# Rear end conformation



## toto (Mar 3, 2013)

Shes not square-- i dont understand how the skeleton comes into play here because its hard to see what her hind conformation truly is.. the inside leg looks correct, but the outside looks camped under/sickled-- it looks like that on every horse standing that way.

Basically, i dont think its correct.. then again, i dont understand whats goin on?


----------



## Elana (Jan 28, 2011)

Your skeleton is off a bit. The patella is located above where you have it.. you have it located below where it is on this horse (see the shadow above it?). 

This horse does not have bad hind leg conformation but what she does have is horribly light bones. Her hocks are small and lack room and she stands a bit oddly behind because she has no heels on her rear feet. She is slipper footed behind so he leg rocks back a bit. Over all she is so light boned... and tied in at the knee to boot. 

She is a bit long through the coupling. She has knife withers and her neck set is a bit low in front of her withers. She has an adequate shoulder.

Her biggest fault is bad trimming behind and very very fine/light bones.


----------



## ozalynda (Mar 17, 2013)

Hi Elena, You are right about the patella. Embarassing! I will fix that. 

Mostly what I would like to know is not so much what you all see as conformation flaws, but how that translates into movement and function. So take it one step further...

-Lisa


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

cant see skeleton image.


----------



## ozalynda (Mar 17, 2013)

I removed the skeleton image while I edit it. 
-Lisa
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Elana (Jan 28, 2011)

skeleton image is still wrong on this computer. 

Her hocks are nice and low and she is not built really down hill. Her shoulder will restrict her reach and the height of her knees in front and she appears to have a well enough set hind leg. She may even float at the trot. 

I expect she moves OK.


----------



## ozalynda (Mar 17, 2013)

Here is the corrected rear end skeleton plus the front end. Moving the patella upward created a REALLY long tibia.

-Lisa


----------



## GotaDunQH (Feb 13, 2011)

Elana said:


> skeleton image is still wrong on this computer.
> 
> Her hocks are nice and low and she is not built really down hill. Her shoulder will restrict her reach and the height of her knees in front and she appears to have a well enough set hind leg. She may even float at the trot.
> 
> I expect she moves OK.


Agree...but it will be hard for this horse to round the back and use the hind end properly due to the length of back which includes a long loin connection.


----------



## Elana (Jan 28, 2011)

I agree GotaDunQH.
OK moving is.. well.. OK. She is not a dressage horse and collection will be difficult due to the long coupling.


----------



## Lokenzo (Jan 16, 2013)

I agree with most of what you have said Elana. She definitely wouldn't make a high end dressage horse for trouble getting her hindquarters under her but she would probably sit pretty enough to get around low level stuff.

One thing I am finding interesting is how different peoples perception is on conformation and what is right and wrong. For example, you consider this mare as being light in the bone and yet here in Australia it's become quite common for people to breed 'lighter bone, longer legs' on horses to increase 'prettiness' if thats a word in the show horse ring. If a horse measures over 8 inches of bone it goes in the hunter ring as its to 'heavy' for the show horse/hack ring. This mares bone wouldn't only be considered seen in the hack ring but considered normal. I guess it really comes down to the end result of what you plan to do with the horse and what breed it is to know what is truely a fault and what is just a different type.

Anyway, that's way off the hind end structure on this mare. Just something I have enjoyed noticing and proving that beauty is in the eye of the beholder!


----------



## ozalynda (Mar 17, 2013)

Totally true Lokenzo, things like light bones are certainly relative. If she was a warmblood then the criticism would be correct, however, as an akhal teke, she actually has quite acceptable bone.

She has a relatively short back for the breed as well.:-o

As far as the ability to collect and use the rear end, one factor that is overlooked with akhal tekes is their surprisingly flexible spine. They are very much like a cat in that respect and even though they "appear" to have a conformation that should defy collection, they are generally very balanced under saddle and light on the forehand precisely because they are able to get their hind end underneath themselves.

I am not a dressage rider, but when I started this mare, I trained with a former student of the great portuguese master, Nuno Oliveira. She was ecstatic over this mare, and particularly her rear end. She felt she could be "brillisimo" and gushed over what Oliveira could have done with her. So apparently looks can be deceiving. This is a common misconception that the akhal teke can not use it's hind end based on common beliefs about "proper" conformation.


----------



## Lokenzo (Jan 16, 2013)

Thanks for the info  I have never seen an akhal teke as we don't really have them here in Australia but it is certainly interesting learning about other breeds. 

My own mare (in my avatar) is a show horse and she has what most on here would consider to be light in the bone yet at the shows they all love her 'long legs.' It is also interesting to note in other threads people say 'nice short pasterns' yet I don't want short pasterns as it can make for a more 'jarring' ride. In saying that I don't like them too long either but do like them to have a little length.

As a show horse and english breed judge I love discussing conformation especially between the different breeds as I am always learning so much.


----------



## Elana (Jan 28, 2011)

I first looked at this horse and thought she was an Akhal Teke.. but was not sure since I had no idea what part of the world she was posted from. I also thought maybe she was a light boned Thoroughbred. 

Yes, for the breed she has acceptable bone. 

However, I look at horses from the point of view of "how many years of daily hard work can this horse take and stand up? Will she be sound and working at age 20?" 

I know Arabians, with light bone (I am NOT a fan of the breed at ALL) often do exactly that.. work into their 20's and do so soundly. There are Thoroughbreds that are the same way (and I love a good Thoroughbred.. but I still want good bone!). 

My point is that with some horses and some breeds, the light bone is not so much an issue.. and it may be tied to the way the horse is used.


----------

