DO like that it's obvious the horse is competing! #3 gets cut.


----------



## NittanyEquestrian (Mar 3, 2009)

Where's the results? =P


----------



## Rascaholic (Oct 4, 2010)

I've never tried this before but here goes nothing LOL
QH Group
1. Keep simply on the fact that he has a nice hind end. Hocks appear to be set at a decent angle, pasterns look ok. Over all he'd make a decent worker. 
2. Cut Cut Cut he screams to me that something is wonky in his back/hind legs. Having said that I'd have to see him moving before I could even remotely say not to cut.
3. I know some of the halter folks are gonna hate me, but I'd have cut him before he got this old! His poor posty legs would beat you and him to death under any type of stress and strain of everyday working or even long trail rides

Half Group
1. Keep. He is the more balanced of the 3. He has a lovely look to him Yes he is a tad strung out, but he has a nice shoulder, a hiney that has potential, and I love his head. Plus the fact that his head is in proprtion to the rest of him gives him a more put together look.
2. Cut- Hello is this guy mixed with some of the limo QH groups? He looks looong in the back. Weak and suprisinglynot at all what I'd equate with a Half. Did I mention the upright pasterns and the club footed look to his front legs?
3. This one throws me. He might be going through the stage of, my parts don't fit to well while I am growing this fast! But considering he looks slightly unbalanced I'd save cut with caution.

Spotted Group
1. Cut but I'd not throw him out with the trash either. He has potential to be an all around kinda gelding. 
2. Hmmm the rear makes me want to say CUT, but it could be rider error. I'll say keep on the basis it's in a show ring and someone is evaluating it's potential and the potential of future generations from it.
3. Another case of something isn't quite right here. I can't say because I have owned some old school appys who were conformational disasters. BUT I'd not have taken a million dollars for their hearts and work ethics. Sadly knowing some of the effects of badly put together butts with tiny forehands I'd say cut.

phew that was hard LOL Made me turn on the lights and crutch to the barn to take a second look at my little TWH. Funny how I never noticed he toes out in the back. Nor, did I notice that his pasterns are on the longish side. I am happy he is a gelding. I still think he had baby making potential if only for his whole attitude and willing nature. Guess you can guess why I got a gelding  yep no will power ROFL.


----------



## BarnBratt (Oct 11, 2010)

_Working Breeds_
*QH Group* 
1.








*Cut- This horse isn't well balnced. If he was to be placed on a teeter tooter, the back would be more heavy than the front. I'm not a big fan of the large hind quarters. He is not well muscled. I can't really tell the conformation of the legs from this angle.*

2.








*.....Cut- I like this guy a lot better than the first. I agree with everyone else that if he was standing properly, he would look better. Right now, his front legs look to be camped under. If he was to be placed on a teeter totter, I'm fairly confident that both ends would be equally heavy. All of his parts seem to blend together nicely with an even topline. His muscling could be a bit better. His back is long but his croup is level. Again, I can't tell the conformation of his legs.*

3.








*KEEP- In my opinion, this is a prime example of a Quarter Horse. He is well muscled and has a powerful build. He is well balanced and all his parts blend together. I don't have a look at his chest, but I can tell it's fairly wide(good) and full. The horse's forearm and gaskin are well muscled. His back appears to be short and strong. His rear quarters are heavily muscled. Also, he has the masculine appearance of a stallion. Good stud*


*Draft Group - Haflinger*
1.








*Keep- Out of the three Hafies, he shows the best characteristics. I prefer Haflingers to me more drafty, but oh well. Again, the teeter totter would be balnced and his parts seem to blend smoothly. Umm..he isn't that well muscled. His back looks a bit weak and is medium in length. Head is attractive  He would make a good stud*

2.








*Cut- Well balanced and smoothly blended. Back is too long and muscling is poor. Seems to be standing on her toes??*

3.








*Definitely Cut- To me, nothing about this horse is appealing. He is well balanced but his structure is funny. His back is too long as well are his legs.(Haflinger are suppose to have shorter legs). His muscling is poor*


*Spotted Group*
1.








*Cut- This appy is okayly balanced. I suppose the teeter totter would be slightly heavier in the back, but not by much. He appears to have a weak back. His neck is medium length(iffy). He also needs more muscling. Croup is short*


2.








*Keep- Nice appy sport horse. Well balanced and parts blended smoothly. Nice small head and long neck. Back seems to be a bit long?(hard to tell) His chest is wide(which is good). This is a hard picture to judge, so I'll stop there*

3.








*Cut-Basically the smae as the first, except his neck is a bit short*

[/QUOTE]


----------



## mom2pride (May 5, 2009)

Honestly...none of the horses in the first group impressed me much. They are all terribly down hill built with posty hind legs. The #2 stallion appears as though he is over at the knee. I wouldn't breed my mare to any of those. But that's just MO. I think if the #2 and #3 horses were set up better on straight ground my opinion "may" change, especially on #3. 

The drafty group I like them all...but I would probably keep #2, and geld the other two. 

The last group, #2 ALL the way...(I'm guessing that is Pay N Go, and he is an amazing horse) The other two are lacking in the nice build, and eye appeal department; both are very downhill, with high hocks, and not very refined at all anywhere.


----------



## DubyaS6 (Aug 30, 2010)

Are there STILL no results?!


----------



## NittanyEquestrian (Mar 3, 2009)

yea I know I'm anxiously awaiting the results =P


----------



## BarnBratt (Oct 11, 2010)

Results please!


----------



## dee (Jul 30, 2009)

I'd cut the lot of them. None of them really speak to me at all - but then again - I'm no breeder and would prefer to have geldings I can use than stallions that just sit around looking bored...


----------



## DanceOfTheDead96 (Sep 28, 2010)

Where are the results for this? It's been over two months...
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

twogeldings said:


> *Draft Group - Haflinger*
> 1.


Keep for sure!

(I know this stud, I have a mare that is by this stud. GREAT brain and nice body.)


----------



## RowdyLover (Mar 10, 2010)

Awww got all the way through this thread wondering who got what and who is stud, gelding and mare and there is still no answer... am disappointed now.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Sent Twogeldings a PM to remind her people are waiting for the answers.


----------



## WickedNag (Sep 7, 2010)

Alwaysbehind said:


> Sent Twogeldings a PM to remind her people are waiting for the answers.


I did that a while back. No reply


----------



## Cat (Jul 26, 2008)

twogeldings said:


> _Working Breeds_
> *QH Group*
> 1.
> 
> ...


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

WickedNag said:


> I did that a while back. No reply


Weird. I checked twogelding's profile and it shows activity.


----------

